There is a view that art has a sense only when it is beautiful for people. Personally, I disagree with this opinion. To begin with, I believe there is no common understanding of beauty, as every person has their own visual preferences and criteria of criticising a piece of art. Besides that, I am convinced that the value of art is in addressing relevant world problems and influencing society, not depending on whether it is beautiful or not.
Firstly, every individual has different preferences and definition of beauty, with its features that might vary among people. Because of that, it is impossible to rely on one set of criteria for creating a valuable piece of artistic work. For instance, a number of young people in Russia perceive modern art with no sophisticated images beautiful, while elder generations are in favor of conventional beauty that includes elaborate details. Thus, every person admires what they find attractive, as everyone has a subjective understanding of beauty.
Secondly, bringing up social issues is what artists aim to do when creating a piece of work, and they consider it as a valuable tool to impact modern world. To be more precise, such Russian poets of the 19th century as Alexander Pushkin and Mikhail Lermontov were writing poems describing not only the relevance of certain social issues but also the negative consequences that Russians could face if not fighting those issues. Their works were regarded as worthy writings and stimulated people not to be indifferent and increased social and political awareness.
All in all, I am certain that art should not be evaluated based on its beauty, as this criterion cannot be considered objectively. Furthermore, art remains valuable throughout the time because . of its message and philosophy, but not only visual aspects.