In the beginning of the 20th century, art had the hubris to plunge into the chaos of a world in transition. It thought about the mind, about space-time, about power and energy and about the human condition. But science moved on, changing the world at every turn, while art moved inside the white box of its own concerns. Progress in science is in the access it gives us to new mysteries. Progress in art is in its discovery of the profound. The purest science is measured by the kind of answers it brings and questions that tumble from them.
The purest art can be measured by the same standards. In art, like science, true beauty is elegant and deep and so endures. The rest is just pretty. Art that endures as part of the experience of being human in the universe must ask profound questions, embrace mystery and never back down.Too much of contemporary art lives by the white box, feeds on its own self, asks small questions, offers only entertainment and comfort, believes cleverness is enough, is self-congratulatory, and views spectacle as depth. It's not humble, and doesn't stand in awe before anything.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
This reflects something about contemporary culture, right? Who we are, what we enjoy, what we're interested in. The way our culture is set up, we've learned that spectacle gets attention, shiny things are valuable, humor makes people smile and comfortable, etc. How do we undo what culture points to as good? In reading what you've written, I definitely think my work falls right into your description of contemporary art's impotence. The dilemma is that I truly find happiness and enjoyment in what I do. The issue is how, and whether or not, you compromise what is valuable to you and what is valuable to the art world.
Post a Comment