I looked at a lot of burnt wood hanging on strings. My interest was tepid, at best. Then I found out that the pieces of wood came from a church that was set on fire with racist motivation. I thought, that should change my reaction. Now that I had a context, something scandalous, why did I still feel generally bored by this art? Because it wasn't a real context, just a statement about the context, and that didn't actually change the bits of hanging wood. Had this been erected at the site of the church, maybe I'd respond differently. The thing is, no matter what I knew about the hanging wood, the artwork itself didn't elicit much of a response. For me, that's bad art.
On the other side of the room was a miniature cathedral make entirely of guns and ammunition. Inside the cathedral was a spinal column, laid out on luxurious fabric. Immediate response. Visual interest and strong emotional reaction, didn't want to focus my attention elsewhere. Good art. Would I want that in my house? Hell no, but I loved it. I like art in my house that's pretty (that word is essentially blacklisted in art school), and interesting enough to be inspiring, but not a distraction. That cathedral was beyond pretty, it was awesome. As to the emotional response, well, it was made out of guns and housed a spine. I dare say anyone who knows what guns and religion are would have a pretty strong reaction, and I think that's what makes good art; not that everyone likes it, just that it makes everyone think.
