An often very misunderstood art movement among the public is modern art. When it comes to topics of discourse, people tend to point fingers at the banana taped to the wall or Duchamps Fountain to generalize it being some of the worst of the worst from the art scene. Oftentimes, it could be said that people struggle to relate to the works. 

Some such arguments people use to criticize the movement is that it is “simple,” or that “a child could do it,” and that the works are made by people who are full of themselves. Which begs the question, what is modern art trying to convey anyways, and why do people tend to dislike it? What about it makes people struggle to understand it? 

Modern art can be characterized as a movement taking place from the 19th to the 20th century that emphasized life being at a constant state of change. 19th century French poet and critic, Charles Baudelaire, would describe modernity as an awareness of how the present is different from the past, and that one should seek out what is new and embrace it, rather than just taking pleasure in modern technology. 

While this point of view was not immediately adopted by artists, stylistically, modern art is now commonly associated with abstract works with bright colors, with possibly confusing, non-objective subject matter. However, broadly speaking the movement is near impossible to condense down to a single style or idea. 

“The ideas are thousands of different ideas, so maybe that’s something that makes it kind of difficult and alienating when people are first asked to study it, or even just walking through a museum and the galleries,” art history professor Alex Reischuck said. “We’ve changed how we teach art history in the last ten to twelve years, one of them is to get away from a surface treatment of issues– the quick, simple, succinct definition of something.”

One more wider known modern art movement that took place in Europe from 1860-1890 is the Impressionist movement. These artists set out to capture the feeling of modern life by emphasizing quick movement of time, including by painting outdoors, peoples’ pastimes, or more rarely, landscape paintings. According to USUEM, all of which was boundary breaking for its time when most art was either mythologized historical or biblical art made in studio settings.

While highly appreciated now, that could not always be said for how they were treated at the time. Louis Leroy, art critic, would go on to coin the term “Impressionism” after satirically describing one of the first Impressionist art exhibitions as being closer to unfinished sketches, rather than to being finished paintings.

According to USUEM, Leroy would also go on to say, “Impression! Wallpaper in its embryonic state is more finished!” Along with that, fellow art critic Albert Wolff described one impressionist artist Camille Pissarro’s works as follows, “Try to make Monsieur Pissarro understand that trees are not violet, that sky is not the color of fresh butter.”

 However Robert Florczak, illustrator and host of PragerU video titled, Why Is Modern Art So Bad? described impressionism’s objective subject matter as being tied directly to its greatness. 

“Whatever their intentions, the new modernists sowed the seeds of aesthetic relativism, “the beauty is in the eye of the beholder” mentality. Today, everybody loves the impressionists, and as with most revolutions the first generation or so produced works of genuine merit. Monet, Renoir and Degas still maintained elements of disciplined design and execution,” Florczak said. 

Florczak, however, earlier described today’s art movement as being “silly,” ”uninspired,” and “bored.” He relates conceptual works to that of Leonardo, making broad emotional appeals to disregard any underlying context to the works he describes. This ironically looks past the challenges impressionists faced when disrupting the status quo with their coloring styles.

What can be understood from this is that “great art” is an ever changing concept. There will always be artists who push the boundaries on its definition, so what is insulting in one generation can become popular culturally in the next. 

“When you look at the European canon, modern art threatens the very fabric of traditional values that many seen as art ever since the Italian Renaissance. As people, we wish to look at icons that look very similar to us. We wish to look at people and know who they are and what they are doing,” said Darcy Mctigue, an art history teaching assistant. 

Much like the Impressionists of their time, conceptual and abstract artists can often be misunderstood among popular culture. Due to the nature of their work, it can alienate them from audiences. 

“Sometimes the meaning of art is not because there is a true, underlying purpose to it. Sometimes, art is made for the artist’s pleasure, and many people fail to see that as well. Similarly, people are lacking in every aspect when you look at abstract and conceptual art. Viewers do not know how to perceive conceptual art, as the meaning could either be profound or there would be no meaning at all.” Mctigue said.

What is important then, is that people attempt to embrace what is unknown to them as well.  

“People tend to be uncomfortable with thinking or feeling with interpreting art right now,” Ariel Kniffin, a biology conservation major, said. “A lot of art is about human experience, and a lot of people don’t want to parse any of it. They want to milk what they can get out of it and leave. And I think that’s sad.” 

For its time, impressionism was not largely considered real art either, which would later change through challenging traditions.

“Like everything that you see in the history of art, some people are going to accept the avant-garde in due time, while others will dislike it. Counter-culture will eventually become mainstream until something else overtakes it because of the shock value. Thus, the process continues for us to learn why some objects are considered art.” Mctigue said.