LHOOQ , as a concept, highlighted a deviant attitude that represented an emerging artistic desire to conjure artistry that bespoke of a modernism era. The artists, through their art, relayed a reactional attitude that challenged contemporary art, not in its artistry, rather in its meaning. LHOOQ , as used by Descamps, challenged existing social grand narratives as to how art should be interpreted and instead used the original to create parody, humor and irony, in an effort to relay a message to the audience. In viewing this art, the audience was given the freedom to interpret them however they deemed fit, rejecting artistry direction that defined art within specific boundaries. It was a movement that placed much emphasis on the language rather than an autobiography of the art, in highlighting social concerns like homosexuality.
In defacing the Leonardo da Vinci masterpiece Mona Lisa by adding a moustache and a beard, Duchamp tried to interpret it in different understanding to what da Vinci originally intended. In trying to incorporate an accurate interpretation, not of the art, but rather of who da Vinci was and perhaps many of his audiences, Duchamp sublimed a sexual context that bespoke of a hidden truth. Duchamp intention was not to merely create an illusion, but reveal an ambiguity hidden within a form that resonated a lot with those who found meaning it ( Todorović, 2017) . It is through the Mona Lisa defacement that Duchamp coined the term LHOOQ intending to challenge the status quo of what art was regarded as and instead introduce a different and unique understanding that infused feelings into art.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
In a conservative Florentine society where sexual freedom was heavily restricted, Donatello artistry in the Marble David and Bronze David revealed a hidden desire. The biblical David is a figure that is a representation of what courage and bravery are. In choosing to carve a rather bland beardless David, with a mature bearded head of Goliath at his feet, Donatello was connoting a sexuality in hidden meaning. His naked bronze David revealed a sexuality that perhaps Donatello was trying to engage his audience in, with the implication being that he was a homosexual ( Wilkins, 2017) . A society where sodomy and the implication of being a homosexual would have been dangerous, Donatello artistry captured an autonomy that desired to infuse a personality into art and encourage freedom in thought.
In a period when there were constant military upheavals, Leonardo engaged his audience in an aesthetically attractive painting that deviated from the general feeling of the time. Choosing to paint a woman rather than a man in a period where masculinity was celebrated, Leonardo intentioned to distract and engage his audience in a thought process that distracted them. The autonomy of his painting engaged his audience in naturalism that allowed them to revel in their inner desires and exercise their creative thought process ( Chaplin, 1952 ). The beauty and almost candor look of the painting painted in a period where the political, the economic, and the social were at constant loggerheads, captures Leonardo’s freedom and autonomy in deciding what art form to engage in, respective of the externalities of the time. It is a freedom that captures the independence that autonomous artist had in crafting artistry that revealed hidden feelings.
Painting a juxtaposition of death and the joys of the youth, Nicholas Poussin contrasted two very different life positions in a very beautiful way. Poussin provided his audience with a reflective art form that demanded of them a contemplation, not of the artistry, but of their life and the futility of it. This somewhat contrasting and yet very connected instances, provide an escapist representation that allows the audience to find significance in whichever life phase best resonates with them ( Dyroff, 1972) . Poussin art ( There Is a Garden in the Mind, ET IN ARCADIA EGO ) captures an autonomy that allowed him to ‘speak’ with his audience by providing them with narrative artistry that challenged them. The art questioned the audience by addressing those uncomfortable social issues that are usually avoided; youthfulness and its mistakes and death and its inevitability.
The contrasting qualities of this painting in the characters and their interaction bring to the forefront the artistic autonomy that LHOOQ concept truly epitomizes. The peculiar and contrasting images of a nude woman with two fully clothed men, with a lack of interaction, contrasted what was socially and typically of individuals in such a state. More so, the lack of engagement between these characters sparked a surprise in revealing a sexual tension that existed within the picture. The artist Edouard Manet through his painting, In Luncheon on the Grass, engaged his audience in notoriety that was at that time not expected or common, giving the picture a thematic continuance that brings it to life ( Kobisz, 1983) . In challenging social conventions of masculinity and feministic attitudes, Manet revealed a freedom that characterized the Avant Grande ambiguity in representation.
The aggressive nature that genuinely captures the autonomy of modern artists in creating art forms that challenge normality has accorded Avant-Grande movement an identity that resonates with modernistic attitudes. Picasso, in his art Women of Avignon , brings out this aggressiveness by painting five nude female figures that are each posed in a confrontational manner, which is contrary to women nature. In choosing to relay a primitivism, Picasso shifted away from what was conventionally expected and evoked controversy. Picasso captures the LHOOQ attitude in engaging art lovers in a conversation that allows them to discuss those intimate and controversial social issues that are generally regarded as taboo ( Picasso & Spanos, 1975) . In finding their own interpretation, the audience is accorded the autonomy to find their own meaning that best relates to them; thus allowing for acceptance and tolerance.
References
Chaplin, J. H. (1952). Leonardo the Florentine. Weather , 7 (6), 170–171. doi: 10.1002/j.1477-8696.1952.tb01481.x
Dyroff, J. M. (1972). Et in Arcadia ego. After Nicholas Poussin [Poem]. Art Journal , 31 (3), 275. doi: 10.2307/775516
Kobisz, V. (1983). Luncheon on the Grass with the Original Philosopher. Art Education , 36 (6), 26. doi: 10.2307/3192645
Picasso, P., & Spanos, W. V. (1975). Paintings from the Festival of Avignon. Boundary 2 , 3 (2), 374. doi: 10.2307/302107
Todorović, D. (2017). The Mona Lisa Gaze Effect. Oxford Scholarship Online . doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199794607.003.0092
Wilkins, D. G. (2017). Donatello and his patrons. Patronage and Italian Renaissance Sculpture , 117–147. doi: 10.4324/9781315090030-6
