Contemporary Art and the Plight of its Public
When I first began reading “Contemporary Art and the Plight of its Public” I was terribly confused and utterly lost. Reading has never been my strength and this piece seemed a little “out of my league”. Once I realized the piece was on art I began dreading the reading. I thought “Who really cares about what other people thought about art a long time ago and what does this have to do with this class?”As I pushed myself forward and began to understand what this piece was really about I was caught off guard. Steinberg explains how the public is not a group of people but rather a role we play in different situations. The public may often feel left out or “excluded from something they were a part of.” It was obvious that I belonged to the public when it came to this reading but Steinberg also said “The shock of something new gradually wears off until it becomes familiar and almost comfortable.” As I reread for the third time I was finally becoming more “comfortable” with what I was reading just as the people who disliked the art gradually became more “comfortable” with the ideas the artists expressed.
I got a lot from the reading because I experienced the “shock and discomfort” firsthand while I attempted to read it. Getting used to new ideas can definitely be difficult for people because to accept them they often have to “sacrifice” what was previously thought acceptable. One example that comes to mind is gay rights. Should people of the same sexes really be allowed to be married? The idea is similar in ways to the acceptance of art. The reading states, “Look, if you don’t like modern painting, why don’t you leave it alone? Why worry about it?” Almost everyone is affected in some way or another by the controversy of gay marriage. For the majority of us who are not gay we ask ourselves; why can’t we just leave it alone? It doesn’t really affect our lives and it doesn’t harm us either. The idea is something we don’t understand, just as Steinberg didn’t understand the art Johns put on display, but for some reason it ignites some flame of emotion within us. The concept is a little different from Steinberg’s but it portrays the same general idea. People or the public often have a difficult time sacrificing old ideas and opening up their minds to something new. For some it would mean sacrificing their values and taking away their safety net as they fall into the unknown. Now I’m not saying that we should all try to become gay or anything like that but I do think our public will eventually develop some tolerance for things we don’t understand.
The question to ask ourselves is without would there ever be advancement in society without these risks?