Though I am not an art historian, a critic, or even an amateur artist, I appreciate art. I have taken so many art history classes and been inspired by many artists. And being a human, I can enjoy art for art's sake. I enjoy pretty scenes, thoughtful slogans, even political statements in art.
None of which you will find in modern "art". At least, you have to look hard, trudging through the sleaze.
Am I being too harsh? Just because "I don't get it" I say I hate modern art? That would not be fair, if it were true. I don't get some of it, but that is not why I don't like modern art. (Besides, "getting" the art is not always an uplifting experience.) Artists are a mirror of society; what they paint, why they create, reflects the mores and opinions of people. Society creates the atmosphere where artists learn. Look back on history and note the evolution of art.
Stone Age: Survival of the human race. The art focuses on fertility of the land and the race.
Cave art, Woman of Willendorf
Egyptian: Concern with status and afterlife
Pyramids, Book of the Dead
Greek: Balance in everything. Perfection of the body
Parthenon (the most visually correct building in the world), the Discobolus
Middle Ages: Church, religion is supreme and man is nothing
Notre Dame, buildings to commemorate God
Renaissance: Humanism, rebirth of ideas in sciences,
techniques, and religion
Michelangelo, da Vinci
Baroque: Religious wars
Rembrandt, Caravaggio
Romanticism: American and French Revolutions
Turner, Liberty Leading the People
Impressionism: More revolutions, people getting restless with old art
Monet, PissarroCubism, Futurism: WWI, Russian Revolution
Picasso, Leger
Surrealism: Great Depression, WWII
Dali, Duchamp
Pop art: Cold War, revolts
Warhol, Pollock
Yes, I skipped a few art movements, but you can see the trend and correlation between society and art. So what is today's world focusing on? Throughout the last few decades, people have been growing more and more secular and apathetic about everything else. Think about it: in "civilized" countries like the US and UK, people are focused on other people (how much time did you waste on Facebook today?), anything to get them from taking responsibility for their own lives, anything to stop them from looking beyond the surface, the constructed front everyone has. Days have become routine, and to break the routine, people do the same thing (usually involving getting drunk or spending money on clothes or vacations or glossy magazines). They work, they spend the money, and they waste time, just waiting for...something. Self-reflection is a fad, religion is a joke, and living for and in the moment is void. And the trend of dissociating oneself from life and reality is growing ever stronger. People are growing lazy; if they want something, they want it now, a quick fix, the snap answer.
Modern art reflects this disease of apathy for reflection, dissociation from reality, and need for instant gratification. Modern artists aren't interested in developing technique, patience, or thought. They are going for the shock value. Pornographic, bizarre, and just plain disturbing–that is what is seen as art now. It is almost a challenge from the artists; this is art, can't you see? If not, you must be a closed-minded freak.
Looking at some of the pieces in the Tate I could not tell what the artist was thinking or trying to convey. All I got was the artist must have been bored or psycho. The art was not for a cause, none that I could see anyway.
So, is this art? What constitutes art?
Oh my heavens. I went to the Tate Modern today and even with your warning I found myself surprised at how unpleasant it was! I probably offended some people with the look of sheer disgust on my face during most of the time that I was there.
ReplyDeleteI spent most of my time in there thinking about how writers frequently write pieces where they try to work out the nature of art—its definition, its purpose, whether or not it's worth the effort, etc. I certainly haven't thought about it as much or as well as they have, but in my opinion, the purpose of art is to convey a message, and preferably one that inspires us to be better people, even if it comes through something dark.
Although I'm tempted to say that the pieces in the Tate Modern aren't saying anything at all (besides "I'm rubbish!") I'm sure that the creators would argue that there is something being said in the particular pieces they've created. I'll acknowledge these imagined protests, but I still think there's a problem, which is that whatever messages they are trying to send are too inaccessible for their audiences. The pathway of communication between creator and consumer isn't functioning as well as it once did, for reasons I couldn't possibly explain if I even understood them myself. Besides that, the messages being conveyed seem to be steeped in the so-called "harsh realities" of life. It's almost as if people have lost the ability to (or simply fear the idea of) hope. There are scads of dystopian novels, and meanwhile so few stories that project a positive future for humanity. The increasing lack of belief in a higher power (generally speaking, of course) may also suggest that many may feel like there is no light at the end of the tunnel, just endless chaos and destruction and darkness. Of course this is extremely sad for them personally (and I don't want to diminish that by saying): one of the unfortunate side effects just happens to be rubbish "art."
All that being said, I'm no art or sociological or any kind of expert, of course. This is just my opinion, so take it with a couple grains of salt and ignorance. :)