Saturday, September 26, 2009

Not my usual post

Okay, this isn't the usual post artist, an analysis...but I have been seeing some patterns in current artists and their work that seem a bit disturbing. I like my comments to be positive and hopefully insightful, but as in the minds of all educators and evaluators, criticism creeps in...And I despise the role of the critique, not for their "insight" into the works but for the self-absorption and personal "flair." And for some reason many media outlets have taken on this "entertainment in a news wrapper" format...but I are some quick bullet points and rhetorical questions that I have pondered over the last several months...

  • What happened to having a background in art? Is there some stigma with actually using that space? When did it become taboo to consider the atmosphere around the central character???

  • When did it become high fashion to do a copy of a copy of a copy of a tattoo that was a cartoon character???

  • How did drawing from something other than a photograph become a sin???

  • Was appropriation of an image always steeling or is it that artists today seem to be taking most of another artists image instead of thinking of something on their own???

  • Why is it that dealers and artists think it's practical to piss off the actual people who love visual art and then wonder why no one is buying?

  • What happened to art history???

1 comment:

  1. On a couple of these points (specifically bullet points 2 and 4), the issue seems to be the over-reliance on the creation of derivative works (to use the copyright statute lingo) - but is that really so surprising in the age of digital cut and paste? I also wonder how many artists realize, for example, Warhol made a whole line of soup cans to comment on mass consumerism of uniform products, as opposed to, say just lining them up for the hell of it.