Answer: It’s a provocative question that quickly necessitates defining the boundaries of what does and does not constitute art. This mirrors the complexity of engaging in the ongoing definition of art. Art is studied because it's among the highest expressions of culture, embodying its ideals and aspirations, challenging its assumptions and beliefs, and creating new visions and possibilities for it to pursue. When we discuss contemporary art, we are typically referring to the practice of fine art, but prior to the Renaissance art was defined within the realm of functional crafts, such as goldsmithing. The idea of autonomous art, or art for art’s sake, developed later, over many eras. Studying art leads to a greater understanding of our own cultural values and of the culture that produced it. When colonizing forces of Europeans encountered African wood sculptural nkisi figures, primarily in what is now the Democratic Republic of the Congo, they considered them to be evidence of idolatry and witchcraft or opposition to the colonizing forces. The figures were often pierced with nails as a symbolic gesture to initiate a desired goal, like protection from an enemy. The invading Europeans often destroyed the nkisi figures, which were sacred objects to the Congo people.
The future or something that happened to them
The answer is humor! It’s been shown it helps with all of those mentioned benefits :)
<span>d. symphonies</span><span>
A composer who combined jazz and classical music into a new sound in the 1920s was George Gershwin (1989-1937). He was american pianist and composer. He studied classical music, but later he got interested in popular music genres, and used to compose operas, film music, concerts and symphonies. Gershwin strongly influenced many musicians, and he is considered to be a first exponent of the symphonic jazz genre. His most famous works are orchestral compositions Rhapsody in blue (1924) and American in Paris (1928), as well as opera Porgy and Bess (1935).</span>
