Originally posted by juventino
Meaning in artworks and understanding artists intentions will always be dependent on the culture the artist comes from
Then discuss yadda yadda.....
I'd be concentrating on culture-specific cases, and throwing in a little bit of talk about culture-specific signs/symbols/icons. Since you don't like the idea of writing about Frida, you could talk about Warhol (I hate him, but he's useful). Pop art was a pretty specific phenomenon, and made uses of icons that were especially specific - Campbells soup cans, Elvis Presly, Monroe, blah blah blah, depending on which culture you were coming from.
You could also delve back into history - when painting styles and schools were much more formal, and rigid, and talk about how European artists tried to cope with depicting the Australian landscape which was so obviously unfamiliar. Of course, then their intention was to send paintings back home to show what the Australian landscape looked like - but they weren't used to the types of trees we had, the bush, the climate, any of it. In this case it's an example of the artwork definitely being dependent upon the artists culture limiting/guiding his perception.
Aboriginal art would be another interesting one to through in there. You could also pick out an artist like Christian Boltanski, whose work focuses on how to deal artistically with representations of the holocaust. Religious art is also a fun one to drag in - try comparing old woodcuts/stained glass windows from England, with Coptic Orthodox imagery, islamic paintings and representations etc.
Blah blah blah. I'm lazy. You make up the rest.
Hope it gave you some ideas though, even if it is too late.
