Descriptive Paintings

Bell describes a descriptive painting as a “…painting in which forms are used not as objects of emotion, but as means of suggesting emotion or conveying information,” (page 264). An example of a descriptive painting would be a topographical work such as a map of a particular area. Most maps are designed as a tool for individuals curious about the area to use for guidance. According to Bell’s theory of which objects should fall under the category of art, maps would not qualify because they do not arouse an aesthetic emotion. It is possible to a map to do so though. For example, what if a parent drew a map of the town he or she was living in to help educate his or her child about the surrounding area. Here, the only intent of the map is to convey information which is the definition of a descriptive painting. If the parent chooses to get creative with the map drawing in hopes of making the learning process more fun for the child he or she may add in some drawings to represent certain areas. For example, the parent could draw a fish to represent a lake or he or she may drawn a house to represent his or her home. If the child sees this map and the images on the map arouse an aesthetic emotion, it should be considered art in Bell’s point of view. Would this scenario imply that some descriptive paintings can be considered art as well or should intention play a role in its categorization?