Today's art scene? Very difficult to judge, since celebrity and the media presence of the artists are inextricably linked with their work. The great artists of the past century tended to become famous in the later stages of their careers, whereas today fame is built into the artists' work from the start, as in the cases of fuckface and blinky.
There's a logic today that places a greater value on celebrity the less it is accompanied by actual achievement. I don't think it's possible to touch people's imagination today by aesthetic means. Most of what passes for contemporary art is little more than an empty series of psychological provocations, mental tests where the aesthetic elements are no more than a framing device and these framing devices are tantamount to exhibitions of expensive framing.
It's interesting that this should be the case. I assume it is because our environment today, by and large a media landscape, is oversaturated by aestheticising elements (TV ads, packaging, design and presentation, styling, this motherfucking mojo wire and so on) but impoverished and numbed as far as its psychological depth is concerned.
Artists (though sadly not writers) tend to move to where the battle is joined most fiercely. Everything in today's world is stylised and packaged, and fuckface and blinky are trying to say, this is a camera, this is death, this is a body. They are trying to redefine the basic elements of reality, to recapture them from the ad men [and women!] who have hijacked our world.
blinky's beautiful body is her one great idea, but I suspect that she is rather prudish [she is!], which means that there are limits to the use she can make of her body and its rickety-rackety past. Meanwhile, too much is made of conceptual art -- someone has been shitting in Duchamp's urinal for the past 90 years, and there is an urgent need for a strong dose of critical thinking that will disrupt and undermine these tendencies to make the merger of form and content the apex of rapture all over again.'
There's a logic today that places a greater value on celebrity the less it is accompanied by actual achievement. I don't think it's possible to touch people's imagination today by aesthetic means. Most of what passes for contemporary art is little more than an empty series of psychological provocations, mental tests where the aesthetic elements are no more than a framing device and these framing devices are tantamount to exhibitions of expensive framing.
It's interesting that this should be the case. I assume it is because our environment today, by and large a media landscape, is oversaturated by aestheticising elements (TV ads, packaging, design and presentation, styling, this motherfucking mojo wire and so on) but impoverished and numbed as far as its psychological depth is concerned.
Artists (though sadly not writers) tend to move to where the battle is joined most fiercely. Everything in today's world is stylised and packaged, and fuckface and blinky are trying to say, this is a camera, this is death, this is a body. They are trying to redefine the basic elements of reality, to recapture them from the ad men [and women!] who have hijacked our world.
blinky's beautiful body is her one great idea, but I suspect that she is rather prudish [she is!], which means that there are limits to the use she can make of her body and its rickety-rackety past. Meanwhile, too much is made of conceptual art -- someone has been shitting in Duchamp's urinal for the past 90 years, and there is an urgent need for a strong dose of critical thinking that will disrupt and undermine these tendencies to make the merger of form and content the apex of rapture all over again.'
Nuk ka komente:
Posto një koment