Interpreting and Making Art

Terry Barrett's book Interpreting Art:  Reflecting, Wondering, and Responding has some great insight into the world of both art critics and everyday people who look at art.  Much of the first chapter describes what it means to interpret a piece of art, claiming that is what makes it meaningful to different people, perhaps even different to the audience than the artist himself.  After various extensive analyses of The Postcard by Rene Margritte, I thought it was interesting that a quote was included by the artist who said himself that he strives for his paintings to promote curiosity, and that "people who look for symbolic meanings fail to grasp the inherent poetry and mystery of the image..." (p. 14).  Barrett tells us that even though the viewer's interpretation may differ from the artist's, it does not make anyone wrong.  I thought this was an interesting concept, because sometimes a work is made for a particular reason or with a certain value in mind, yet Barrett supports the idea that everyone's informed opinions or interpretations are allowed (though some are better than others, p. 225).  I feel that the book is claiming that a work of art only comes alive when it is displayed for others to interpret, however I also believe art can have meaning for the artist himself during the making of the piece, and even if no one else sees it, does Barrett believe no meaning exists? I wonder about this implication.
While Interpreting Art discusses analyses of specific works, Barrett's article "Approaches to Postmodern Artmaking" and Gude's article "Principles of Possibility" relate to ideas of actually making art.  Both articles begin by addressing some sort of breaking free; in Barrett's case it is designing pieces outside the confinements of an interior art gallery, while Gude discusses the need to break away from the national art education standards in order to create a stimulating curriculum.  Barrett's article describes modernist art as focusing on an "aesthetic experience" as opposed to conceptual thought, and similarly, Gude says modernism supports the use of standard elements and principles are no longer the only components to make exciting art or a successful curriculum.  Gude then directs her article towards the importance of play and allowing students to have a part in the development of a curriculum.  Gude mentions how the Surrealist games promote the emergence of students' imagination.  This article addresses many important factors and global themes that could potentially enrich an art education curriculum, including multicultural studies, social issues such as pollution, and the environment.  This article is valuable as Gude seems to be in favor of incorporating postmodern artistic practices into the classroom and moving forward, expanding upon more traditional exercises.