by Lucie Shores

Created on: February 07, 2010   Last Updated: February 08, 2010

To question the source of artistry is to define an artwork by how it was created and who created it, on one level.  Whether one considers artistic abilities to be learned or innate depends on what one considers to be "art".  

By one definition, "art" is the way in which something is done.  An individual may have innate ability to behave or move or perceive in a way that allows them to negotiate the environment in a way that is recognizable and has a certain impact on others.  Contrarily, someone may have perfected the skills involved in mastering an arts discipline, yet never formally produce notable works of interest.

When limiting the inquiry to skill, the focus narrows to answer its own quest for definition.  Skill can be equated with ability, but not with potential.  If one possesses the ability to see and translate what one sees into another medium in an artful way with no training, one could be said to have a natural ability as well as much potential for developing skill;  a learned competency. 

If these arguments are accepted then the artwork created can be equally recognizable, yet products of widely disparate abilities, skills, processes and motivation.  Recognizable ancient to contemporary works of art, when similar in genre and of like value,  can be traced to all manner of origin.   To define 'a priori'  the process, skills, knowledge or apparent talent necessary for a work of art to be accepted as such is invalid.

Generally speaking the question is blurred by books of 'artwork' painted by cats, babies and random acts of nature.  However if we confine the question to formal arts disciplines, including dance, music, painting, sculpture, and the literary arts,  one can clearly answer the question as stated.  Formal discipline involves formal training, where an innate ability is shaped, and perfected according to a generally accepted ideal.

Someone who is naturally strong and lithe may have more talent, or natural ability for dance than someone who is born with another body type.  However, someone who loves to move and communicate concepts through movement can acquire whatever skills are necessary to use the medium successfully.  That goes for any art and any individual with passion for expression in a particular mode or medium.

As one can see the question can be answered on several levels, but with the same result.  Differences in the execution of art can be noticed and judged against certain ideals or theories, but ultimately,  the criteria we use to define art, must be in observation and appreciation of the work itself. 

Learn more about this author, Lucie Shores.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.