People have been predicting the next thing in art for a long time.  The sad 
thing is that to a large extent, the next art is predicable. The market 
controls art and artistic invention and thus the novelty of the new needs to be 
predicated on it comes from.  Otherwise the arguments for the new have no basis 
for their supposed validity. Legions of artists have been concocting the new in 
this fashion ever since the market took precedence over the reflective nature 
of the aesthetic endeavor.  Clement Greenberg ridiculed the practice, 
derisively, referring to "concocted art" (now masked by such terms as 
"research") and "avant-gardIST" artists.  Avant-gardist artists are those who 
continue avant-gardism as if it were an evolving tradition instead of 
revolutionary breakthroughs.  Another voice from the past is Harold 
Rosenberg's.  He wrote a book, now its pages are brittle and yellowed, titled 
The Tradition of The New.  The predictability and dumbness of new
 art is only slightly relieved by the pretense that it embraces the world of 
events beyond the merely formal.  Don't misunderstand me.  I favor new art by 
which I mean the constant effort to re-symbolize human experience through 
visual metaphors.  I favor all genuine efforts to lay bare and give form to 
some unfolding -- scarcely glimpsed --  reality of human experience.  At first, 
perhaps always, it has no previous identity, no market preparation, no 
tradition, no understanding, no "artists' statements" (prime evidence of 
concocted avant-gardism) ) and yet it forces a realignment of all that came 
before.  Another idea taken from Rosneberg is that this sort of genuine newness 
can come from anywhere, from the seemingly familiar to the accidentally 
incomprehensible.  "You can start anywhere", he said.

Thus the pendulum analogy is correct and unfortunately so.  It is the tool of 
concoction and artistic resignation.  It affirms market supremacy.
wc



----- Original Message ----
From: Saul Ostrow <[email protected]>
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Sent: Sun, June 6, 2010 8:03:27 AM
Subject: Re: "In a skeptical world in which authority has often  
failed,...collaborative art is a radical rebuke that allows...no  gatekeepers  
to tell us what is and isn't art." (recent article)

How sad to live in such a prescribed world


On 6/6/10 2:53 AM, "ARMANDO BAEZA" <[email protected]> wrote:

and so does art,from one extreme to the other, as nature is expressed.
Always has and perhaps always will.


________________________________
From: Saul Ostrow <[email protected]>
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Sent: Sat, June 5, 2010 8:54:09 PM
Subject: Re: "In a skeptical world in which authority has often
failed,...collaborative art is a radical rebuke that allows...no  gatekeepers
to tell us what is and isn't art." (recent article)

Most pendulum either swing back and forth in the same plane , or follow the
circular motion of the earth - the swing is prescriptive and mechanical


On 6/5/10 8:05 PM, "ARMANDO BAEZA" <[email protected]> wrote:

Don't panic
The
of aesthetics
pendulum
keeps moving
back and forth
mando


________________________________
From: joseph berg <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Sat, June 5, 2010 4:48:16 PM
Subject: "In a skeptical world in which authority has often
failed,...collaborative art is a radical rebuke that allows...no  gatekeepers
to tell us what is and isn't art." (recent article)

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-ca-wiki-culture-20100606,0,78517
57.story



--



--

Reply via email to