The answer to the question, “What makes something art?” can be as varied as the people who would ask it. To some, nothing can be considered art unless it is esthetically pleasing, such as a painting of a vase of flower one might hang in a dining room. To someone else, a piece must convey some meaning or insight in order to bear the title “art“. But what about photos of the Holocaust? Deep meaning is definitely conveyed, but esthetically there is no attraction. Or consider a drawing of a bumblebee on a rose: beauty is evident, but what is the deep meaning there? Yet, to still another person anything at all could be considered art if it was created for the purpose of bringing enjoyment to the person or people who experience it.

Past generations employed greater standards of propriety in many ways than our modern American culture dictates. Art was expected to convey not only beauty and meaning, but also nobility, respectfulness, and often an air of something to be achieved. Peaceful contemplation was a frequent theme in portraits, and rolling landscapes filled quiet halls with calming images. Today, artists embrace life’s realities with perhaps more artistic license, bringing a grit and sometimes an unsettling nature to their pieces. These may not always please every art show attendee, but they are truly art, nonetheless.

Art is a creative reflection of life, simply stated, and thus its definition is ambiguous. Perhaps it should remain that way.