In order for any work of art for example a film a novel a poem or a song to have merit it must be understandable to most people Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning f

In our history, we see some artists whose works were widely understood by the public, while others gain their merits posthumously. However, I disagree with the claim that it must be fathomable to most people in order to be valorized, because assessments toward a piece of work may differ a lot after many years.

It is undeniable that the general acceptance to the contemporaries within an artist’s times is usually positive to be esteemed. Take Leonardo da Vinci as an epitome. Da Vinci had been already acknowledged as a multifaceted prodigy in various fields including architecture, drawing, and sculpture, when he was young. He was strongly patronized by the Family of Medici, and therefore he was able to concentrate on producing oeuvres rather than being distracted by financial problems. His fame was further helpful, regarding that he could interact with other masters of his times, in the high society of artists. This prominent example demonstrates the importance of acceptance during an artist’s life.

However, we must note that there exist many painters who eventually gained great reputation only posthumously. Vincent van Gogh would be a typical example. It is very well known that Gogh was suffering from poverty, while he could sell merely a single piece of artwork, during his lifetime. A series of letters between him and his brother, Theo van Gogh, proves his extreme pennilessness, and he was not even able to afford sheets of canvass or oil paints for his work. He then passed away in severe solitude and penuriousness. After his death, his chef d’oeuvres started to astonish the world, including both critiques and the public. One of his masterpieces, “Starry Night”, is currently appraised as the most appreciated artwork in South Korea. Van Gogh, as a symbolic example, proves that the coeval deference is not a prerequisite for an eternal value.

Furthermore, such unfortunate artists are not confined only in the area of painting; Franz Kafka, one of the greatest writers ever, is a conspicuous example in literature. Kafka was nearly neglected by both critiques and the common people until the very day of his death, due to tuberculosis. The fact that his will—left to his friend—was to incinerate all his manuscripts demonstrates how he was overlooked by the people. The bunch of manuscripts, which was supposed to be burnt out, includes the historic masterwork “Metamorphosis”; his works are now relished by such a broad readership, from young students to professional writers. This salient example supports the rebuttal against the given claim.

In summary, yet granting the importance to be acknowledged by the contemporary people, I believe that this is not the necessary factor to become valorized at some point, regarding the two examples. Artists should therefore dedicate themselves to realize the virtue in which they believe, rather than trying to grasp the attention of surrounding people. (474 words)