Why do so many people find it hard to understand art?

Because there is hardly anything to "understand" in art.

Luca Nicoletti

Is this from Ikea?

I have a cousin with a rather limited circle of interest, upbringing, lifestyle, and exposure. Recently, he became aware of a brand called IKEA when they entered the Indian market. He perceives me as someone who is more exposed to well-designed products and possibly owning some items from Ikea. During his recent visit after many years, he repeatedly asked throughout the day, "Is this from Ikea?" He sat on a chair, a replica of the "Phantom Hands Chair" designed by Pierre Jeanneret, which I had commissioned from a local artisan in Mumbai. He asked, “Is this from Ikea?” I clarified that it was actually designed by the architect responsible for Chandigarh and numerous other iconic buildings worldwide. Although he found it comfortable, he remained curious if it was an Ikea purchase.

Later, while he was near the washbasin, he noticed a well-designed towel holder from Umbra and once again inquired, "This looks nice, is it from Ikea?" Unable to resist, I informed him that it was a product from a different company called Umbra. I explained that Umbra was established in 1979 by Les Mandelbaum and Paul Rowan, who aimed to create modern designs that were accessible in both price and attitude. Despite my response, my cousin still wondered if Umbra products were available at Ikea.

Limited Vocabulary

Imagine a remote village cut off from the outside world, possessing its own language consisting of only a few basic 20 words like “Food, Sleep, Drink, Kill, Die, Birth, House”, and so on. If one were to enter this village and ask "Have you seen abstract art?" the response would mostly be formed within those 20 set of words. Almost similar to, “is it from Ikea?”

Point being, you can express only what you can comprehend and the response is likely be formed using your known vocabulary. The response from these villagers to the question would be something like "Kill and sleep". 😉

Connecting the above two

People with limited exposure to what is considered contemporary art and a restricted vocabulary often become perplexed when trying to comprehend and appreciate it. They may claim not to understand something when, in reality, they simply like it or don’t like it.

In the past, didactic art served both to entertain and to instruct, prioritising conveying a message over inventing a new language to explain it. This approach made the art straightforward to comprehend. However, with the ongoing evolution of art, we now have various movements such as cubism, abstractism, and so on. As art continues to evolve rapidly, the same cannot be said for languages, as creating a new language demands considerable effort.

Manto's stories were deemed obscene or vulgar by the bourgeoisie class back then. Perhaps they were unaware of red light areas and other references in his works, or maybe they lacked the vocabulary to articulate their thoughts accurately. Thats why he was not appreciated at that time.

You cannot understand something, but you can like or dislike something.

Incase of art, it’s mostly about liking or not liking. Art is a self expression and to understand it, one might have to study the artist’s journey and not necessary his/her art. There is hardly anything to understand in art.

p.s. Inspired from “What Is Art and 100 other very important questions” by Ernst Billgren