
Ask HN: Has anyone learnt to love art? - eelliott
I don&#x27;t feel much emotion, if any, when viewing art. I know I&#x27;m missing out on a universal experience (http:&#x2F;&#x2F;slatestarcodex.com&#x2F;2014&#x2F;03&#x2F;17&#x2F;what-universal-human-experiences-are-you-missing-without-realizing-it&#x2F;).<p>Has anyone else faced this challenge and overcome it somehow?
======
muzani
You might just not have seen good art. Like someone who has tasted only dark
chocolate might summarize that they simply "don't like chocolate".

I find that good art is actually a way of crystallizing and capturing emotions
of a period of time. Many of those emotions don't resonate with us as they
were in some period of history unfamiliar with us.

Music tends to capture emotions much better. There's the anger in Eminem's
music, the helplessness of Linkin Park, the depression of Nirvana, ambition
and energy of Queen.

Art paintings and sculptures tends to target art viewers. It's not meant to
just be beautiful but say something. Like memes, they much of it is a fresh
take on a common thought of the period. But looking at it as an outsider,
they're hard to get.

You might appreciate architecture more. There are things like animated
sculptures or huge ones crafted from steel. Or things more subtle, playing
with light.

Or if you want things that captures and enhances natural beauty, photography
and food is a kind of art too.

But what I find to be the rawest kind of art is war memorials. The most
memorable art experience for me was visiting war memorials in Canberra. You
can also go to places like Holocaust museums.

~~~
ajeet_dhaliwal
Good point. What are your interests eelliot? May sound strange but I
absolutely love looking at video game concept art.

~~~
bananicorn
That's not strange at all - I fondly remember flipping through the pages of
the Art Book I got with the first Dark Souls - I still use it for reference to
this day, the motives make good drawing practice :)

------
gyvastis
I would suggest not to stress over it. If it's natural for you, you'll come
along and join the journey sometime in the future.

I have had a similar "issue", I never understood what do people see in art and
why it always seems so hyped up. But just by getting more mature, and exposing
yourself to different things and people, your perspective changes. That is
what happened to me. I've started to notice that my eyes were getting more and
more attracted to visual things. Photographs, paintings, etc. I've started to
notice more details, more things came into place, the reason behind some of
the works I've seen.

It's just my personal experience. I liked the natural transition. And it's
still happening. I think it will never end. But if you're naturally leaning
towards it, don't rush it. It's art. You don't have to understand it to love
it, but over time you'll love it even more as it reveals itself.

------
demygale
I don't feel much emotion when viewing art, but I'm a huge art lover.

Go to a museum and take a guided tour where they talk about the artists. You
should start to feel intellectual curiosity at the very least.

~~~
nxsynonym
Best advice I can give to people who "don't get art" is to go to a museum and
get lost for a while.

Second best advice I can give is to not try to "figure art out". Don't try to
assign deep meaning to a piece that you think should have it. Yes, lots of art
works on multiple levels - in concept and in execution - but none of that
matters if you can't connect with art in the first place.

Personally, the first time I ever saw a Mark Rothko painting in person create
a seismic shift in my understanding of art and more specifically painting.

To me, viewing art is like listening to music you really love. You will know
immediately if you enjoy the piece, and will learn to appreciate it more and
more every time you look at (or listen to) it.

People get too hung up on the "meaning" of art. What is the "meaning" of your
favorite song? My guess is that your connection to your favorite song is
rooted in familiarity, nostalgia, or pure enjoyment, and not in the literal
meaning of the lyrics (although that is entirely possible!).

Go and see art in person. Looking at it through a computer screen is bad for
you and bad for artists. Go to local gallery openings, museums, or art
studios.

------
Jtsummers
There's a museum in Florence that I went to where you could see many statues
in various states of completion. It was fantastically beautiful. They were
clearly not complete works, Michelangelo had intended to do more. But for
whatever reason they never were finished. Despite their state of
incompleteness, you could see the craftsmanship involved in getting them to
their current state. But you could also see beauty in this unfinished state,
as if the men (predominantly) of stone were climbing out of the rocks
themselves.

Show someone an image of the Statue of David and it's not that interesting.
But see it in person. The immenseness of it. The detail that went into it. See
these other statues nearby, like stone timelapse photos. The whole thing is
quite fascinating (intellectually) and can be quite emotionally moving (not in
the sense that it brought me to tears, but more of an awestruck feeling seeing
this work).

~~~
_jdams
I was just there recently and there are rooms off to the side of the David
which had so many sculptures. I remember it vividly because they all had these
black markings sticking out of them in symmetrical places all over the faces
and bodies. Is this what you're speaking of? I can't remember seeing the works
in progress, as you mention.

~~~
Jtsummers
[http://www.accademia.org/it/esplora-il-museo/le-
opere/i-prig...](http://www.accademia.org/it/esplora-il-museo/le-
opere/i-prigioni-schiavi-di-michelangelo/)

These are the ones I was thinking of.

------
Broken_Hippo
I'm going to say first and foremost that I'm an artist. I sell occasionally
(rarely), but constantly create. I'm often prolific. I'm nearing 40 and have
done this stuff since I was a child.

Yet I really don't have an emotional connection with art (there are
exceptions, but this is rare). I hold a few things I've made dear to me but
would sell them in an instant. I don't think this is in any way necessary.
Whatever you feel - or don't - is just how you see it.

But I like art, overall, especially surrealism, fantasy, and abstract work. I
think they are neat to look at when done well. I'm sometimes in awe of well-
done landscapes, portraits, still life paintings, and things depicting current
events and situations. I don't really enjoy these, though, since I find such
images boring after a while. In fact, I'm the type of artist that would make
something up if someone insists on "getting" my art or asks me to explain a
few things. Or refuse to explain altogether. I know folks expect this stuff,
so I'm prepared to jump into that role if it ever becomes actually necessary,
even though I know it would be a farce.

It is OK not to have emotion. It is OK to like art because you find the image
interesting to look at. Because you find it neat, pretty, absurd, or whatever.
So long as it captures your attention, that's enough. Regardless of what an
article says.

All that said, though, if you want an emotional connection, I suggest learning
about art. See a lot of examples, read up on what artists have written about
their own work or the reactions of critics and regular folks that saw the
work. Look up "classic" popular artists, look up not-so-popular artists.

Expand into other fields. Maybe visual art isn't what you connect to- maybe
you find your connection with music or poetry. Maybe you find you are a sucker
for good animation (old Disney films have watercolor backgrounds and Dali did
some work with Disney: Newer animations are marvels of digital animation at
times). Once you have a feel for your preferences, explore how you think and
feel when you look/listen/read what you like.

Whatever that last one is - the things you think and feel, however it changes
- is your emotional reaction.

~~~
eelliott
Thanks for the reply broken hippo

------
slr555
I am an MFA with a lot of friends in STEM fields some of whom express similar
feelings. A couple of suggestions:

1\. Look for art that you connect with. Some people weep at the sight of a
Rothko, overcome by emotion, others say, "what the hell?"

2\. Find a guide. There are bad art classes but there are also great teachers
who can help you learn to see the "art" in the art. When I started I hated
Shakespeare but after learning to read the language it is now filled with
endless beauty

3\. Consider what in the world inspires you emotionally. A loved one,
mathematical concepts, food? Whatever it is that moves you probably has art
that it has inspired. Seek it out.

4\. Sometimes the spark of emotion gets buried pretty deep. At least 2
engineer friends have told me they have trouble with humor because their
training has taught them to dissect things in a very linear and methodical
fashion. If that fits you try let go of some of that from time to time.

5\. If you have ever been choked up by a TV commercial or a news story or a
film think about why and seek out art that explores those topics.

Best of luck to you. There is a lot of art out there from Peking opera to
Gregorian chants and from Chuck Close to Goya. You'll find your groove!!!

------
thecupisblue
Yes! I have. Years ago I was like "ugh art is just overpriced bullshit. this
picasso dude and his stuff that nobody understands, it's just snobby stuff."

Wanna know what changed me a lot? Diverse friend circle, drugs and listening
to Kanye West. Those things taught me to look at life in a different way,
appreciate the emotion and experiences they capture or try to evoke. I love
art now. I got a huge basquiat canvas on my wall (not an original ofc) and a
bunch of paintings by artists that aren't remotely popular.

~~~
eelliott
I'd love to know what drugs you tried, and your fav Kanye songs. I like his
old stuff more, even the early mixtape stuff before college dropout, when he
was a bit raw and battling his ego openly.

------
ehllo
Art is a lot more than the visuals you see or the acting for example. Maybe it
helps you to know, that any "artwork" gives you a clear view into the point of
time, when it was created. If you understand this, you can better grasp what
the artist wants carry over with his work, why the artist has done this and
how this art influenced other artist's and society.

Just two examples to make it clear:

High Art vs Low Art (kitsch):

[https://www.documenta.de/en/retrospective/documenta_5](https://www.documenta.de/en/retrospective/documenta_5)

Going new Ways and influence Art (kurt schwitters):

[http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-
entertainment/art/features...](http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-
entertainment/art/features/pop-art-pioneer-is-back-in-the-
picture-8468691.html)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_Schwitters#Influences](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_Schwitters#Influences)

And two Sites, that can give you a good sart:

[http://onlinekurs.staedelmuseum.de/en/](http://onlinekurs.staedelmuseum.de/en/)

[https://www.moma.org/learn/moma_learning](https://www.moma.org/learn/moma_learning)

------
itamarst
John Stuart Mill talks in his autobiography about how he suffered from what we
would call depression, and how this taught him the importance of feelings, via
the arts:

[https://www.utilitarianism.com/millauto/five.html](https://www.utilitarianism.com/millauto/five.html)

~~~
eelliott
Hey thanks so much for sharing this link

------
fredophile
It might be helpful to think of most of the art you see as being part of a
conversation. Various features or characteristics are a response to what came
before. Seeing a painting without knowing the context it was created in is a
bit like overhearing a sentence without hearing the rest of the conversation.
Taking a guided tour or using one of those audio tours some museums have might
help you with this.

Another thing to consider is that art isn't just paintings in a museum. It can
be photographs, sculptures, architecture, images created on a computer and
never printed, movies, music, etc. Maybe some other medium just matches your
personality better.

If you think you really don't enjoy art you should check out Maurizio
Cattelan. His work is pretty amusing and pokes fun at what people tend to
think of as art.

------
DanBC
The fact you don't have an emotional reaction would suggest to me that it's
not a universal experience.

There's a bunch of stuff that we used to think was universal but we've
relatively recently found out isn't. One example would be "forming mental
images of things".

[http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-34039054](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-34039054)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10148792](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10148792)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11554894](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11554894)

Is there nothing at all that provokes any reaction? No film that triggers
anything?

------
Vaskivo
I've been reading a lot of books about stuff I know/knew nothing about.

One of the books I read was "What Are You Looking At?: 150 Years of Modern Art
in the Blink of an Eye", by Will Gompertz[0].

It's fantastic! The book is great at making you "get" art, and it's
significance. Art is not so much about "emotion" as it is about showing and
telling the same things in a different way. Or just doing something completely
different!

[0][https://www.amazon.co.uk/What-Are-You-Looking-
At/dp/06709204...](https://www.amazon.co.uk/What-Are-You-Looking-
At/dp/0670920495)

------
luxpir
Decent programme by someone with the same issue, [solved]:

[http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b072n5xp](http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b072n5xp)

------
mapster
art can take any form, from poking the viewer to challenge misconceptions and
beliefs to anything else. it can be a series of photos of you dropping
something sacred and valuable or just a really well done drawing that tool a
lot of time and skill.

art is also like music, if there is ANY music you like, then there is an ART
you will like.

last. don't feel weird not getting or liking art. you are coming at it from
wrong angle.

------
achairapart
You're trying to look at art as it is, but you should _learn to see_ art as
_you are_.

Read John Berger' Way of Seeing.

------
mbrock
I happen to think that a lot of people don't feel "emotions" when "viewing
art" because the art that's obviously available is either totally irrelevant
to your life (e.g. bourgeois portraits of rich people from the 1600s, vivid
scenes from places you've never been, full of religious symbolism) or totally
alienated in the special contemporary way (performance art, most of the random
crap made by self-absorbed young artists, etc).

There's also a thick nearly opaque wall of posturing involved, so that talking
about art is often an anxious display of cultural capital.

Learning to love art, like learning to love wine, is heavily tied up with
class and the attempt to "understand" the acquired tastes of the upper middle
class.

Staring at paintings in exhibition rooms or museums is also a very unnatural
thing for a human being to do. Great art from the past wasn't made to be
"exhibited" like that, it was usually part of a context, from which it was
later extracted, or literally stolen.

You can think of a painting in terms of "how would this subtle affect my mood
if I hung it on the east wall of my living room?" That's a function of art,
too, and probably a more authentic and real one. A lot of art was made to hang
in churches for inspiration, so if you're inspired by religion, that's a whole
thing.

Maybe you'd like to try going to a museum of history and viewing some ancient
everyday tools, coins, and jewelry. Those are things that were carried around
by people or kept in their homes, and people wouldn't usually stand around
staring at them and admiring them, so you're not experiencing them as they
did, and there's no need to feel "emotion" in any romantic or dramatic
sense... but those artifacts are still very interesting, beautiful, and
provoking the imagination.

You can also be interested in paintings in this way. Go to an art museum, find
a painting that seems interesting in some way, not necessarily because it
overwhelms you with feelings, but maybe just because it seems odd, strange, or
curious... Or you just don't understand it.

Then you can realize that a single painting, because it contains so much
information in the whole tapestry of its context and history, is like a portal
into another world that you can explore, if you want to... and that's kind of
amazing.

I think the idea of a painting as a radiant artifact that makes people swoon
with awe is pretty strange, and possibly only applies to people with a certain
abnormal genetic kind of synaesthesia.

Van Gogh painted a lot of scenes from nature, because he loved nature, and
walked a lot in the countryside. What I think is amazing about Van Gogh is
that he paints those scenes not just as "beautiful" in a simple sense, but
sometimes in a way that makes the landscape looks lonely, sad, or even
distorted in a strangely vivid and almost scary way.

I doubt Van Gogh himself would say that his paintings "lived up" to the lived
experience of being in the countryside during a sunset, say. But they mirror
it in an interesting way, and having seen those paintings, one can see the
countryside in a somewhat different way, or with more complex resonances.

His letters are fascinating to read. Some quotes:

 _“What I want to express, in both figure and landscape, isn’t anything
sentimental or melancholy, but deep anguish. In short, I want to get to the
point where people say of my work: that man feels deeply, that man feels
keenly.”_

 _“Many a worker in a factory or shop has had a strange, beautiful and pious
youth. But city life sometimes removes ‘the early dew of the morning.’ Even
so, the longing for ‘the old, old story’ remains. What is at the bottom of the
heart stays at the bottom of the heart.”_

 _“What am I in the eyes of most people – a nonentity or an eccentric or an
obnoxious person – someone who has no position in society and never will have,
in short the lowest of the low. Well, then – even if that were all absolutely
true, I should one day like to show by my work what there is in the heart of
such an eccentric, such a nobody.”_

He's a very different person from me, but I found his paintings strangely
interesting, and after reading the letters I find his whole life fascinating,
and that gives me a bit of an entrance into being interested in the whole
scene of the Impressionists in Paris where his style changed so interestingly,
but also the "old Dutch masters" that he was emulating at first, like who were
those people, what was going on there, what were they trying to show...

~~~
eelliott
Hey mbrock,

Thanks for your great reply. I think I might read about Van Gogh and try to
understand him now. I saw some of his paintings at the MET, my girlfriend was
blown away but I was pretty meh at the time. Perhaps I can understand more
from his words

~~~
mbrock
I had your same kind of problem, or more like just not having any kind of
robust interest in art, and I was living in Amsterdam for a while which of
course has great art museums...

I also didn't have an internet connection at home nor a smartphone, so it was
really easy to build new interests, not being dopaminergically tethered to the
world wide web...

So I decided to get a "museumkaart" which is a cheap way for residents to get
endless museum access for a whole year, and to write a little journal about a
museum every weekend.

Because I'm a kind of obsessive personality and I didn't have anything else to
do I ended up reading quite a bit of whatever relevant stuff I could find to
flesh out the journal entries, and that's why I read the Van Gogh letters!

So yeah, I also recommend finding a way to be more disconnected from the
internet on evenings and weekends. :)

~~~
eelliott
Good on you, I lived in the Netherlands for 6 months but didn't have the
insight yet to engage in such activities.

~~~
mbrock
The boredom of internetlessness has strange side effects...

