2006.04.29
Moving Away from Modernism
I’ll be rambling my thoughts in this article as they haven’t yet coherently gelled.
I’m not an artist and I’m not entrenched -even peripherally- in the art world. Regardless I have very strong opinions about art and in particular the so-called Modern Art. This movement is no longer modern, and I don’t even think most of it is art. I think it’s time for something new.
Seriously, folks, can we get on with it already? In its day I’m sure it was absolutely revolutionary to paint primary color squares on a white background. These were the days when pastoral landscapes and portraits were the norm. Squares on canvas had never been seen. This was, however, 100 bloody years ago! Colorful squares are no longer interesting. They don’t convey any meaningful ideas or emotions. They are a kindergarten project made by infant minds with a sheet of butcher paper and a pack of crayons.
I realize I’m narrowing my definition of modern art. However, if you walk into any museum of modern art you will see people of today cooing over the latest square innovation and talking about it like it has meaning, depth and innovation. It makes me sad.
Part of the problem is that the art community has become extremely elitist. They believe they are producing something with deeper connotations than even the artist can imagine. They have convinced themselves that what they are doing is important, even if its crap, and people who view the art buy into it. Critics search for the hidden meanings and nuances. Of colored squares. On a canvas. Or my favorite, throwing colored paint at the canvas.
Not all art that is chunked into the general category “modern” is this stupid. Some of it is really quite interesting. They contain something you can identify and react with. Even if you don’t like it you can garner some meaning and insight that you identify within the art be it beauty, disgust, reverence, anxiety, revelation, etc.
So I’d like to start a new movement. I haven’t decided on a name for this movement (and maybe it already exists in critical theory). The idea is that art has to stand on its own. It’s fine to know something about the artist and what meaning they are trying to convey, it’s fine to know something about what the art critics think of the piece, but when it comes to it what matters is what you as an individual take away from the experience.
Art must be able to stand on its own. If I walk down a street and see a building done in a modern style and I don’t like it, my reaction is valid. I don’t care what the architect was trying to accomplish and I don’t care what the critics love about the building. It’s an eyesore. I hate it. Or perhaps I love it and wish they would build more.
As an artist (if I were an artist; saying you’re an artist is awefully pretentious) this means that I can stop pandering to critics and audiences and just do what they want. I realize some do this anyways (applause) but many don’t. Critics can simply STFU and get a real career. Or start talking about art as their personal experience instead of as an authority on something as subjective as art. Or at least go on and try to figure out why so many people like or dislike a piece instead of telling us what to think about it.
Best of all, however, is that my opinions, your opinions, and everyone elses opinions will regain validity. No one can brush them off as, “You don’t know what you’re talking about.” Because you don’t have to know anything about what you’re talking about other than I like it or I don’t like it. It’s always nice to be able to explain why, but the final answer is that you have your opinion.
I don’t believe that most people like or even appreciate colored squares on a canvas. This kind of art will retain some fans, but it won’t be popular. Speaking of popularity we’ll have to do something about Hollywood and the entertainment business in general. So long as they continue to act like critics (telling us what is good and what is not) then we’re no longer allowed to have our own opinions.
Maybe I should call this the Obvious movement. Obvious Art.
Blah blah blah. This article is long enough. Thoughts anyone?
Categorized: thoughts
You can follow any responses to this entry with a RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
6 Responses to “Moving Away from Modernism”
- NHK says (April 29th, 2006 at 18:22:18 )
You remind me of myself back in college, railing against film criticism and the French “New Wave” (which hasn’t actually been new for several decades). I’m mostly in agreement with you, in theory anyway; though I suppose the whole idea here is to eschew theory!
That said, there is some extremely freaking cool so-called modern art out there…as well as a lot of crappy, “meaningful”, over-contextualized nonsense.
The mark of a truly skilled critic, btw, is the ability to suck all joy out of others’ experience of almost any given thing, even *good* art; this is true regardless of whether they’re telling you that you should love it or hate it.
- m.ookee.com says (May 1st, 2006 at 11:41:44 )
Agreed (with Doug, that is — I couldn’t understand NHK’s holier than thou art critic tone of injustice toward the art world)…well, maybe that wasn’t what was meant, I couldn’t stand it either way.
Whatever…I agree with the post, it’s kind of the same thing I used to say about poetry. You don’t like it? OK. Just because you don’t like it doesn’t make it bad … Isn’t that what all art is supposed to be about? People shouldn’t be “employed” as artists. Not in the sense that we think of art.
Sure, we need graphic artists for this or that, or the covers of this or that, but art is supposed to be an outlet, not a profession.
As you said, art is subjective … in fact, it’s kind of the anti-science (or what’s provable). There is no good, bad, etc., just art. No one rails at mathmeticians when they say 2+2=4, why is it that we have to prove that this piece is better than that one? I like it, you don’t. I see a naked woman blowing up her neighbor’s front yard, you see a cat eating a banana peel out of the garbage. My interpretation is much more entertaining (the naked woman is hot), but it doesn’t make it any better.
…Actually, thinking about it, we should do that one day. Just go to some art museum (MOMA comes to mind) and just make shit up about what we see, and express those thoughts loudly enough to annoy those around us…after all, it is art.
- douglas says (May 1st, 2006 at 17:40:13 )
Actually I can imagine a few people railing against basic math. Of course those people can generally be ignored. Except when they enter politics.
I’m with you that artists are not employable. This doesn’t mean that a person can’t make a living at art (and a great many do). Still, most artists should expect to retain “regular” jobs.
“The mark of a truly skilled critic is the ability to suck all joy out of others’ experience of almost any given thing.” That is absolutely quotable, NHK! And by the way, I’m not saying all modern art sucks, I’m just saying most of it does and that the idea of “modern” is kind of stupid when the style is anywhere from 70 to 100 years old. If it’s older than my parents it is not “modern”!
- annemone says (May 18th, 2006 at 19:09:08 )
Please stop using the word “modern” in regards to art. Please please PLEASE. I have no issues with you deriding “that” kind of art, but I don’t think dragging the word “modern” is helping to make your case. At least not for me. I do think you should keep working on this paper/rant/blog entry, if only to work through issues with the kind of art you love to hate.
sincerely,
an aspiring critic
- douglas says (May 18th, 2006 at 20:47:33 )
But… How can I talk about my love/hate relationship with the movement if I don’t use it’s own terminology? Isn’t SFMOMA the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art? C’mon!
Any ideas of what I *should* call it?
- NHK says (May 20th, 2006 at 22:07:50 )
I think part of the problem is that you’re indicting entire movements, eras, etc., rather that the specific things you dislike. Investigate - at least cursorily - the various schools, styles, etc. and pinpoint what you really *don’t* like; then try and find some “modern” (please don’t slug me, Annemone) art that you *do* like. You yourself admit you have a “love/hate relationship with the movement”.
Personally, I’m partial to Barbara Kruger, Wassily Kandinsky, Cindy Sherman, and some of Robert Mapplethorpe’s stuff…some of that’s photography, so I’m not sure how relevant it is to this discussion.
Steel yourself with a shot of scotch and head down to the SFMOMA for a few hours; I’ll bet you a steak you won’t leave without finding at least three pieces you like.
