| Replaced_Texan |
01-17-2006 05:44 PM |
Dream Interpretation
Quote:
Originally posted by Diane_Keaton
No question the working class may "get it"; it's the arrogant presumption that it will have some great effect on them that bothers me.
|
Great effect? No. Effect in some way to stimulate a reaction. Yes. That's what art is and it would be a great, great tragedy if people stopped making art to generate an effect.
Quote:
Nope. The commentary that goes with the art is patronizing and/or the expectations about how the art could or will transform or change things.
|
I see. It's not the art, it's the commentary to the art that you object to. Stop listening to people and go look at art. Lots and lots and lots of art. And encourage as much art as possible to be displayed and supported so you get as broad as a view as possible.
Quote:
I would think offense would depend on on who is telling him he needs art in his life, and if the person is telling him what kind of art he needs. And not to be even more of a bitch here, but I think the language we use about art can alienate a working stiff. I say Cristo and in turn, you refer to him as "The Cristo" (you say potato; I say potodo). That alone could turn a working stiff off. I would doubt you are pretentious -- but I know some Manhattanites that are and it comes out in their language.
|
I'm not refering to a person when I say "the Cristo." I'm referring to the work. It's the shorthand I use to talk about a particiular piece art when I've discussed pieces by more than one artist. I don't know much about the man, but I've seen a lot of photographs of his work.
I think that you don't give working stiffs enough credit, especially since most artists ARE working stiffs. People react to art. Good or bad. And they don't necessarily need anyone to tell them that it's good or bad or that they should feel a certain way about the piece. Art is interactive with the audience. Sometimes, of course, having more information about the piece can help the viewer understand the artist's perspective, but for the most part, the viewer's own prejudices, history, and preferences will most influence his or her reaction to a piece.
Installation art, in my opinion, is singularly unique in that it tends to be temporary, it tends to be fairly large and it tends to be site specific. The short duration, the scale and the location add to impact it has on the audience. These are only additional elements that the audience has to process in appreciating a piece of art, but I think that they're interesting. Installation art is obviously not your cup of tea, but it seems to me that your criticism has been of the criticism and not of the piece itself.
|