tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6652275538457823708.post2856253092824042385..comments2023-07-03T04:25:54.358-07:00Comments on Art Babel: What is Art?New York Cityhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05807506312905707802noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6652275538457823708.post-70374521404165523692010-04-15T15:20:52.895-07:002010-04-15T15:20:52.895-07:00Well, I have discussed this a few times. There are...Well, I have discussed this a few times. There are two competing definitions of art right now. <br /><br />The contemporary art world defines art as only the conceptual component.<br /><br />The traditional definition of art which comes down to us from ancient Greece relates to beauty, skill, and human expression and is much more holistic. This does not exclude the concept, but the concept is irrelevant and meaningless if it is not communicated in an interesting and eloquent fashion. <br /><br />Right now, the conceptuals have the definition of art under their finger. The contemporary realists are trying to return the definition to its original state. <br /><br />Odd Nerdrum, has decided to take a different tactic. His work, (and all realism with emotional or spiritual content), they have called Kitsch, and so he decided to embrace this term. In effect, it is easier to redefine the word Kitsch than it is to return Art to its original definition. Thus, Kitsh becomes the original meaning of art... not to replace art, but to offer an alternative.<br /><br />Whether you choose to embrace the new definition of Kitsch, or you choose to support the original definition of Art... Look at the work of Odd Nerdrum. Look at Andrew Wyeth. This is the alternative. <br /><br />On that note, check out Odd's book "On Kitsch". He is working on defining that vocabulary of which you speak. His new book "Kitsch: Mer Enn Kunst" is an expansion on this, but hasn't yet been released in English. They're still working on the translation.New York Cityhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05807506312905707802noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6652275538457823708.post-78707518250139520222010-04-10T14:59:18.467-07:002010-04-10T14:59:18.467-07:00Ok, well, a lot of fonts to nicely and humorously ...Ok, well, a lot of fonts to nicely and humorously describe what art is not. Now, please, state exactly what art IS. I am new to your blog, and happily reading and catching up. Perhaps it is in another post? It is easy for us realist artists to rise up and say, "...but that's not art!" It is not the big bad curators, critics, collectors et al who cause the 'problem' your post describes. It is the critical absence of a unified idea and vocabulary among artists ourselves as to what art itself is, or can be. Until that arrives, expect more blank canvas.MCGuilmethttp://www.mcguilmet.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6652275538457823708.post-12289704257574494112010-02-18T01:01:28.351-08:002010-02-18T01:01:28.351-08:00Hi Ryland,
Thank you.
I think you do have a rig...Hi Ryland,<br /><br />Thank you. <br /><br />I think you do have a right to judge this Art, actually. Why should only an elite few of self proclaimed "experts" be the only ones with valid opinions? Most people don't like this kind of stuff and it's not because they don't get it. I've studied aesthetic theory and philosophy as it applies to Art for at least a decade now and though I can B.S with the best of them, I can't make the Art mean something relevant. I can't make it speak to people. The piece has to do that itself, and if it doesn't (like the piece in question) then it is rubbish. <br /><br />But, don't despair, I think there is a tidal change happening. Po-mo is still the dominant mode, but there are more brilliant and skilled painters today than in at least the last 100 years. The recent auctions of Old Masters at Christie's, Sotheby's, and Phillips de Pury are telling me that the market is changing. Damien Hirst's big flop at the Wallace Collection (which received uniform negative reviews) is another signal. Po-mo as a dominating mode is on its last legs. But change is slow going. I think in the next 5 years we will see contemporary realism gaining a lot of public attention. I don't think it will be the dominant force, but certainly will become front page news. When the general public is aware that they have a choice, that their opinion is valid, I believe that they will choose us. And I am honored to in some way be part of trying to make that happen.New York Cityhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05807506312905707802noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6652275538457823708.post-28321085958140419992010-02-17T11:49:55.062-08:002010-02-17T11:49:55.062-08:00Ryland here. I always enjoyed reading your posts....Ryland here. I always enjoyed reading your posts. First: Kudos on being involved in this years bienalle! <br />Second: I have no right to judge this art, but I was hoping the art world would be shifting in such a way that, art displaying technical and creative superiority would be the dominant force, but I see that is not the case, which is a shame. <br /><br />I know so many other artist who paint and or draw so well, but nobody will display their work, and then I see things like this. I hate to say it, but I think it is complete and utter rubbish.<br /><br />Lastly, thank you for your technique and materials posting. 50 years ago, then passing along of information like this would not have been possible and its great that aspiring artist can have access to the information in your posts.<br /><br />Thanks and I look forward to reading more soon!H.Rylandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02269980126409755915noreply@blogger.com