The works which may be related to the canonical art forms are generally the one which have a broader influence on the collections, display in the prominent museum, collections and some other extensive scholarship. Whenever one considers the definition of the canonical artists, it is certain that history can’t be read without their work. Under such condition, it is completely inevitable that the reading associated with the national canonical art is still be in question. This kind of struggle can be observed by considering the case of the British art world.
For a long time, it is certain that the canonical art is very important for the society. Some of the canonical artists include the artists such as Dan Flavin and Alighiero e Boetti. In their art forms, these canonical artists have tried to give some or the other message to the society. Some of the canonical art forms have been derived from the era of renaissance (Bal, 1999). This is defined as an era when there is the refreshment of the art and the time of rejuvenation which is there in the different art forms. If the art form is looked before renaissance, the information is much more immature and unrealistic. The art works which is there from the renaissance and the era after the same is much more relevant to the modern era of art-works.
The period of renaissance actually lasted for a period of more than 300 years and a number of techniques have been identified. This led to the foundation of some of the revolutionary techniques such as the first time perspectives which are there in art, the newly found colors which took the art to the completely new level. In the present times, the art which are developed can’t be used by referencing to the canonical forms of art. These four canonical models of art include the sfumato, unione, cangiante and chiaroscuro. These techniques have been important and are still referred by the contemporary artists (Beardsley, 1998).