Is it only art journalists, academics, and contemporary art gallery owners, who like what most people would call, and sometimes literally is, crap – aka contemporary “art”? I am, of course, referring to the anyone-could-do-that! variety of contemporary art. I certainly don’t wish to dismiss the whole of contemporary art, not least because I am a contemporary artist myself.
(There seems to be a similar trend going in contemporary classical music as well, but I am not qualified to talk about this.)
Maybe I’m weird, getting old, or out of touch – but I simply don’t understand this growing trend towards producing less and less accessible and aesthetically pleasing art – especially the sort that seems unfinished, rushed, scruffy, disdainful, and literally anyone could do (who has the physical capacity to do so). This sort of “art” goes against my senses, aesthetics, and comprehension of human nature.
Newness, for the sake of it, is very easy. Take it from me: as an artist, philosopher, psychologist, and someone interested in the history of art – I could come up with new ideas every five minutes. They would be thought-provoking, but they would look like rubbish, would not enhance the viewer’s lives in any way – just like so much modern “art”. In fact it might even depress them.
I choose not to do the easy. I choose to be faithful to my own sense of aesthetics and value. And, believe me, it is much harder…
Leave a comment