Your friend Kiara says that she is certain that the first piece of art ever created was a sculpture. You disagree. What would you tell Kiara to best support your argument?
(1 point)
Time, natural elements, and other forces have erased most of the early art from the Earth, so we may not ever know for certain what was the first piece of art ever created.
Prehistoric art was produced before writing, so no one created written records of the first pieces ever created.
Scientists have already determined that cave paintings are the oldest pieces of art ever created, so it cannot be a sculpture
Sculptures were not created until the late 18th century once the technology was available.
I would tell Kiara that prehistoric art was produced before writing, so no one created written records of the first pieces ever created. Therefore, it is difficult to determine exactly what the first piece of art was. Additionally, time, natural elements, and other forces have erased most of the early art from the Earth, so we may never know for certain what the first piece of art actually was. Therefore, it is not accurate to claim with certainty that the first piece of art was a sculpture.
I would tell Kiara that time, natural elements, and other forces have erased most of the early art from the Earth, so we may not ever know for certain what the first piece of art ever created was. This means that claiming a sculpture as the first piece of art is merely speculative and cannot be supported by hard evidence. Additionally, prehistoric art was produced before writing, so no one created written records of the first pieces ever created. Therefore, it is not possible to definitively say that the first piece of art was a sculpture.
To support your argument against Kiara's claim that the first piece of art ever created was a sculpture, you could explain that time, natural elements, and other forces have erased most of the early art from the Earth. This means that we may never know for certain what the first piece of art ever created actually was. This argument highlights the limitations in our knowledge and the challenges in making definitive claims about the origins of art.
Additionally, you can mention that prehistoric art was produced before the advent of writing. Since no one created written records of the first pieces ever created, it is difficult to determine with certainty what form they took. This further reinforces the idea that asserting the first piece of art was a sculpture may lack concrete evidence or historical documentation.
On the other hand, stating that sculptures were not created until the late 18th century would not support your argument, as it is an incorrect statement. Sculptures have been created throughout history, long before the 18th century, utilizing a variety of materials and techniques.
In conclusion, it is important to consider the absence of concrete evidence and the lack of written records when discussing the first piece of art ever created. It is more accurate to acknowledge that due to the passage of time and the limitations of historical documentation, we may never have a definitive answer to this question.