Re: 'Remember, it was Duchamp's readymades and rejection of skilled art practice that effectively tossed the creative act to the vewer (and to the institutional authority of the "artworld".'
Accordng to Danto it was the Brillo boxes that did that... DA On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 2:16 PM, Chris Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The 20th C. has proven that concepts of art are too weak to sustain "the > innovative expression of what Kandinsky called "inner necessity" a spiritual > manifestation of ineffable human creativity" > > Haven't you seen that yourself - in how art schools have changed over the past > 50 years -- with the loss of idealism and aestheticism? > > > > Here's a blog that has followed the journey of an idealistic MFA student: > http://sculpturelife.blogspot.com/ ---- who finally writes: "My usually > traditional sensibilities have been broadened in the past two years (the > academy playing no small part)" -- as then begins his career in the studio of > Jeff Koons. > > The academy has prepared him to join the artworld -- but will we ever see the > "spiritual manifestation of ineffable human creativity" ? > > And this is why I think that the concept of art should be left to the social > sciences - while those - whom they may eventually identify as artists - need > to focus on spiritual values as they are cultivated within specific > traditions. > > Either very old traditions (Russian icon painting) or very young ones > (European abstract painting) > > > > ************* > > > William wrote: > > Miller lands on the central issue of art theory and > criticism. Is art simply a product of culture, > reflecting the iconic imagery of visual culture at > large which shapes the "gaze" of the audiences who > thus "create" it? Or is art the innovative expression > of what Kandinsky called "inner necessity" a spiritual > manifestation of ineffable human creativity that > shapes culture and the "gaze"? In short, does the > artist create art or does cultural audience create > art? If both, as likely, which side has the greatest > sway? Which side ultimately decides the issue? > > Today, in the late apotheosis of Duchamp and the > degrading of art's uniqueness to the equivalence of > the commonplace, the plam of victory belongs to the > "culture creates" camp. Remember, it was Duchamp's > readymades and rejection of skilled art practice that > effectively tossed the creative act to the vewer (and > to the institutional authority of the "artworld". > > The downside of the cultural gaze is the tendency to > rank art as artifact where quality is contingent upon > social utility and the most useful commonplace object > or practice may trump all else. The downside of the > artist's gaze is the strong possibility of its being > irrelevant to culture through redundancy, oddness, and > uselessness as an artifact (as, say, for propaganda or > a sign for established beliefs, etc). > > A very tough dilemma. > > ____________________________________________________________ > Free information - Scholarships for college, university or tech school. Click > now! > http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/fc/Ioyw6ijlUNllj3dOesgUyHDZuBl8dG > j2GPEYn7CZT2UMCXmxNbCVYA/ > > -- Derek Allan http://www.home.netspeed.com.au/derek.allan/default.htm
