Modern Art I Could Do That Yeah but You Didnt
There is a phrase that has been at least semi-popularized to depict modern art, specially the brand that produces blank canvases, overpriced attempts at children's scribbling, and oversized carmine paint swatches. "Modernistic art," many accept written, "Modern art = I could accept done that + Yeah, but you lot didn't."
Now every bit somebody who is thoroughly bellyaching with such cheap versions of modernistic art, I take to admit that is a valid point – if it'south followed upward by the clause, "because y'all wouldn't have thought to do it yourself." Otherwise, the phrase but validates any art, no matter the quality. Which, unfortunately, seems to be the mindset of quite a few modern art over-enthusiasts.
If you start reading a book that has poor grammar and whose chief character is an annoying Mary Sue, it's a bad book. If you listen to a song that sounds like pretty much every other overly-autotuned pop vocal you've heard and has shallow, poorly-written lyrics, it's a bad song. A painting or similar form of art does not take quite as precise depiction betwixt "good" and "bad" – or, at the very to the lowest degree, "not good" – but that doesn't hateful that variations in quality don't exist. Just like any other art grade, it needs to provide its audience with something unique, whether it's pleasure from aesthetics that they don't get at home or an insight into somebody else'due south story (whether information technology's an individual or a group, fiction or fact).
Now, before I keep going, I should annotation that I am not one of those critics who thinks that simplicity automatically makes for something terrible. Those kinds of people often miss out on some really groovy stuff because they're likewise busy grumbling. Oftentimes, "elementary" is the key to perfect presentation. I take seen a lot of modern fine art that I could accept probably done myself, but that I all the same relish considering, well, I wouldn't have thought to brand visual discussion puns by overlaying 2 similar-looking words; or I wouldn't have thought to combine and blend those two particular color swatches in that detail mode, and y'know, that combination and texture is actually pretty. Things can be uncomplicated and still unique and enjoyable to wait at. This is when "Yeah, but you didn't" applies – when the audience actually wouldn't have made the art because information technology never occurred to them, not considering they don't like it.
" data-medium-file="https://oldnewsisgoodnews.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/lavatorylove-story.jpg?w=300" data-large-file="https://oldnewsisgoodnews.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/lavatorylove-story.jpg?w=320" class="size-medium wp-image-1817" src="https://oldnewsisgoodnews.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/lavatorylove-story.jpg?w=300&h=225" alt="Found at a Chelsea Gallery some years back. The words "lavatory" and "love story" laid over each other. (artist unknown)" width="300" height="225" srcset="https://oldnewsisgoodnews.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/lavatorylove-story.jpg?w=300&h=225 300w, https://oldnewsisgoodnews.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/lavatorylove-story.jpg?w=150&h=113 150w, https://oldnewsisgoodnews.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/lavatorylove-story.jpg 320w" sizes="(max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px">
Constitute at a Chelsea Gallery some years dorsum. The words "lavatory" and "love story" laid over each other. An excellent example of "I could do that + Yeah, but you didn't (think of information technology)." That, along with an obvious sense of humour, gives information technology some value across just an Orwellian fetishization of simplicity. (creative person unknown)
But you know why I didn't paint a giant canvas plain, solid red, or just lazily get out it blank and and so hang it up? Because, given that I had the ways to create art, why would I want to look at thatover anything else I could have done, much less hang it in my house or pay to stare at it in a museum? I wouldn't. It'south not that I necessarily couldn't physically do it, or that I wouldn't have thought of it. Rather, it's that if I want to see a solid block of carmine or to just look at a white wall, it's chosen painting the firm. If I don't want to put in that kind of endeavour and I still, for whatever reason, have an incurable craving for a swatch of some unvarying shade of red, there are enough of ways I can see that and pay zippo to do then. Similar, y'know, looking at an actual pigment swatch, which costs petty to nada to acquire.
" data-medium-file="https://oldnewsisgoodnews.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/red-square-and-paint-swatch.jpg?w=300" data-large-file="https://oldnewsisgoodnews.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/red-square-and-paint-swatch.jpg?w=535" class="size-medium wp-image-1822" src="https://oldnewsisgoodnews.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/red-square-and-paint-swatch.jpg?w=300&h=164" alt="One of these items is "Red Square" by artist Kasimir Malevich. The other is a "Pioneer Red" paint swatch. Can you tell which is which?" width="300" height="164" srcset="https://oldnewsisgoodnews.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/red-square-and-paint-swatch.jpg?w=300&h=164 300w, https://oldnewsisgoodnews.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/red-square-and-paint-swatch.jpg?w=150&h=82 150w, https://oldnewsisgoodnews.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/red-square-and-paint-swatch.jpg 557w" sizes="(max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px">
One of these items is "Red Square" by plough-of-the-century artist Kasimir Malevich (founder of the Suprematist art motion). The other is a "Pioneer Red" paint swatch. Can yous tell which is which? Actually?
And to be honest, if I'm looking to temporarily enjoy apparently, solid blocks of colour, I see plenty of that my mode to piece of work or walking down the street, often in vastly more interesting forms than a behemothic, nondescript foursquare of unvaried colour hanging lifelessly on a wall. A blank stretch of grey on the side of a span that is otherwise covered by graffiti. A swatch of colored paint that covers up a graffiti artist's mistake. Unintentional grayscale on the one time entirely white sides of a dirty cargo truck. And every one of those pieces of "unintentional art" is about screaming that it has a story behind information technology* – a real, non-high-falootin'-maybe-it'south-there-maybe-it'southward-not-but-gosh-darn-it-people-like-to-overanalyze-things-and-await-for-phantom-metaphors-in-everything kind of story behind information technology, and i that, even if it'southward not grandiose and complex, rarely touches the realms of, "Well, hither's something I can sell to rich snobs at a gallery." The unintentional art of the world around y'all is so much more interesting than many cases of forced simplicity on a canvas precisely because, in large part, the "fine art" that surrounds u.s. in everyday life was made by accident, or for some other purpose than existence stared at past people desperate to discover some sort of hidden significant or metaphor that only as likely isn't in that location. (Which is not to say that you tin can't make a game of looking for hidden, probably nonexistent metaphors on your own fourth dimension if y'all want to, simply Lord(s) almighty, some of us are tired of hearing how every apple tree to ever appear in whatever kind of literature or work of art is symbolic of the Adam and Eve story.)
And so, long story short, if you're debating whether or not to go to a Suprematist art showroom, why non get exterior and appreciate the world around you instead? It's cheaper, and generally a lot nicer. At the very to the lowest degree, information technology's more interesting.
But the blank sail or single solid square techniques aren't the only methods that allow laziness to pass for abstraction in modernistic art. I take seen plenty iii-yr-erstwhile-worthy scribbles done by 30-somethings to last a lifetime (not that it takes all that many). Hon, if I wanted a child'due south scribbles, I wouldn't pay $500 for a 5″ x viii″ canvas that some thirty-year-onetime stranger took crayons to. Instead, I'd happily committee some free scribbles on printer paper from, say, one of my old students**who has really and for real not hit puberty yet and has actual real reasons for drawing tactlessly messy and semi-formless scribbles for anybody but themselves. Cause allow's see…
- They don't necessarily have the ability to do anything better nevertheless. But with a few exceptions, an adult who commits to being an artist typicallydoes have the ability to practise better, and…
- …they better have if they're asking money for information technology. The six-yr-old who gives me a heart she cut out of printer paper is not asking for money. She's just showing affection towards somebody who she considers to be a friend or, at to the lowest degree, a likable instructor. And that brings u.s. to our concluding betoken:
- If I get a bunch of scribbles from a real child*** who I actually know, the cartoon has genuine sentimental value and not just the wishful thought of, "Well, I threw a lot of money at this, so information technology ought to be valuable, right?"
" data-medium-file="https://oldnewsisgoodnews.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/modern-art.jpg?w=300" data-large-file="https://oldnewsisgoodnews.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/modern-art.jpg?w=535" class="size-medium wp-image-1819" src="https://oldnewsisgoodnews.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/modern-art.jpg?w=300&h=142" alt="Some modern art for you. Have it. No, really, take it. It took about two seconds to make this; it's about on par with a good chunk of the modern art out there; and the best part is that the most you'll have to spend is the cost of printing it on whatever canvas you choose. Printer paper, for all I care. Now explain to me why you want to pay $100+ for so-called "professional" scribbles again?" width="300" height="142" srcset="https://oldnewsisgoodnews.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/modern-art.jpg?w=300&h=142 300w, https://oldnewsisgoodnews.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/modern-art.jpg?w=600&h=284 600w, https://oldnewsisgoodnews.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/modern-art.jpg?w=150&h=71 150w" sizes="(max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px">
Some modernistic art for you lot. Have it. No charge. No, actually, take it. Information technology took me less than five minutes to brand, and it'due south well-nigh on par with a adept clamper of the modern art out there. The best part is that the most you'll have to spend is the cost of printing it on whatever sheet yous choose. Printer paper, for all I care. Now explain to me why you want to pay $100+ for so-called "professional person" scribbles again?
Now, don't go me incorrect, there's plenty of really cool abstract modern fine art out there, some of which has merit partly because it isabstruse, but art likewise needs to requite its audiencesomereason to care about it. It could be as simple equally, "That'due south a really cool design or combination of objects that I wouldn't have encountered otherwise." But only like any other art form, the fact that some abstract art is adept doesn't get in all adept. And because of this notion that abstract automatically equals skilful, "fine art" has, in many ways, gone the way of "fine dining," where customers will often pay out the wazoo to get a serving of prawns that would barely feed a mouse. (Although the prawns will probably be delivered to you with more artistry than some of the paintings in New York City's Chelsea galleries.) Many artists' policies seem to have become, "Pay us more so we can requite you less." And while sometimes "less is more than," other times less is just less.
—
*Thisis what makes photography and so wonderful. Momentarily putting aside the fact that framing a shot is an under-appreciated art in and of itself, when a photo's candid, it's capturing a moment, or something that has a genuine pregnant and story, even if somebody else could take physically snapped the shot. And fifty-fifty when a photographer sets up a staged shot – even when a picture isn't candid – they're creating a moment in a similar manner to how, say, Vermeer created a moment in "Girl With a Pearl Earring," or Frida Kahlo did with her self portraits. Besides, painting does not have quite the same ability to capture slightly more natural, merely-pick-up-a-camera-and-click sentiment the way that photography does, and then pitiful painters – y'all have to do a little something more than than human action as a glorified firm painter to go me to pay you for something that doesn't fifty-fifty cover the entire wall.
**I taught math and grammar to 5- and 6-yr-olds last summer, and still have some of their doodles and cards in which they misspell my proper noun. This is probably some of my favorite art. It'south priceless to me because I bonded with the artists over things like "v + 1 = half dozen" and "big is the reverse of small." It is worthless to most other people precisely because most other people did not accept that kind of feel with those kids. And that's okay. Sentimental value is non-transferrable. The fact that y'all, quite reasonably, would not likely want to pay even x bucks for information technology does non diminish information technology'south value to me personally, and vice versa.
***The aforementioned might be true if an developed who gave me something like that, depending on the adult and on the story behind the souvenir. But the value of the piece would still be sentimental, and personal sentimental value does not, in and of itself, qualify anything for an art gallery or museum.
Source: https://oldnewsisgoodnews.wordpress.com/2014/10/08/modern-art-i-could-have-done-that-yeah-but-you-didnt/
0 Response to "Modern Art I Could Do That Yeah but You Didnt"
Post a Comment