ideas are not art
In art museums all of the visitors are on the same level; the museum owns the art, and the visitors are there to look at it. But in galleries and art fairs, everyone is not on the same level: some people are lookers and others are buyers. Lookers are there to appreciate the art. They visit galleries for the same reasons they visit museums. But buyers are there with one intention: to buy. Galleries and fairs exist for the sole purpose of selling art, and thus cater to the buyer. The buyers keep the galleries alive while the lookers contribute nothing to the galleries.
This past Thursday I visited the Frieze Art Fair. The fair exhibits work from over 150 of the world’s top contemporary art galleries and was teeming with wealthy buyers. I could see their wealth in their clothes, hairstyles, and facial expressions. They wanted me and everyone else to know that they are wealthy to ensure no one would mistake them for a looker. As a looker myself, I did not feel welcome at the fair. The gallery owners did not want to talk to me because they could tell I had no intentions of buying, and the buyers acted as if I was invading their fair. Since I felt unwelcome at the fair, I also felt uncomfortable looking at the artwork. In a museum I do not hesitate to go right up to a work or to spend twenty minutes standing in front of it, but at Frieze sometimes I didn’t even want to go into a gallery. The art was not there for me to appreciate, and the gallery owners and the buyers did not hesitate to remind me of this.
Now about the artwork itself. The majority of the artwork I saw at Frieze was all idea and lacked any sort of physical creation that could speak for itself. The art at Frieze needed written or verbal explanation; the art did not stand on its own and say, “This is what I am.” Instead, it sat there with a plaque or gallery owner somewhere close by ready to give a lengthy explanation of its metaphorical and philosophical significance. The art would be nothing if it came uncoupled with its verbal or written description. To create contemporary art that could be shown at Frieze an artist only needs good ideas. Artistic talent is no longer a requirement to become a well-known artist. Contemporary art, as exhibited at Frieze, was all talk and no show.
The visual arts are separate from the literary arts and other non-visual arts because they do not require words to explain themselves. An artist can successfully incorporate words into their visual artwork, but then the words become a piece of the artwork, not a written ad-on in the form of a plaque on a wall. Thus today’s contemporary art is about the idea behind the artwork, not about the physical artwork itself. The artwork itself has become an incomplete physical manifestation of the ideas behind it; the artwork does not fully contain its own meaning or purpose. If it did, no verbal descriptions would be necessary. So the artwork is only an approximation of the ideas it represents. It stops short of representing the entire idea as if the idea it represents is too profound to ever be totally encompassed by something physical.
I believe that physical artwork can render a complete portrait of an idea, and is the artist’s job to figure out how to do this. One piece of artwork can have many interpretations, and interpretations that differ from the artist’s original intentions can be correct. But if one cannot interpret the art without a verbal or written description, then that artwork is not art. It is merely a physical something that silently sits in room with white walls, waiting for someone to read its plaque.
Art should not be silent. Art should scream. Art should deafen me when I walk into the room. It should make me cover my ears and close my eyes because it screams so loudly. But it should not push me away; it should entice me with its screams. It should seduce me with its visual glory. Perhaps I long for art that artists no longer create; yet I don’t want artists to recreate art of the past. I don’t want another The Starry Night or another Mona Lisa. But this is what I do want: I want art to represent the turmoil, pain, and beauty that the artist sees when he or she looks at the world. I want art to have emotion and feeling. I want art to take on the responsibility of communicating the ideas behind it and not to leave it up to words to explain what it is and why it is here.
October 19th, 2006 at 12:27 pm
i understand as being artist who belives in doing and not getting done.. i am attaching haw i work…probably sense of pride possession is lacking in art as such…and self gratification enrichment is last…in mind in today in art as such…
Image making.
images I make are from the image quotes in print media, internet, and other mass communication devices. I remove center of focus and work with background or backdrop of the image, again discarded or abused visual quotes. I work upon them and salvage formal and sensual qualities by making them integral part of the total image. process of making image also involves scanning , breaking of images ,mending, all these is mor physical in nature having to squeez, hold, caress, and arrange.
Making of an objects and images.
objects often refers to possessions, memories, emotive and idiosyncratic associations…. all these reference ceases, the moment use is over or association are broken, in short moment they are discarded, used, and neglected. I am concerned with these objects.. used, felt, and replaced types. I use them for what they have yet to offer..rekindle sensual and formal pleasure..and regret of neglect.
Idea is to possess them for purly primodial pleasure of possession. their pure formal qualities, like shape size color, and derive pleasure of young triable girl, what she does with, discarded, tiny little perfume bottle by hanging it between her young breast and enhancing her own body and value of the bottle, and in turn making young boys head turn. ( Sigmund freuid, Kant, Roger Fry and what not, simplified and put in practice for you, without M.F.A.) My objects are common, but their formal qualities are not so common, in fact these commonness is cause of their negligence and abuse..consumed and objurgated., most of our objects are supplied and mass produced hence lacks evocative quality to be pride possession, and they in breeds in us ‘consume, and be condemned’ attitude. We have mass produced images to consume, relations to be consumed, even experiences are to be consumed. These objects and images I make are left behind by sensually and emotionally dead culture of consumerism, which gets reflected in my work, through highly randomized and highly ordered visual space. the play of visual coincidence creates pleasure, I frame or put this images or objects in to ‘show cases’ or ‘boxes’ to give them pride of place or precious treasure like treatment. putting them or encasing objects/ images gives them aura of sacred idol of contemporary society.
I make images or objects not to propound my ideas or experiences nor to over blow singularity of my having them, which in today art world has become GURU MANTRA of creativity. simple act of image / object making is enriching for me..and my day to day living..or would like my said act to be. I would like to compare my art activity to the’ act of quilt making, carving staff or painting body by triable women, cattle herds man or teen age girl..simple self gratifying enriching act and pride possession. I use various mediums for my work, and I do not bend them beyond their potentials, hence seemingly there are jumps and inconsistency, it is also due to interruptions. Most of the handling and process involved in making of images or objects, be it technical or manual, I do it my self.