FAR EASTERN UNIVERSITY

GENERAL EDUCATION

MODULE 6
1st Semester, A.Y. 2021-2022

GED0106 Art Appreciation

I. Topic for Discussion:

II. Learning Outcomes: At the end of the class, the students will...

III. Task
A. Instructions: The following statements are some of the major points raised by Robert
Florczak in the video “Why Is Modern Art So Bad?”. Respond to each statement by
expressing your agreement or disagreement. Justify your response.
1. For two millennia, great artists set the standard for beauty. Now those standards are
gone.
 I disagree with this because in my own opinion we have all our own standards of
beauty and we all have our own taste. As they say, “beauty is in the eyes of the
beholder” and sometimes what’s beautiful to others differs from the other one
especially in today’s situation. The world is changing over a period of time so as
the taste of people. Many great artists today still have their standard of beauty but
others might fail to see it because they don’t know what’s good on its purpose or
message the art or artist conveys. Modern art isn't just about self-expression. It's a
pushback to tradition, it's a different way of looking at things, and it’s extending
the role art plays in society, among other things.
2. The profound, the inspiring and the beautiful were replaced by the new, the different,
and the ugly.
 I agree with it since what I understand in the video, mostly the arts that one’s
meaningful with its message, inspirational with its purpose, and attractive to its
audience were transformed with this unusual, and unattractive arts that can
sometimes provoke or harm other people in all aspects of their being.
 3. Not only has the quality of art diminished, but also the subject matter has gone from
the transcendent to the trashy.
 I agree with this since a lot of Art has become purely about the story surrounding
the piece. To be a great modern artist it's more about how well you can spin ideas,
concepts and tells stories rather than how talented you actually are. Hence some
of the 'best' modern artists today can sell a blank canvas for thousands, or a rock.
I've seen that all white painting before. It's called, "Polar Bear Shovelling Snow in
a Blizzard." That even the wall is really called a piece of art. And when I saw that
apron I couldn't tell what was good (even before knowing what it actually was).
At the end of the day, people can create what they like and it's not that all the
things which aren't as perfect as these old paintings worth nothing. It is okay to let
people publish their works, but today's standards are really weird sometimes like
the banana with tape is a piece of art costing millions
4. it’s not only artists who are at fault; it is equally the fault of the so-called art
community: the museum heads, gallery owners, and critics who encourage and
financially enable the production of the rubbish.
 I agree. As stated, these are the ones that support graffiti and called it like brilliant
idea or art, as well as the scatological and called it appealing. It also them who
promoted and supported the idea of that banana with tape for who else would
spend millions and think it is art? We do not purchase the artwork. We go to
museums or buy art from galleries. We have the ability to make our thoughts
known as well as felt. After all, the gallery is just like any other company. The
product will not be manufactured if it does not sell. Hirshhorn Museum of modern
art for instance from the comment section. There I found that theres this dirty
bedroom set up in one nook of the museum and praised as "great art." There was
a single string of clear Christmas lights hanging from the ceiling in another
exhibit. Things went from bad to worse. The funniest thing was that they had
armed guards to protect their so called "art."

II. Deepening:
Instructions: The following is an installation view of Mideo Cruz’s Poleteismo at the
“Kulo” exhibition in CCP in 2011. This was one the most controversial figures in the
exhibit as it depicted a crucifix with a large red phallus attached. The said exhibit was
shut down because it ignited a debate about the limits of freedom of speech in the
Philippines, in regard to religious imagery in art. As an Art Appreciation student,
examine the figure very carefully and answer the questions that follow.
 (Photo by Ina Alleco Silverio / bulatlat.com)

1. Why do you think this image was made? What might have been the creator’s purpose?
What evidence supports your theory?
 The relic was completed in 2004 and is about the transformation of Filipinos after
several layers of colonization. It was apparently inspired by how people got our
country's name in comparison towards the monarchal trend of accumulating
religious artifacts as well as the Poon (Christ the King) recreating the holiness and
recreating this same emblem to parallel definitions. My understanding of what he
wants to convey in his arts is that most religious people are fanatical compared to
garbage. They give more importance to the useless. Just like the government they
pay more attention to it as compared to the longevity of the problem that must be
acted upon.
2. Why do you think the creator chose to include these particular details (most specially the
large red phallus)?
 In many civilizations, phalluses have become subjects of adoration, according to
Mideo Cruz during an interview. They utilize them as amulets, symbolic
figurines, and other such things. They might be a sign of patriarchy and power.
(Keng,2011)
3. What do you think the creator might have wanted the audience to think or feel?
  It was through Politeismo that Mideo wanted the Filipino public to realize what
he believes to be the unconscious, new forms of gods Filipinos adored. In other
words, as an artist he critiques what he personally observes to be what Filipinos
regard as sources of comfort and meaning in life, and this he made through
Politeismo. He created this piece of art whose central core was to provoke such
reactions from the Church and other institutions and I think this was successful.
4. Does this image show clear bias? If so, towards what or whom? What evidence supports
your conclusion?
 Art is supposed to be a representation of the artists’ vision and their skill in
expressing it. When an artist insults you with a bunch of rotten bananas on the
floor, it tells you more about the artist than their “vision”. The artist has vision but
the thing is he only focuses on that vision without considering the vision of other
people especially those who believes and loves their religion. It is a bias to the
sense that he wanted to convey through his work was the outright interference and
opposition of the Catholic Church to the RH bill. He would have just used a
picture of a bishop carrying a handsome montero and there he would have
installed his condom, sure he have his artistic freedom, but his freedom ends
where the religious beliefs and sensibilities of others begin
5. What did you learn/ realize from examining this image? Does any new information you
learned contradict or support your prior knowledge about the topic or theme related to
this image?
 Our world is different now and so is the perspective of the people and the artist.
The reality is that the controlled environment and the gallery are the real life.
When you see a hungry child on the street, it is very normal to others. But when it
was brought to the gallery, all the tears, anger you cry, get angry and utter unkind
words. Mideo's exhibit was successful because many were hit so hard. The
negative reaction of the people is exactly what Mideo's artwork means. I
immediately remembered Guillermo Vargas' Starving Dog exhibit. The hypocrisy
of the people is really outside. When they see a hungry dog on the street they
don't pay attention to it or they don't know anything, but when inside the gallery
the others will speak evil things but they are doing even worse. But the thing is,
his purpose is very clear but the way he uses art is wrong and somewhat
disrespectful. It was not only the Lord that he disrespected but the beauty that art
shares with humanity, which has nothing else to share but goodness, respect and
virtue because that is what the crooked world needs more. To comprehend, the
Perspectivism concept was applied. The reception-interpretation method
dynamics It was also from this belief that conflicting viewpoints and ideas
comments on the exhibit Politeismo were better understood. However, as with
any competing viewpoint, a fusion of horizons is possible. Genuine discussion
may actually occur whether the beholders agree of each perspective would be
ready to postpone their judgements against each other and take the posture that
the other sees.
6. In your own perspective, is this a good or bad art? Justify your answer.
  In my own opinion, I considered this as bad art, even if the artist’s intention is
good, as a religious person I would consider this as an insult to Christianity and
who believes in Jesus as a Holy one. It just shows disrespectful for me. If
anything, God uses Cruz’s work to stir all of us (Catholics, Muslims, Christians,
etc…) to take a stand. In the end, God is the ultimate judge. Who are we to know
what another is really going through, right? Let us all grow together wheat and
weeds. For those who choose to be wheat remains wheat. For those who choose to
be a weed, well I hope you will turn eventually.

References:
PragerU (2014, September 1). Why is modern art so bad? [Video].
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNI07egoefc

Hannah A. (2015, July 26). “Kulo” Exhibit: Is It Obscenity Or an Art ?.