Wednesday, March 09, 2005


A reader commented in the post below asking me whether I'm "one [of] those people who likes modern art, like, way too much." I think I better clarify my opinion. I appreciate Classical, modern, you name it. But I think there must be a certain methodology behind art. Artists must adhere to certain guidelines if they intend on imitating styles and that requires more than using paint as colour. There comes a time when you realize objects aren't made up of a series of receding tones (reality is not monochromatic) and that the texture of the medium itself can bring works to life. The stuff I saw yesterday didn't require skill; they were too one-dimensional for that. Relativism applies within a certain context and within the contexts of both "good art" and "bad" (which is intentionally defiant), what I saw was neither due to the artists' limited knowledge of the science behind art. I know I'm starting to sound anti-populist, but I know when I visit a gallery, the fact that certain pieces are inaccessible to the majority (not by intellect but skill) is what appeals to me. I don't want to see the work behind the art. I don't want the natural visual fluidity interrupted by unconscious mistakes. I want to know what I'm looking at is something original that couldn't have emerged from conventional mobility. And I expect it to bring a heightened sense of reality. Art is more than a feeling or simply an accumulation of cultural capital. It is a specialized field of expression (self and otherwise). Just like not everyone has the ability to cook, calculate and conform, not everyone should be labeled an "artist" just because they can colour between the lines with the tools of the trade.


Student strike today. I'll be damned if I attend class! That's right, I emailed in my homework. Fuck the establishment!

No comments: