Final answer:
Art for art's sake theorists posited that personal interpretation is the source of meaning in art, emphasizing the independence of art from moral or social obligations and focusing on aesthetic experience over clear messaging.
Step-by-step explanation:
The art for art's sake theorists, a movement that found traction in the Modernist era, believed that the personal interpretation by the viewer was the source of meaning. These theorists asserted that the value of art lies in its aesthetic and not in its depiction of noble ideals or moral messages. Accordingly, artworks could exist independently of social and moral responsibilities, existing simply for the sake of being art. This idea emphasizes that beauty and meaning in art do not have to serve a worldly agenda but can exist for the pure joy of observation and contemplation.
Art that adheres to this view might not necessarily communicate a clear, intended message or narrative clarity, but instead focuses on eliciting individual emotional responses or stimulating aesthetic appreciation through elements like color, shape, and line. Ultimately, the meaning of art becomes as much a product of the viewer's perception as it is of the creator's intent, with some believing that the best art invites its audience to engage in the creative process through interpretation.