Paint Your Own Pottery

Text reads:
Lately, I have found myself contemplating the distinctions between those artworks which are shown in galleries and museums and those which are displayed solely in the common home. Take, for example, this piece of paint-your-own pottery. Paint-your-own pottery is an easily accessible art form that people of all ages and artistic ability can enjoy regardless of their knowledge of ceramics, but it is not exhibited in galleries and museums. Is paint-your-own pottery poorly regarded because of a lack of formal training? Outsider art, which is created by people who lack any formal art training, is becoming more accepted; there are even galleries devoted to just those works. But many outsider artists have developed an advanced level of skill with and knowledge of the media in which they work. Is paint-your-own pottery seen as lesser because the artist has not had a direct influence over or knowledge of the entire process? Throughout history, many great artworks have been made that did not require the artist’s attention to and involvement in every detail of their creation. Some well-known modern artists have even outsourced their work to industry. Are artworks then exhibited solely because of the notoriety of their creators? Many galleries enjoy showcasing cutting edge artists who are virtually unknown in the art world as a means of responding to cultural changes and advances in both how we make art and what we perceive as art. What about concept: is it partly the idea behind an artwork that elevates its status? If an artist were to make a piece of paint-your-own pottery from a conceptual standpoint would that then cause us to reassess its value and artistic merit? Would it then be able to find a place in the arts and not be displayed solely in the common home?