Response top Jenna's "Knowledge v Emotion"

"Do you think it is better to possess knowledge about a work of art or to interpret it in a personal way?"

This is a tough question to answer, as it is entirely interpretive/subjective. Oh wait. So are all the other questions.

I'll assume by better you mean more moving, more aesthetic-emotion-inspiring, to the viewer of the art. If this is the case, knowledge is almost entirely irrelevant. In fact, too much knowledge can in fact be a detriment to the art process.

Suppose I was the world's foremost expert in the field of cubism and the theory of cubism. If an amateur artist came up to me and showed me his stab at cubism, chances are I would be unable to see past his foibles and appreciate his art. A layman, however, could approach the art piece with a fresh palette (hyuck hyuck), and glean all sorts of emotional communications that I missed, as I was too busy knitpicking through the mistakes.

Is it possible to approach a piece of art with a fresh palette while simultaneously in possession of knowledge in the field. Can we look past what we know and see novelty and newness again, and be inspired and moved by the freshness, even if it is amateur freshness?