When it comes to music, painting, books—any kind of art, really—some works achieve momentary popularity and then fizzle out like fireworks on the 4th of July. Other works, however, only become MORE popular over time.

Today I would like to discuss some aspects of art that I believe can help an artwork achieve the status of “classic/universal/timeless”:

Much has been said about different levels of “value” that people experience from things. It has also been said that some works of art (such as the novels of Jane Austen), provide many levels at which you can understand them.

In my opinion, there are three crucial levels of function, meaning and value that any artwork needs to have if it’s going to be a timeless, “classic” piece that people are going to be able to enjoy over a long period of time.

This is, of course, provided that the artwork answers the basic criteria that make it able to be considered “good” (more on that another time).

The three levels of function that artworks need to fulfill to become classic:

The functional; the art fulfills a functional need. Example: I need a book to read for 30 min at night before I go to sleep. Which book will it be? Example: I have an empty space on my wall where I need to put something that is a certain size and goes with the colors I already have in the room. Example: I am throwing a dinner party, and I am looking for what music to play to set the right mood.
The emotional; this is on the level of “entertainment,” which means it makes you feel a certain way, it creates a mood, it allows you to experience emotions that you want to experience at that moment. Example: The wedding band that provides the dance music for during the reception. The Hallmark Christmas movie that you watch to get into the holiday spirit. The relaxing picture of a calm mountainside lake that you hang in your bedroom to create a soothing atmosphere.
The meaning/message; this is the thought-based communication aspect of the artwork that provides inspiration, motivation, gives new ideas, makes you look at something in a certain way that you never thought of before, simply communicates something incredibly relatable, etc etc. The exact meaning of an artwork can be very different for different people, but in well-received art, there will be a general agreement that there is “something” the work communicates that goes beyond the literal. It doesn't have to particularly deep or earthshattering (although it can be), but there does have to be “something.” Examples of art work with meaning: The “Danse Macabre” by Camille Saint-Saens. Example: The movie “The Shawshank Redemption.” Example: The novel “Pride & Prejudice” by Jane Austen.

The secret is that ideally, an artwork should fulfill ALL THREE functions at the same time.

Here are some examples of what happens when you DON’T have all three going at the same time:

Functional only, no emotion or message:
Have you ever sat in a hotel or restaurant and heard a sort of monotone “background” music being played very softly that keeps following the same rhythm and occasionally goes up a note, then comes back down again? Almost completely monotone? It barely even qualifies as “Muzak” but you hear it more and more frequently in restaurants and hotels. That’s what I think about when I think of a piece of art that is “functional” but neither provides emotional value nor has meaning or message. It is functional as in there is music being played in the background. It is safe, it doesn’t offend anyone and seems to be a favorite of chain establishments. Provides very minimal emotion, although you could argue that it provides some. You see a similar thing with the artwork on the walls at many chain hotels.

Functional plus emotional, no message:
Have you ever heard a cover band play at a New Year’s Eve party? It was probably functional in that it provided the music people were expecting at the party and gave people something to do. It was most likely also emotional in an appropriate way, as those bands tend to be pretty good at getting everyone dancing and in a partying mood. If the band played some well-written covers, it may have even provided some meaning/message value. But did the band itself make a meaningful impact on you? Do you remember the name of the band or would you look them up online or search for their particular recordings so you could hear them again? There are many artworks that have mostly entertainment value but don’t go beyond that. There is nothing wrong with that unless you’re aiming for art that will still be remembered 100 years from now.

Meaningful only, no functionality or emotion:
In the field of visual art and sculpture, there are a tremendous number of artworks that are “interesting” for various reasons, but you would probably not hang them on your wall at home. As a most extreme example of “meaning” only, and not particularly any functional or emotional value, I always think of the banana taped against the wall, an artwork called “Comedian” that was put on display in 2019. It came in three “editions,” meaning in three different museums a banana was taped against the wall in a specific way, and these were all considered versions of the same artwork. The bananas were actually eaten in several different occasions by visitors, but that didn’t even seem to matter, because the “artwork” was seen as the concept of the banana taped against the wall, and not even the banana or the tape (or the wall) itself.

Sometimes artists forget to include the functional. Then you might end up with art that has strong emotion and is even meaningful and well-executed, but it is unclear how people would use it in daily life. An image that is too small to hang as wall decor but not quite suitable as the subject of a greeting card. It’s cool, but what would you do with it? Is it just “art for art’s sake”?

What happens when you have all three in one:

When you have all three in one, and they are in harmony with each other, you get art that most people recognize and appreciate as a “real” work of art that also delivers a corresponding emotional value and is practical at the same time. Something that ends up being enjoyed over and over in daily life (even if only in certain settings or seasons).

And when the quality of the work is also very high in all aspects of it, you get works of art like Mozart’s Requiem, the novels of Jane Austen (200 years later just as interesting as in the early 1800s), movies like “Amadeus,” “The Lord of the Rings” series, the original “Jurassic Park,” and perhaps even Harry Potter. This is also where you get Monet’s “Bridge Over a Pond of Water Lilies,” Van Gogh’s “Cafe Terrace at Night” and Jack Vettriano’s “The Singing Butler.”

*“The Singing Butler” by Jack Vettriano, popular as wall decor*

These works are likely to continue to be enjoyed for a long time to come. Nothing lasts forever of course. Cultures do eventually change. But if you combine the three elements, art has a greater chance of being memorable over the long term.

Now, I am by no means saying that I have perfected this in my own work or that all creative work must contains these elements. Artists can do whatever you want with their creativity. But I think it is a useful tool for artists to ask themselves these questions as part of conceptualizing a new work of art:

How would I like people to use/view/enjoy this work? In what setting/season/time of day/location would this work be most relevant or appropriate?
What mood do I want this work convey? How do I want people to feel when or after they read/view/enjoy this work?
What is the overall message/thought/meaning that I would like to communicate with this work? What woud I like people to walk away with and remember after viewing/reading/enjoying this work?

Something to think about when contemplating your next project. :)

What Makes Art & Music“Classic”?

Getting Unstuck as an Artist—Create a “Small” Effect