A valid interpretation of an artwork is dependent on an understanding of the artist’s intent and the context in which it was created.

Interpreting artwork is not only the livelihood of art critiques but also an unavoidable process which happens every time anyone sees an artwork. A person need not be an art critique to interpret a work, thus the nature of interpretations taking on many forms. Although everyone believes that their interpretation is correct, I personally believe that a valid interpretation of an artwork is dependent on an understanding of the artist’s intent and the context in which it was created.

The artist’s intent is, possibly, the most important aspect to take into consideration in order to make a valid interpretation of his or her work. In order to even create a work, an artist will almost always have a purpose in making the work. Be it as a response to an issue or as an avenue of expression, understanding the purpose of the work is possibly the most important step one needs to take in order to make a valid interpretation. An example would be Olympia by Manet. When it was exhibited in the Paris Salon of 1865, it caused an uproar. Critiques all over deemed it as “vulgar” and “immoral”, even going to the extent of saying that if the painting were not destroyed, it is only because it is well-protected. I feel that these interpretations, although made with good basis, were not valid interpretations. Manet meant for this painting to simply show the truth. This work, known to some as Manet’s “masterpiece”, was so violently slammed in its time due to the simple reason of interpreters not understanding the artist’s intent.

Context is also extremely important in interpreting a work, such as in the case of Lucia Hartini. Her painting of “Srikandi”, is full of symbols which any art critique can easily link with courage, barricades, freedom and defiance, but without truly understanding the context in which the painting was painted, the interpretation of “a courageous woman breaking out of barricades and seeking freedom” will never be complete. This painting was painted by Lucia Hartini in her Indonesian society which was extremely male-dominant. Female artists such as her suffer in both art school and society as they are looked upon with a critical eye and their works are not recognized. Her influences for this work were not only the society she lived in, but also of her longing to break free of societal norms and in the process, discover herself. Understanding her context to paint this painting, we can then form a valid interpretation that she is depicting herself as Srikandi, fighting back against the critical judgement and norms of society.

Therefore it can be said that understanding the intent and context of an artist is crucial in forming a valid interpretation of the artwork.