When I started uni as a Fine Arts major conceptual art, in other words, performance art, was pretty strong. We had the performances of Marina Abramović and Ulai as well as of others. And of course we all knew about the conceptual «art» of Yoko Ono. But in our art school we had no classes, nor where we ever led towards that branch of «art.» And even when I switched to the Theatre Arts Department, the university did not consider teaching classes on how to be a performance artist. And I think they had the right approach. To me, in my opinion, performance art is more akin to theatre than to art, and conceptual art is more akin to nothing. I’ve no use for it. It is simply a way for talentless «artists» to «create» art that no one understands and that says nothing important. And do not forget, these are my personal feelings and opinions. Yours might be different and I will respect them.
So, here is a comparison:
| Aspect | Traditional Art | Conceptual Art |
|---|---|---|
| Primary Focus | Skill, technique, and aesthetics (form, color, composition, craftsmanship) | Idea, concept, or social statement; the concept is often more important than the execution |
| Materials/Execution | Paint, marble, bronze, canvas, musical instruments—mediums require mastery | Anything: instructions, text, objects, performance, ephemeral materials; mastery of medium is often secondary |
| Immediate Impact | Often visually or emotionally striking; can communicate without explanation | Often obscure; may require reading instructions or context to understand the meaning |
| Accessibility | Easily appreciated by general audiences; universal visual or auditory appeal | Often appeals to a niche audience familiar with art theory*; can feel confusing or silly to outsiders |
| Longevity | Objects are permanent or durable; intended to last for centuries | Often ephemeral, performative, or instructional; may exist only as documentation or memory |
| Emotional Engagement | Direct: beauty, awe, empathy, or emotional resonance | Indirect: intellectual engagement, provocation, or philosophical questioning*. |
| Risk of Misunderstanding | Lower: people “get it” on sight | High: without explanation, work may seem meaningless or trivial |
| Evaluation Criteria | Technical skill, composition, beauty, originality | Originality of idea, conceptual clarity, provocation, challenge to norms |
| Famous Examples | Michelangelo, Rembrandt, Vermeer, Monet, Beethoven, Stravinsky | Yoko Ono, Fluxus artists, Duchamp, Sol LeWitt, Abramović |
| Criticism | Can be conservative or formulaic; sometimes prioritizes aesthetics over ideas | Can appear pretentious, naive, or inaccessible; sometimes “idea-heavy” and lacking sensory impact |
* I strongly disagree as I think it is pretentious, naive, meaningless and a useless experiment in elitism displayed as mediocrity. It might be interesting for the performer or the conceptual «artist» but pure rubbish to the rest of us.
What they teach at uni (nowadays) is that traditional art emphasises skill, execution and sensory impact (and I agree). And that conceptual art emphasises ideas and provocation, often at the cost of immediate clarity or beauty. Well, only very few of them bring forth ideas or provocation, some are just self-indulging machinations by talent-less «artists» having us all on.
JaZzArt en València 
I am amazed and angry that you omitted the greatest of composers, Mozart!
Joanna
Me gustaLe gusta a 2 personas
Oh no, I would never ignore Mozart, who is my favourite as well Joanna…
Me gustaMe gusta
In that case, Francesco, put him in a prominent position NOW!
Joanna
Me gustaLe gusta a 1 persona
Always Joanna. Not to worry, but I do not know what article, as this one was about Conceptual Art versus Traditional Art…
Me gustaMe gusta
Each to their own Francesc, but I have to admit that there is very little conceptual art that has appealed to me – if any.
Me gustaLe gusta a 1 persona
I totally agree Malc, I have never been a fan nor do I even think that it should be included as art, perhaps as theatre or something else… Thank you my friend and all the best!
Me gustaLe gusta a 1 persona
I really felt this one. I’m a traditional artist too, I sketch, paint, and draw. Not formally trained, just self-taught out of pure love for art. The way you explained this really resonated with me, especially how you broke down the difference between skill-driven art and what often feels like pretentiousness. Beautifully put.
Me gustaLe gusta a 1 persona
Thank you so much! I truly appreciate your words and I agree completely. Most conceptual art is pretentious. All the best.
Me gustaLe gusta a 1 persona
I’m glad you said this. As one who is uneducated in fine arts I am at a loss to understand the meaning or appreciation for most conceptual art pieces. Sometimes I just like the colours 😊 Maggie
Me gustaLe gusta a 1 persona
Liking the colours is one of the best ways to appreciate art, whether it is abstract or figurative. Conceptual art, there is no understanding it unless the artist/representative explains it to you. I am glad you liked the article and thank you so much!
Me gustaLe gusta a 1 persona