.Does it amount to cheating? The ETHICS of Digital Art . . .

Artistic Classification: High Art

It is commonly thought within the art world that, regardless of fairness, two loosely defined categories of art exist: high and low. These categories define tastes in aesthetic properties. Practices such as painting, sculpture, and printmaking are considered high art because of the amount of skill needed to meet the aesthetic standards of higher-class society. Webb Phillips, an employee of the Cognition Lab at MIT, states that “[a]esthetic systems perpetuate class inequalities.” In examining this statement, we find that the higher social class, also being the wealthier class, is synonymous with the idea of being ‘cultured.’ It seems as if society labels high art as being “long established art forms such as painting and ballet” which are “supported by an elite and wealthy class of society” (Webb). Works of art in these forms are generally not accepted unless the artist is extremely skilled and masterful with his/her work, which excludes a vast majority of society on the basis of finance. Webb’s statement about ‘high’ artists being supported by the elite furthers this predicament. The reason these people are indeed so skillful is that they have access to the funds with which to do so. This socioeconomic system places costly skill on a pedestal, whilst leaving the generally more expressive, humane, and available works of art to the lower classes.

Neoclassicism is a perfect example of a movement which is widely considered as high art. The Neoclassical movement (approximately 1700-1810 A.D.) is characterized by a photographic likeness to reality, which required the utmost skill and patience. Most of the artists of this period were extremely perfectionist in nature, sometimes almost obsessive, as their goal was to accurately reproduce life in two dimensions with absolutely no difference from three-dimensional realistic vision. The piece we are to study is Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres’s “Napoleon on his Imperial Throne,” painted in 1806. Right away, note the rigid and stern title of the work at hand. This title may or may not have been assigned by the artist, but regardless, it reflects the stern and serious subject of the painting. It also tells us exactly what we are viewing.

Upon first glance, this piece seems like a photograph. The detail of this work is almost unheard of for a painting. This is known as photo-realism and was a standard in the Neoclassical period. Neoclassicism is what some refer to as a rebound movement. It is an exact opposite, and very protestant of the “free formed and colorful” Renaissance movement, which it followed (Victorian Web). The lack of freedom is quite evident on examination of this work. Napoleon Bonaparte sits extremely rigidly in his throne, staring intently ahead as if waiting for the viewer to excuse themselves from his view. His lips also seem to be frozen closed in mid thought, as if he appears to be refraining from speaking. Though the background is dark and the scene shadowy, the lighting is rather harsh, lighting the right side of Napoleon’s face and body almost like a small spotlight. His clothing is heavy and draped in the style of historic European royalty. Napoleon sits exactly centered in his throne, and interestingly enough, still bears his sword at his side. This seems to imply a strong warrior type of royalty. Napoleon sits with two staffs: one short, in his left hand pointing diagonally upward past his shoulder much as a soldier holds a gun. The other is approximately twice as long, one end resting on the floor in front of his chair and held high at the top with the right hand. Detail in the clothing is eerily accurate. Every shadow, highlight, and detail of fabric is easily noticeable. So much so that we can accurately deduct the fabrics our subject is wearing: fur and velvet. Details in the chair appear to us, as well as even the crisp pattern of the carpet on the floor. Only four colors are present throughout the piece: brown, gold, red, and white. This signifies a very clean, refined atmosphere, a signature of European royalty. A perfectly symmetrical crown placed on Napoleons head completes the scene.

What does all this symbolism mean now that we have documented it? First we see that Neoclassicism seems extremely strict. Portrayal of reality in a most accurate form is extremely important. Every minor detail is worthy of documentation in order to reflect the utmost character of the subject and its surroundings. It also seems that this person is very important. In Neoclassicism in general it’s seen that man, as a being, is the most important subject for art. Rarely is anything else portrayed unless it’s in the company of a human form. The subject matter is royalty, hinting to regal roots and financial stability, key features of high art classification. There is almost no emotion radiating from this piece. No imperfections, no ‘normality;’ it is most certainly not a reflection of the masses.