Wednesday, April 11, 2012

When is Art Cease to Be Called Art?

To say that a work of art is good, but incomprehensible to the majority of men, is the same as saying of some kind of food that it is very good but that most people can't eat it. – Leo Tolstoy

Art is an individual act of “self expression”. It serves no purpose in the economic growth of a society except as, in general, a form of entertainment. It is in parallel with the rationale of religion filling the psychological vacuum pertaining to the philosophical question – “Why am I here?” But unlike religion whose followers come from all walks of life, Art enthusiasts are mostly composed of people who can afford the luxury of “free time”. It is therefore safe to assume a large number of its patrons come from the “well-to-do”. Given their “purchasing power”, it is also safe to assume this clientele are cultured, intelligent and well-educated. It is because of these assumptions that I find it beyond my understanding why some can’t distinguish an exercise in aesthetic from, what I consider, plain “garbage”. Perhaps the fault lies in me. I’m not “gifted” enough to appreciate “art”, but then, hear me first:


 
It doesn’t take an Art Critic to recognize these painting and sculpture was done by masters. It captures life “as-it-is” where details are painstakingly reproduced.

A movement called “Impressionism”. In contrast to its early predecessor, it gives emphasis on how light plays with colors thus ignoring details.

Another art movement called “Cubism”. Perhaps this is Ka Rolly’s inspirations in creating beautiful paintings such as this:


But to fill a canvas with dots and sell it for 10,000 British Pounds is something I couldn’t swallow even if I can afford it (which I can't)…

 

Nor do I find any artistic endeavor on this except as a support for my butt to alleviate the stress from my weary knees.

Camping equipment and bedroom furniture are now considered Art.

This movement is called “Conceptual Art” or “Con-Art” for short (and it’s aptly named). Through their works, one may deduce "Con-Artists" does not require talent nor skill to create their art. The only thing sophisticated about it is the fancy name they gave their "creation". It has to be observe on a different perspective like “You have to look beyond the object to understand the concept and appreciate its beauty”. I might as well buy a toilet bowl, give it a thought-provoking title like “Parched Canine Oasis” and shove it down their throat - “THIS IS ART!”.

I wasn’t properly “schooled” in the Fine Arts nor do I claim any authority to backup my criticism. What I am is a nobody who appreciates beauty and admire things I can’t do. But I’m not alone. My views are shared by people like Julian Spalding, a former director of Glasgow Museum and the late Dennis Dutton, a philosopher in art.

But I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt. You be the judge.

----------------o0o---------------- 
Images where "borrowed" from the net. Who ever owns it, I say Thank you.

20 comments:

  1. I think I will enjoy looking at a canvas fill with 10,000 British Pounds in 50 Pound denomination more than a 10,000 Pound canvas fill with multi-colored dots. I'm that artistically naive LOL.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Let's call it "Currency Intimacy"! : D

      Delete
  2. Art for me is putting enough effort for it to impress people. Not having to impress people, or maybe invite a second look at it, is not art for me, whether it be onceptual or not. Art may not be that expensive, but if it attracts attention and a stir, I'd contemplate on pulling some bills from my almost-empty wallet though.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Meron din namang "concept art" na gusto ko, katulad ng "pop art" ni Andy Warhol at yung "City of Words" na hindi ko matandaan ang artist. : )

      Delete
  3. I like this post. I have seen some exhibits in the Art Gallery of South Australia (and in Western Australia, too), at the contemporary art gallery where some items which they considered 'art' is, for me, NOT an art at all! Whew! Mga lumang tabla ng paleta na pinagtagpi-tagpi sa isang malaking plywood, or mga wires na pinilipit at isinabit sa ceiling gamit ang mahabang nylon. Marami pang iba... Whew, had I know na gagawa po kayo ng ganitong blog post, kumuha ako ng photos ng mga 'yon.

    It's so daunting na ang standard ng fine arts ay bumababa na siguro ngayon. :D

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kung hindi natin maintindihan, sasabihing "shallow" tayo. Pero kung iisipin nanloloko o loko-loko ang lumikha. >: D

      Delete
  4. I do not even know the masters of art. Alam ko lang nga pangalan nila but what they stand for.... is beyond me. I guess I'm one those shallow people kasi I'd rather look at a sunset or a sunrise. I appreciate the droplets of rain on the street. I find beauty looking at water flowing in a river.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Akala ko you know no master or art work. But you just mentioned the greatest art creation ever and the greatest artist ever - Mother Nature. : )

      Delete
  5. alam mo, nag-enrol ako sa weekend art class dahil stick figures pa rin ang drowing ko sa tao.
    pero kung ganito ang mahal na mga trabaho, teka lang, i'm dropping out of school na lang and will just do it without learning the discipline. hahaha! (kidding! i love my art class).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ya, I read it on your site. Good for you for trying everything. It helps kick the boredom away. : )

      Delete
  6. I am right there with you. A bottle of coca cola inside a museum does not necessarily qualify it to be seen as an art, imho.

    ps. could you extend to ms atticus to allow me to read her blog once again. i guess i didn't make the cut when she put her blog on by invite only :)

    thanks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. pasensiya na ginawa kong chatroom ang iyong comment page, blogusvox. dispensa. :)

      Delete
    3. No problemo. Mi casa es tu casa. : )

      Delete
  7. because art is highly interpretive, it could be anything :) It is up to the eye of the beholder to interpret what is art and what is rubbish ;)

    Some artists get away with it esp if they already have the credibility. Any art they do becomes golden.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. IMO, 3 things are necessary for an object to be called art. Idea, craftsmanship and aesthetic. So called artists like Hirst and Emin failed miserable in two of those categories.

      Delete
  8. art encompasses a vast collection of art forms. thus saying, concept art is different from fine art. concept art as my daughter said is visual representation of a design or an idea or mood to be used for films, animations, illustrations, video games, etc while fine arts are those made primarily for aesthetics and not for application.

    it is highly interpretative, i agree with bw. it is not an easy task as i see it to create a concept art. it is also important to know why an art is categorized as one.

    that said, it is more likely that art created for aesthetics is more appreciated. most who have created a name in this field are those that tend to get experimental i surmise.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. To that, I agree. I can appreciate some of it like films made by Usukawa, paintings by Acconci and photograps by Warhol.

      Pero alam mo, bing, to put a can of coke on a pedestal and say it's art or display a dissected carcass of an animal... abay lokohan na yan.

      A certain museum in the states have to store their art work when the museum was under renovation. Since they don't have enough storage space to put all of it, they have to discard some. Alam mo kung ano ang unang tinapon nila... those so called conceptual arts!

      Delete
    2. Furthermore, bing, I think "concept art" is different from "conceptual art" (the main issue of this post) and all of these various "deciplines" are under the wings of "fine arts". Concept art, per se, is not a separate "art".

      Delete