interesting views of art in todays world.

I agree with him entirely. His thoughts on Art could well be applied to Rap "music."

I have said for a long time that "modern" art isn't art. I could not agree more with what was said in this clip. We are all demeaned when we see this new stuff, and enriched when we see the really beautiful things some artists are capable of.

Excellent! Thanks for sharing. A lot of the bad quality in modern art is due to the fact that art fundamentals, technical skills, craftsmanship and aesthetics are not emphasized in our schools. Thus permitting a lot of art without merit to be displayed without properly mastered design skills and execution.

Talk about a can of worms- read some of the comments.

I think he is just complaining about the state of things, he does not deal with the causes.
Perhaps the main reason collectors switched to impressionism and all the rest in the late 19th century, is they were bored with the neo classicism and romanticism they had seen already.
Could this be due to the short sightedness of the artists? Perhaps they did not keep their public entertained... even the most delicately presented inspired scene gets dull if that's all you ever see.
Or did the collectors really switch? The collectors of neo classicism and romanticism did not disappear overnight, they kept buying. Among these would have been many of the older collectors.

Maybe the Artists who saw the changes coming, and participated, they kept the attention some of the bored collectors,or at least the critics and the writers, and inspired new ones.
Often, Yuppies move markets and create trends, younger upwardly mobile people. New money, or young old money.
They want their own identity.
They don't always want to collect what their parents collected.

It has been said that the basic idea of art is to create an emotional response in the viewer.
Some artists and their viewers prefer a rather base emotional response. I think these are the people he is complaining about-the ones who like the images that make many of us scratch our heads, or worse.
So let them have what they like.

Some of my best clients collect some pretty strange art.
Rather than criticize their tastes, I study them. I try to see what it is that attracts them to this or that piece.
Maybe I can learn something.

One reason I go to art events and visit artists all over the globe, is when the changes come, I want to be involved, or at least aware.

If I can be a trendsetter, great, but at the very least, I want to be a trend spotter.

There are enough people in the world that you can find ones that like what we do.
It's just a matter of reaching them.
There are a lot of bored collectors wandering from event to event looking for something new. And young new collectors looking to define themselves by their own tastes.
Reach those people, and you will always have viewers and collectors of your art.

I guess what it boils down to is that the money that flows to modern art won't be flowing to classically beautiful items anyway, so why worry. Is that it, Barry?

Barry.... Bravo, well said!!

Weldon

Ed Westerly said:

I guess what it boils down to is that the money that flows to modern art won't be flowing to classically beautiful items anyway, so why worry. Is that it, Barry?

Click to expand...

Something to that effect.

Weldon47 said:

Barry.... Bravo, well said!!

Weldon

Click to expand...

Thanks, if I really had it figured out clearly, I could say it in one sentence !

Related to this discussion is a piece I wrote a few years ago which I present to you here:

A Prolegomena to the study of weapons as Fine Art

There has been discussion as to whether engraving, long considered a craft by many, should now be included in the broad field known as Fine Art. If this question is to be answered, the prerequisite question may be,†What is Art?†What divides Art from simple craft? And further, if engraving is found to be Art, could it be described and criticized in the same language as the other arts?

It may be folly to classify artists by “ismsâ€, but if we cannot classify the engraver, perhaps we can observe elements of style or temper in a work that may be recognized and described by the language of the arts. Can we see the importance of the subject matter in engraving as it can be seen in Hellenistic art? Can we observe the importance of content, decorum and space in Victorian scroll, as we can in roman art and neoclassicism? And can we see expressionism in engraving as the rejection of realism, superseding form and subject matter, as it has been seen in Modern art?

If engraving is an art it would be a culturally literate art and thereby be discussed in ways which allow it to be intellectualized and appreciated by those who have a knowledge of the arts or the background which gives them understanding of the common language of art, without the requirement of being an artist themselves.

Perhaps we should ask if there is a precedent for examining engraved weapons in such a serious manner. What is their historical value in relation to other objects made by the hands of men?

When we look to literature for examples of the value placed on engraved weapons, there are many. In Book VI of the Iliad Homer describes how Adrestos, defeated in battle, pleads for his life at the point of Menelaos’ spear. Adrestos offers a tempting ransom of “Gold and smithied iron†from the treasures in his father’s palace. Unfortunately for Adrestos, Agamemnon appears and runs him through.

Homer describes Hector carrying a spear eleven cubits long, having a bronze point, with a “ring of gold “on the shaft.

Achilles is described as Godlike, and appropriately, wears armor fashioned by a God, Hephaestus. Homer goes into great detail describing the shield, and the chasing, repose and engraving wrought by this God, which was very ambitious work indeed. It included in its subject matter, the heavens, the earth and the sea, living constellations and the sun, Two cities and armies, Their wars and the battles therein, Gods and Goddesses, all framed by fields of grain and the sickles in the hands of the men who worked them, herds of Kine with upright horns, pursued by Lions and Dogs, and vineyards populated with wooing maidens accompanied by dancing youths wearing daggers of gold.

The infinite detail, as described by Homer, would have made this a fine piece to examine, but unfortunately this work is lost to us. Enveloped and obscured by the mists of time, it can still be an Icon of creative genius in our minds. Immortal as the God who wrought it, as long as men speak of the shield of Achilles, it may be studied by our imaginations.

By contrast the common Greek soldiers he leads are described in their inexpensive armor as “Mail Clad Achians.†This in itself demonstrates the status of even such a hero as Achilles, was further enhanced, by not only the best quality edged weapons and armor, but the highly skilled artwork thereon, and the drama of the scenes which Hephaestus chose for the content of this artwork.

This emphasis on content of the work is in keeping with the Temper of Classicism, The dramatic and heroic nature of the events depicted being important above all else, with technique being formalized to cause as little distraction as possible from the subject matter.

In the field of edged weapons we can see a tremendous diversity in engraving styles from Hephaestus’s creation, examples of excavated Mycenaean gold and silver blades inlaid with hunting scenes from 1500 years before Christ, presentation knives dating to 3300 BC in Tutankhamen’s tomb, Japanese Tuba and Napoleonic swords, all done with the finest material and engraving and finishes, guiding the way forward to the latest diversity in automatic folders created by the most gifted makers and engravers of today.

If we include the subject of engraving in the fine arts, perhaps we also include checkering and filework on the grips, scales and stocks of knives and firearms.

The point pattern on the stock of a gun may be described as classic by its adherence to the ancient idea of detail being subordinate to design. The classic temper holds that order and good sense will prevail. Classicists might consider the development of the point pattern to be final and complete with its unity of form and balance, decorum and dignity. It offers a transparency of arrangement and simplicity of style.

The fleur de lis pattern may be viewed as romanticism with its imaginative and emotional elements. Exhuberence and passion in this work is hard to deny. The romantic spirit may be expressed by the flowing ribbons, bold curves and attention to detail. Perhaps we can describe the more flamboyant examples as expressionism as practiced by a distinct artist expressing his personal style and development.


If we include engraving and checkering as fine arts, dare we say that it may follow that the lines of the stock itself be analyzed by these methods? Are the lines of a Manton rifle from 1819 and an American classic stock from the twenty-first century similar by chance, or could it be the respect for form and insistence on balance, the harmony of line and radius inherent in the mind of classicism unify the two?

In Custom Rifles of the 50’s perhaps the rollover cheekpiece, exaggerated pistolgrip, ivory inlaid stock and skipline checkering, presently discredited, were all characteristics of a decadent period; symptoms of a lack of any real artistic direction at all.

If that is true, we may cautiously embrace the neoclassicism which today brings us back to the traditional lines and rules of form, and be optimistic that we avoid the inherent danger of neoclassicism, that brilliant execution becomes simply a matter of successfully duplicating previous sets of rules.

Perhaps this discipline is indeed merely craft, but, if it is art, should we not speak of it in the language of art?

The world would be a very dull place if everyone followed the norms, it's those that dance to their own songs and follow their dreams that keep some of the people creative.

Thanks Dave.

Listening to that video, makes me think about this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Degenerate_art#Artistic_movements_condemned_as_degenerate

I'm so glad that people can make the art--whatever they conceive of that to be-- that they want to make in this country.

Interesting history Ede. Thanks for the link.

The reasons for the rather rapid transition from realism and academic art to modernism and post modernism have been thoroughly researched and outlined at the Art Renewal Center, by ARC Chairman Fred Ross. The full treatise on the subject can be found here: http://www.artrenewal.org/articles/Philosophy/ArtScam/artscam.php

Because it is rather lengthy, I have quoted a few paragraphs here that specifically address how the transition came about.

"What happened? What could possibly have happened to cause an artistic heritage and tradition, after 500 years, to fall this low in the esteem of the eyes of the world?

Three things explain half of it: World War I, World War II, and the Great Depression. What terrible catastrophes held the world in their grip in the first half of the 20th century? What unspeakable atrocities and tragedies caused the deaths of tens of millions of people, from want and war? Somebody was to blame! Some one had to be blamed. This could not have just been written by the fates. God could not have wanted mankind to suffer so.

The clear, evident, and easy scapegoat for all that went wrong was quite simply "The Old Order".

It wasn't just the leaders that were guilty. The entire last generation was to blame. This seems now a rather absurdly all-sweeping attribution of culpability. And with them everything that they believed and respected was impugned, discredited and desecrated. The artists they loved were pigeonholed as their lackeys and supporters, and their art was debased in every possible way by every possible format. People stopped even looking at the art of these great Traditional Humanists of the 19th century. It just had to be bad. After all, look who supported it; the old order! No attempt for decades was ever again given to looking with an un-jaundiced eye at what these artists were doing, saying, and achieving.

Then, the other critical cause was the consideration of powerful economic reasons for dealers to wholeheartedly espouse this new modernist ethic. If you were an Alma-Tadema or Bouguereau dealer, you had a list of a hundred clients wanting to buy their work. But their technique permitted them to only paint one canvas every 3 to 8 weeks, so you stood biting your nails waiting for each canvas that you knew was sold long before it was completed. Modernists, however, could often complete a single canvas each and every day. Some did even more than that.

This was certainly true with all of the biggest names. Whether we are speaking of Picasso, Modrian, Matisse or de Kooning. Many of their works could be completed in a couple of days or a couple of hours. Their dealers now had an enormous supply to meet whatever demand they could generate. They had high motivation to prove that these paintings were not only as valuable as the prior generation's, but that they were even better. And when the money pouring in from this consummate con game, they were able to buy themselves historians, writers and critics, who happily developed complex, convoluted arguments to justify their philosophical positions.

Incredible fortunes were made from all of this. Incredible fortunes are still at risk invested in these works."

I hope you will visit the ARC and read the whole dissertation. It is quite illuminating. There are also many high resolution images of great art to view in the ARC archives.

That's quite an interesting website Roger. Thanks for sharing.

Roger, thanks for the information about the ARC.

I will begin by apologizing for what will likely offend the enlightened elite. I am after all a simple farm boy.

A close friend of mine who is an outstanding artist studied at two American universities and has a masters in fine arts. He became very frustrated at the lack of solid fundamental drawing and art instruction. He experienced too much time spent waxing philosophical and abstractly intellectual- I know "abstractly intellectual" is an misty concept or description but you know what I mean.

He finally went to Sweden to attend an art artelier for instruction on drawing, art fundamentals and classical training. On his return he spent some time as an adjunct professor teaching drawing and quickly fell from favor among the professors. His instruction was too rigorous, structured and practical. He was black-balled and left on his own accord not enjoying and being disgusted with the whole philosophy and atmosphere. He had students that told him they didn't need to learn to draw or understand design and composition because they were going to be abstract artists.

I have studied the post impressionist/modern art era and much of it is pure garbage. For the record I like very much some of the impressionists and occasionally some abstracts. There is little in the abstract expressionist movement that I find inspiring, uplifting, or beautiful. The video at the beginning of this thread and what Roger posted explains it well.

It is my opinion that shock value, vulgarity, and obscenity has more to do with individuals trying to hide their lack of skill, vision, and discipline than advancing art.

If a piece of art requires sophistry and long-winded fancy philosophical descriptions to validate it's existence it most likely is lousy art.

Thomas Kinkade, one of the most commercially successful artists of our generation was severely and regularly panned by the critics. Why? because he painted what was desired by the masses. I don't think he was a great painter but he certainly was a good painter and branded himself the "painter of light". Ironically this branding was one of the things most irritating to the art critics. Yet it is exactly what the critics attempt to do to and for the edgy controversial new comer.

I take issue with many critics of the arts- painting, sculpture, film, music, literary, etc.- when they place their stamp of approval overwhelmingly on a work that cannot be defended based on an accepted set of standards established over hundreds of years. There are at times true ground breaking works but they are rare.

If one definition of art is to evoke an emotional response then almost anything can be defined and promoted by self serving and collaborating artists and critics. Perhaps I am a Pollyanna or unenlightened but I prefer art that strives to evoke emotions that uplift, inspire, beautify, and edify. I have no use for a crucifix in a glass of urine, a rock that any crane could have placed, or a painted white panel that resembles my garage wall. Please find your self expression and validation in striving for real art and being a better world citizen.

The last of the great artist were relegated to Kind Edward Cigar boxes___Fred

Hear, Hear, Roger and Lee. I can't (don't take the time) express these thoughts that well, but am glad you can!

Well I have been away for a few days and just thought I would check back to see what has transpired during the weekend. I thought this might be a provocative topic that would make us all examine our own definition of art. Admittedly I tend on falling on the side of Roger and Lee's views. I am glad to see it is producing a healthy discussion.