I didn't mean to sound glibly dismissive. I am also annoyed by the misunderstanding of craft and the assumption that it doesn't indicate any intelligence on the part of the maker. They use their iPhones to take pictures that they then claim are the equal of pictures taken by much better cameras,which means they also don't understand the brilliant technical mechanisms they are surrounded by-and these people are of all ages,lest you assume this is an anti youth rant. If anything,the youth are more likely to wait and see if there's more to know and a lot more likely to recognize craft. It is the wretched middle-aged who assume it took much longer than it actually does to make something and it is they who say they will never have time . Kate Sullivan
-----Original Message----- From: William Conger <[email protected]> To: aesthetics-l <[email protected]> Sent: Sat, Oct 6, 2012 9:13 am Subject: Re: What does capitalism have to do with art? Camille Paglia is not to be ignored. She is one of the strongest voices that offsets the excessive silliness of much contemporary art. Never mind that her comment cited by Michael has contradictions, such as heralding Pollock for his 'spiritual' art while also championing the utilitarian, nonspiritual pragmatics of good industrial design. Her main complaint, however, is worthy: A loss of attachment to the industrial -- hands on -- past has also surrounded younger fine arts students with an airy 'scholastic' theorizing that eschews materiality and thus the skills associated with it. If capitalism gave us the great aura of respect for the well-made and the innovative, it also soon gave us the opposite: the poorly made and the redundant. I've said before that after WWII the dogma of manufacturing changed from make-it-as-well-as-you-can to make-it-only-as-well-as-it-needs-to-be (not my idea) and this resulted in the cheapening of products, the throw-away culture, the fascination for tiny incremental 'improvements' that were really nothing but ornamental and lateral proliferations, a trait of redundant excess. Nowadays hoever makes something, a toaster or auto, as well as it can be made with the best skilled workers and best materials, is on the road to total marketplace failure. The latest art schools fashion in the continual 'return-to-painting' department is a preference for seemingly unskilled and slap-dash figurative imagery and method. The more awkward and amateurish a painting looks, the better it is. Keep in mind however, that the main interest of the Impressionists 125 years ago was to paint as if they had just happened upon a random scene in daily life. Thus they painted quickly, pretending not to compose, and using short unblended dabs giving a loose, (deskilled) unfinished, and casual look to the whole (see RH Wilenski, Modern French Painters). Does that sound familiar in the context of today's 'advanced' new painters? It's alright, though for art to proceed with recursive loops, like astronomical epicycles. All art is a hybrid of some previous -- unfinished -- ideas and methods. The slap-dash look of much new painting is an expected way for an ancient art methodology to complete with the instantaneous flood of disparate imagery in our digital world. The carefully made, skillful, s-l-o-w painting may be out of sync with today's speedy change and flatter world. (disclosure:I am a slow, careful painter!). If you're not using a digital method, a deskilled push-button digital device, to create and deliver images as artworks, and if you must enroll in the always open department of return-to-painting, you'd better paint it fast, very, very fast. Better yet, just send your canvas through the digital printer and let it spew the paint much quicker than you can. That's good enough! wc ----- Original Message ---- From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sat, October 6, 2012 7:17:38 AM Subject: Re: What does capitalism have to do with art? Sadly, the link failed. You can find it by putting Paglia Wall St Journal into Google. She says all is lost to the IPhone etc. Kate Sullivan -----Original Message----- From: Michael Brady <[email protected]> To: aesthetics-l <[email protected]> Sent: Sat, Oct 6, 2012 7:35 am Subject: What does capitalism have to do with art? This is for you, Berg. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444223104578034480670026450.htm l Paglia in the Wall Street Journal. Woo hoo. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Michael Brady
