Final answer:
Auden’s interpretation of the painting as a human response to suffering is consistent with the intentions of artists like Motherwell and Kollwitz, who aimed to express human emotions and the impact of tragic events through their art. Such works often serve as platforms for emotional connection and societal reflection.
Step-by-step explanation:
The interpretation of Auden regarding the painting as a human response to suffering aligns with the intentions expressed by artists such as Robert Motherwell and Käthe Kollwitz. These artists utilized their mediums to convey deep human emotions and complex narratives. For example, Motherwell's use of the abstracted Star of David in Wall Painting III is not only a representation of the Jewish experience but also a broader commentary on human suffering, loss, and the striving for freedom after oppression. Similarly, Kollwitz's works vividly express mourning and suffering, conveying the personal impact of World War I and the universal experience of loss.
Art during periods of conflict and suffering often reflects the grim realities of the time. Poets like Wilfred Owen and Siegfried Sassoon eschewed glorification of war, instead offering a raw depiction of its inhumanity, similar to the visual commentary of artists like Kollwitz.
In understanding Auden's perspective and the context within which these artworks were created, one can agree with the interpretation of art as being a vessel for human response to suffering. Art transcends mere aesthetic qualities and serves as a platform for emotional connection and a catalyst for societal reflection and commentary.