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?
10 comments:
"Surely our brains are developed enough to stop thinking in terms of right and wrong?"
I wish.
I have a hard time understanding that there is a true meaning of art, but to some extent it take on the part of a religion in some people life's. The modern museums being the Cathedrals of today. But isn't it part of an education to form a special taste, (thought to be superior). I studied Graphic Design in the 90:s prior to that Architecture, in both educations there was a transformation of the pupils tastes toward the more extreme. Maybe to heighten the feel of being something special, and to have a greater understanding of Art/architecture. I suppose this happens when you study other creative fields. While I studied drawing was out of fashion it was all design, drawing was thought to be of lesser value then design.
A huge topic.
I think of art not as a religion but as a language - a language with all its developments, accents, and its dialects. A language which can be used in a meticulous or in a slovenly way, with fashions for expressions. A language which borrows from other languages creatively, indiscriminately, mistakenly, becoming beautiful, ugly, distorted, changed, but growing always growing.
Olga, I believe you said it just right...art is a language with many inflections, many words, my phrases which borrows from other languages and is ever changing. We don't all speak the same dialect, but we all have language and we use it the best we can...and appreicate others' usages, even when they aren't using our dialet.
Art can become a religion, and I think it is for some.
It can have hard and fast rules like "draw only in ink, no pencil, no erasing, work only from life, etc. etc."
I like my art like I like my spiritual life ... experiential and characterized by discovery and personal revelation rather than codified, writ in stone and handed down on high from someone else.
r.e., yes I have my head in the clouds!
Mattias, your experience of art education explains a lot. Perhaps the root of it is there in art schools?
Olga, I like this comparison with language very much. Maybe the elitists are speaking patois so as not to be understood?!
Thanks Sioux for your thoughts.
Karen, well said, I can see that in your wonderful art.
AFter returning to art school as an adult, I got to see first hand how academia perpetuates an elitest attitude. Art is not just for the eliet! Art is necessary to life. Used to be that everyone practiced the art of making beauty in every day life. Its not for the chosen few but like orgainzed religion, some like to draw a line to say who's in and who's out. Pretty silly stuff. Thanks for an interesting post and great comments!
an interesting post...art should never have a right or wrong...
Good points by all! I don't know any field where the cliques don't form, the "serious" don't put down the "casual" practitioners, and where money, awards, and degrees don't create levels of hierarchy.
Me, I'm just playing with art and loving the color and form of it. Or else I won't play!
Wonderful post Felicity. I always enjoy it when you share your interesting thoughts. It might be fun to classify art forms by religion. Watercolor, with all the rules might be Catholic, while monoprinting might be Unitarian since it's much looser and less defined, and oil painting could be protestant since there's so many denominations. I could go on but I have a feeling I'm getting myself in hot water and being very un-PC.
Post a Comment