How out of touch is the art world?
A while back, in I think the NY Times, there was a blurb about an NYC "performance artist" who, looking to be the next "big thing", decided to sell herself for sex.
She had a patron pay her something like $40k...it was a LARGE amount...and then she videotaped the whole thing and declared it art.
Today I heard her heralded as a genius by an instructor.
Which I guess means that streetwalkers are worthy of NEA grants now.
This got me thinking....Thinking about how utterly out of touch the art world seems to be with anything close to reality.
The person who made this remark about the Artist/Hooker (if ANYONE can tell me her name, I'd owe you one BTW), comes from a nice legacy family. Daddy is a high poobah in art education (oddly enough at the same school she teaches at now.... *cough cough*), and this instructor even did the whole legacy thing at school.
Now, in any enclosed system, in any tight-knit group, you run the risk of becoming too insular. And I think this is the case here.
The art world, seems a bit out of touch with the everyman. Even though they oft claim to be his champions. There is no common touch anymore in the world of fine art. Whereas Giotto or Rembrandt would create a work of art accessible to all, now art is made for artists by artists.
Now, is thsi an accurate assesment, or am I the one who is out of touch?
You tell me.
Official Photo.net Villain
[FONT=Comic Sans MS]DaVinci never wrote an artist's statement...[/FONT]
If that burns you up my next piece will infuriate you. I have decided to declare myself as "Breaking into the art world", but I am not going to do anything, and then I'm going to call my inaction "art".
Seriously though, I know what you mean. There was a controversy in NZ a month or so ago. They spent a small fortune flying a NZ artists piece overseas for a competition. We're talking taxpayer money. The piece was an outhouse that nieghed like a donkey ???
I guess we are just clueless..
just think what a future archeologist will think of when they dig that up. Most cultures are viewed through their artifacts and art work.
Originally Posted by Sean
Sean, you are truly a Great Genius Artiste` for doing such an Unconventinal Work! Of course, you must break in in either NYC or San Franscisco. Such an unconventional work would surely bring in the Market in either of those two Great Metropolises of the Arts!
Originally Posted by Sean
I spent yesterday doing a big museum crawl through San francisco. I saw one exhibt at the Legion of Honor. there was one exhibition that we went to see that was both beautiful and disturbing at the same time. It was titled "The Child" by the artist Gottfried Helnwein. The show was showcasing his concept of the child as an innocent. His mediums were acrylic, watercolor, drawing and photography. Except for his drawings I had to get up within about 2 feet to see the minute brushstrokes to know it was not a photograph. It was amazing his absolute mastery of his mediums to be the best i have ever seen short of a fine photograph. What was disturbing was the way she portrayed the child as an innocent. Through gross deformities, death, and being in companionship with Nazi soldiers. I have not been able to shake the images. Toi contrast it, at another museum, at Fort Mason, they had a showing of supposed photographs. they were noting more than injet prints of magazine adds, that were half painted over and then decopauged. They were sloppy, indistinct, and you had to read about them to understand what the artist was trying to say. It had nothing to do with business. It was colages in happy colors. Ok I lost that meaning. What redeemed the gallery was the showcasing of holga pinhole photographs upstairs.
I guess if I used the woman who filmed herself having sex, and called it art, I could called a preformance artist. I am expanding. My growth rate is a preformance.
But I do need to share one bizarre coincidence. James Came all the way from New Zealand. His family orginally had all come from Scotland. His mother was the last to inhabit the ancesteral castle. to maintian its ever increasing costs, she sold off many of the pieces of art. The last James knew the painting of his great great grandfather was sold to an American collector. that was in the early 70's. The section of the impressionists was closed, so we started walking through the rooms looking for some of the dutch masters. James gasped and ran for one of the portraits. A man in a red military looking coat from about the early 1800's. It was the portrait of his great great grandfather. In fact James was the spitting image of the man. Talk about a total coincidence. What would be the odds of that ever happening? Of course we had to take pictures of it with him posed along side.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I'm trying to remember - who was the artist that said, "The most frightening thing I can imagine is to see things as they really are."
Originally Posted by Robert Kennedy
Notwithstanding the challenge ... No, I don't think you are the one who is out of touch... but I would submit that "being out of touch" once in a while is a GOOD thing. That, to me is a description of an important part of fantasy, of imagination, of dreaming. None of those are reality, but they serve a function beyond value ... they offer temporary escape from the stark, harsh realities of this world (note 1).
Art, all of it, in my humble opinion, is an escape ... through what we call "mystery" ... from our society, and to a great extent, our own cocoons of awareness. We ... or at least, I ... try to "see" art through the eyes of the human being that created - or captured (the jury is still out on that one) it.
Is some of it bizarre? -- of course ... we are occasionally bizarre ourselves. Does some of it "Not make sense"? - Undoubtedly. I cannot describe the logical, true, "sense" of Sibelius' "Finlandia", but that doesn't lessen its worth.
So, "Is the Art World out of touch"? I hope so, and I'll pray to my Creator that I get the chance to be "out of touch" occasionally myself. The art world can help there.
BTW ... Unless I'm wrong, Rembrandt, El Greco, Giotto ... I don't think they were available to "everyman" - only the select few in the Royalty business.
Note 1: (This time I didn't forget) "Temporary, occasionally, at times" ... NO, not ALL the time ... that would be a serious problem.
Ed Sukach, FFP.
Recently? AFTER the whole 80's Annie Sprinkle thing, AFTER Koons and Cicciolina, etc? *yawn*
Originally Posted by Robert Kennedy
Then again, art is whatever people say art is.
Get over it, move on or get stuck.
I had to talk about my last show to some year one photography students. I think my attitude to art in general is summed up in what I said when one asked me what I felt when people looked at my work. I said I was happiest when it got a reaction, if they either loved it or hated it I knew I was heading in the right direction. If they "liked it" I was less happy.
I think we need to be contensous on occasion, try things out, they might work, they may be crap, but hell, push out the boat is what I say, society needs a challenge on occasion. And aren't artists ment to shake things up now and then?
and boy I'm a great spellr...lol
Last edited by livemoa; 09-23-2004 at 01:00 AM. Click to view previous post history.
When bankers get together for dinner, they discuss art. When artists get together for dinner, they discuss money. Oscar Wilde Blog fp4.blogspot.com
Point #1 ... Yes, I agree.
Originally Posted by livemoa
Point #2 ... Yes, I agree.
Ed Sukach, FFP.
I'll second that Ed, David.