What is Art?

Banksy's Artwork

 

Why was it produced?

To create controversy in society and in art, to explain Banksy’s personal opinions on society in a picture form.

Do you think the artists thought of it as “art”?

Many people see Banksy’s art as disruptive and as unacceptable. Artists probably view Banksy’s work as a joke, rather than serious artwork.

 

What is your opinion of it?

I like Banksy’s artwork as I think it shows true opinion rather than conforming to the norms of society and creating artwork in the same way that everyone expects artists to do.


What is art?

ART has not always been what we think it is today. An object regarded as Art today may not have been perceived as such when it was first made, nor was the person who made it necessarily regarded as an artist. Both the notion of "art" and the idea of the "artist" are relatively modern terms.

Many of the objects we identify as art today -- Greek painted pottery, medieval manuscript illuminations, and so on -- were made in times and places when people had no concept of "art" as we understand the term. These objects may have been appreciated in various ways and often admired, but not as "art" in the current sense.

ART lacks a satisfactory definition. It is easier to describe it as the way something is done -- "the use of skill and imagination in the creation of aesthetic objects, environments, or experiences that can be shared with others" - rather than what it is.

How could the artistic qualities of a controversial work of art such as the installation above or a

winning entry for the Turner Prize be explained to someone who doubted its artistic merits?

(17 marks)

You cannot define art as any one thing - it is simply someone's feelings or opinions expressed in almost any form. Everyone has the right to create an art of their choice in which ever form they choose, whether that be a painting, to music, to a film. One person cannot define art no matter how logical their answer may be - as the appreciation of different artworks depends on the person. Different people interpret art in different ways - for example, Banksy's artwork to one person may be pure vandalism on public property, but to another, could be inspiring and appreciated greatly, if they share the same views on society, or even if they don't.

Against Immigration

They can be negative aspects from immigration such as overcrowding. England can only take so many people, and due to net migration being higher in immigration in the UK we are significantly growing in numbers which may be ok for now, but it the distant future can cause problems relating to benefits, debt, housing, education etc. Also there may be an issue with the language barrier and more people are having difficulty in understanding one another, and eventually the languages spoken can create problems for places such as the work industry. It could also possibly cause racial or social disagreements between cultures and social ways of living such as informal rules. These are some reasons which can cause large numbers of immigration to be frowned upon.

How have problems changed in society

Idleness was seen as a big problem because unemployment had been high.

Many diseases were life threatening since healthcare was only good if you were wealthy.

Squalor - Housing was inadequate and poor conditions such as slum areas.

Poverty was rife, the elderly suffered as their state pension was barely sufficient (Want)

    People had little education and the school leaving age was 14 (Ignorance)           

what is the Welfare State?
Welfare State constructed during Labour government post world war two– until recently taken for granted.  Concept of cradle to the grave care for all – provision of free access to healthcare (NHS), free education access to social benefits for those in need for example council housing

When was it created?
1945-1950

Explain the concept “from cradle to the grave”
Looking after from birth to old age (links slide show)

When was the NHS created?

1948

Do you think Welfare should always be provided by the State?

This can vary because of the situation it provides for some people, as some people can have a luxury life on benefits yet not work which is not fair, therefore it should be necessarily given rather than provided compulsory. 

Which of the four ‘providers’ of Welfare do you think may provide the best provision?I think that the state is the best because it concerns all aspects of society such as environment, transport and education.

1.  Do you think the creation of the Welfare State has been a force for good? 

This is mostly true however some people take advantage of the beneficial opportunities and therefore is not a good aspect of the welfare state. 

TRANSPORT

why do you think it is different now?

Transport has changed due to an improvement in technology and there are more choices in the way you can travel, they are more advanced and have a quicker duration.  

What effect has this had on the population?

As the population has increased, the transport facilities are a lot busier and therefore need different time allocation and need to work efficiently.

Are we now ‘better off’?

Yes definitely. We can travel anytime and anywhere and do not need to worry about how we are getting there.

How have these changed since 1945?

• health care
• transport
• communication
• employment
• education

Life Changes

Do parents have the right to influence a child's characteristics in order to improve life chances? (for example make choices about what kind of child they want at conception or chose not to continue with a pregnancy if they detectabnormality). 
I believe that it todays society due to modern technology, we are offered a range of outcomes and options prior to pregnancies. If a couple do not want a boy, and then they may decide to abort. If an abnormality is detected then it also may result into abortion. I think that this  process can be bad, due to parents developing their babies the way they want them to be, nurturing them before they are born which goes against nature which I believe to be wrong.

Your life chances are mainly effected by your circumstances. It is a question of who you know not who you are!I think that this may be true to an extent because your area consists of your opportunities which can determine the chances you have in your life. However, opportunities may arise that can provide better outcomes that what you circumstances suggest. Therefore it is not always true. 

The proption of young people from working class families taking part in higher education is less than young people among better off families. Why do you think this is the situation? Is it nature or nurture? What is the key determination in life chances?

The proportion of young people from working class families taking part in higher education is less than young people among better off families.

Why do you think this is the situation?

Is it nature or nurture? What is the key determination in life chances?

This is determined by nurture due to being where you live. If you are richer, and classed as a bourgeoisie then you are likely to have more opportunities. In life, your chances are mainly determined by your wealth but in some cases this doesn’t always happens and depends on your careers, if you want to be a model, then you life chance depends on your nature; physically and your appearance. The UK government use ‘mean test’ so that only certain groups are given benefits.

The government ‘Means tests’ focuses on offering financial support

To the most needy.

The government argue that a universal benefits scheme would mean supporting

Many people who do not need financial support.

Debate the argument above of a universal benefit scheme.

What do you think?I think that it is a good idea to give opportunities to those who can not always financially achieve so therefore this scheme is good in that sense. However, as it can cater for those who do not even need financial support then this is not effective and in fact is wasting money to those who could benefit from it more or even be given to other organisations such as charities.

Independant Research

How far and in what ways do soaps promote certain types of behaviour and legitimise negative behaviour?

independent research

Ashley Cole: 99 caps but not a single England goal to his name...

...Chelsea left-back has one final chance to find the back of the net to avoid joining a very exclusive club

Ashley Cole will earn his 100th international cap when England face Brazil at Wembley tonight, but the magic 100-club is not the only exclusive club that the defender will join.

Should Cole fail to score, he will become just the second outfield player in history to reach a century of caps for a top 20 ranked country to have never scored.

Out of 67 players to have reached 100 caps, only Sweden’s Bjorn Nordqvist failed to score, with his 115th and final international appearance coming in 1978.

Nordqvist played 115 times without finding the back of the net, so Cole still has a chance to score before he overtakes the Swede. However, the Chelsea left-back is not known for his prolific goalscoring record for his club, having netted just seven goals for the Blues – all of them coming in the league.

Having scored nine goals for former club Arsenal – with one coming in a Champions League tie, the possibility that he will get off the mark tonight is not a crazy one, but it is more than likely that Cole will reach the 100 mark with a big zero next to his name in the goals scored column. He is priced at 40/1 with bookmakers to get on the scoresheet.

Of course, England’s most capped player remains Peter Shilton, and although the goalkeeper didn’t score for his country, he still managed to get his goal tally off the mark against Southampton while playing for Leicester City.

There is some who feel that Cole should no longer be first-choice in the left-back role for Roy Hodgson’s side, with the ever improving Leighton Baines breathing heavily down Cole’s neck. With Baines’ set-piece ability, he certainly is a more attacking option, having already scored for the Three Lions in just 13 appearances.

However, Cole has established himself as one of the leading left-backs in the world, and the achievements to his name certainly back up that argument. Three Premier League trophies – two of those with Arsenal which includes ‘The Invincibles’ season – seven FA Cup’s, a League Cup and the famous Champions League victory with Chelsea last season leaves Cole as one of the most successful Englishmen to have played the game.

And although he may receive a mixed reception when he runs out tonight, there is no doubting that fans will let him off if he never scores for England, as long as he demonstrates the same commitment and skill that he has done in each of his 99 previous caps.