Week 3: Coprolite
It all started going downhill when Marcel Duchamp took a urinal, turned it on its side, signed it, and put it on display.
[Marcel Duchamp, The Fountain, 1917. Image description: Exactly as in my first sentence. If you can’t see it, you are not missing anything.]
Meet the readymade: an object that the artist transformed into a work of art by telling people that it was art. He only exerted the effort required to select the object from an infinite number of potential readymades. He rejected aestheticism in favor of functionality, turned away from the concept of an artist’s creativity setting him apart from other people, and aimed to make you think beyond “Ooo, pretty.”
In the latter, at least, Duchamp succeeded.
Whenever I mention that I majored in art history, someone inevitably asks me what I think of contemporary art. Perhaps that person elaborates with a question along the lines of “is it art anymore when someone just dips a paintbrush in a bucket, swipes it across the canvas, and calls it a completed work?”
I tell them that I don’t like most contemporary art. I don’t understand it. From the eyes of an art history student, I gaze at the art and see almost nothing from the work itself to either regurgitate for the exam or analyze in greater detail. Looking at a toilet doesn’t read “symbol of undercutting bourgeois values” to me. As a museum-goer, the more I look at some pieces, the more confused I get. What message is the artist trying to send? Am I just not smart enough to get it?
I can’t reject modern art entirely, though. I have an odd fondness for Jackson Pollock. Yes, his paintings look like random paint splatters on a canvas. People say that a kindergartener could create a Pollock. But they don’t, and they can’t. Even when letting the paint drip, Pollock controlled the flow of the paint, then went back and edited with brushes to create a more expressive composition. The paintings needed his eye and his engagement with the canvas to come alive.
Deep down, I’m uncomfortable with saying that certain things are not art. Some of the most interesting art subverts contemporary expectations of what art is. Once upon a time, people thought that Caravaggio plunged his art into deep shadows simply to mask his inability to paint. But when the simple act of painting becomes subversive in the midst of a maze of installations, has it gone too far? And-look, a shark preserved in formaldehyde? A tent containing pictures of everyone you’ve ever slept with? Really?
When it comes down to it, I have to reject Duchamp’s distaste for the aesthetic. I want my art to be pretty. The beauty elevates art above the objects of everyday life. It draws me in so that I can see the artist’s message, whether it’s a comment on society at large, a visual translation of the artist’s psyche, or no apparent message at all.
I also have to continue celebrating an artist's inspiration. Without the artist's unique perspective, our museums would be empty and our lives would be boring. Is there anything wrong with celebrating an artist’s eye for beauty instead of his ability to pile up random crap?
(Thanks to ecosopher for her beta feedback!)
[Marcel Duchamp, The Fountain, 1917. Image description: Exactly as in my first sentence. If you can’t see it, you are not missing anything.]
Meet the readymade: an object that the artist transformed into a work of art by telling people that it was art. He only exerted the effort required to select the object from an infinite number of potential readymades. He rejected aestheticism in favor of functionality, turned away from the concept of an artist’s creativity setting him apart from other people, and aimed to make you think beyond “Ooo, pretty.”
In the latter, at least, Duchamp succeeded.
Whenever I mention that I majored in art history, someone inevitably asks me what I think of contemporary art. Perhaps that person elaborates with a question along the lines of “is it art anymore when someone just dips a paintbrush in a bucket, swipes it across the canvas, and calls it a completed work?”
I tell them that I don’t like most contemporary art. I don’t understand it. From the eyes of an art history student, I gaze at the art and see almost nothing from the work itself to either regurgitate for the exam or analyze in greater detail. Looking at a toilet doesn’t read “symbol of undercutting bourgeois values” to me. As a museum-goer, the more I look at some pieces, the more confused I get. What message is the artist trying to send? Am I just not smart enough to get it?
I can’t reject modern art entirely, though. I have an odd fondness for Jackson Pollock. Yes, his paintings look like random paint splatters on a canvas. People say that a kindergartener could create a Pollock. But they don’t, and they can’t. Even when letting the paint drip, Pollock controlled the flow of the paint, then went back and edited with brushes to create a more expressive composition. The paintings needed his eye and his engagement with the canvas to come alive.
Deep down, I’m uncomfortable with saying that certain things are not art. Some of the most interesting art subverts contemporary expectations of what art is. Once upon a time, people thought that Caravaggio plunged his art into deep shadows simply to mask his inability to paint. But when the simple act of painting becomes subversive in the midst of a maze of installations, has it gone too far? And-look, a shark preserved in formaldehyde? A tent containing pictures of everyone you’ve ever slept with? Really?
When it comes down to it, I have to reject Duchamp’s distaste for the aesthetic. I want my art to be pretty. The beauty elevates art above the objects of everyday life. It draws me in so that I can see the artist’s message, whether it’s a comment on society at large, a visual translation of the artist’s psyche, or no apparent message at all.
I also have to continue celebrating an artist's inspiration. Without the artist's unique perspective, our museums would be empty and our lives would be boring. Is there anything wrong with celebrating an artist’s eye for beauty instead of his ability to pile up random crap?
(Thanks to ecosopher for her beta feedback!)