"Works of art are received and valued on different planes. Two polar types stand out: with one, the accent is on the cult value; with the other, on the exhibition value of the work."
"With the different methods of technical reproduction of a work of art, its fitness for exhibition increased to such an extent that the quantitative shift between its two poles turned into a qualitative transformation of its nature. This is comparable to the situation of the work of art in prehistoric times when, by the absolute emphasis on its cult value, it was, first and foremost, an instrument of magic. Only later did it come to be recognized as a work of art. In the same way today, by the absolute emphasis on its exhibition value the work of art becomes a creation with entirely new functions, among which the one we are conscious of, the artistic function, later may be recognized as incidental.This much is certain: today photography and the film are the most serviceable exemplifications of this new function. "
This is a very interesting point. I dissected art into two points through history. It regard the first as cult, while the second as the purpose it carries. These two points pointed out the existence of those object/things before they are considered art. This is a very thoughtful way to express pre-art. I realize that even though the context was built more on western culture but it could very much lead itself into all context within history. The bronze sculpture/vessels, paintings, bamboo scrips all started with this two purpose before they are later considered as art. The two poles presented very well explains the reason for innovation as well. they both pretty much lands itself into this two categories.
