I don't care for tribes - football, religious, political, etc., but I did read an interesting article on agnosticism last week which rang a few bells for me. The thought that there is a group I might belong to really tickled me!
I was reading a blog by someone who really irritates me because it's pretty clear, to me anyway, that she is trying to subtley manipulate her readers to see that her way is the only way. Why I read it, I don't know, that's another story! Sure, she has all the right answers but if that was the only way, wouldn't we all be doing it? Perhaps it was the combination of those two things that sparked my thought this morning - is art simply another religion? Are art movements necessary in the same way that religions are necessary? We need to invent a group, give it some guidelines or even rules, and believe wholeheartedly that this is IT, this is Art, finally pinned down, defined and definite. When it doesn't quite fit, we break away, tweak the rules and worship a new god?
Do I have to confine myself to appreciating realism if I draw realistically? Why do artists of similar genres stick together? Who thought of creating a heirarchy depending on what medium you use? Another blog entry got me thinking about fashion in art. Such and such a style is popular he says. No point patting yourself on the back if that's the case because your style will go out of fashion just as surely as white flared trousers and platform boots. Surely creating art movements and fashions in art is to all artists' detriment. Sure, it makes us think but I feel, like fashion, it's time that we accept that 'everything goes' and throw out the notion that only an elite few understand the true meaning of art. Surely our brains are developed enough to stop thinking in terms of right and wrong?