the modern world
I was writing a post for my online "survey of20th century art" class and I thought to cross post it here. The discusion questio was:
Do you think that we are more doubtful today about the possibility of art affecting life?
My reply:
If the early 21st century were to be defined in a single term, I feel that term would best be "cynicism." We are leaving an era of post-World War II excess and consumerism, which has defined life in terms of marketing. The majority of people today consume art as a part of a product. It is understandable that the majority of people today, when faced with artistic creations, are suspicious that "someone is trying to sell them something" because this is often literally the case. Any new artistic concept or style is just another marketing ploy as insincere as Starbucks' pseudo-primitive decorations were Disney's plastic childhood.
The whirlwind of changing the artistic movements of the early 20th century has accelerated into a kaleidoscope state of coexisting movements from the past. The futurist's vision of blurred confusion has come to fruition in the form of a society in which we choose eras of the past to emulate without a current, cohesive theory or vision of our own. A brief walk around the mall will afford the sight of people wearing clothing, which imitates fashions from virtually every decade of the last century. These past, heartfelt movements are now merely choices and flavors on the shelf that we may choose to discard.
In answer to the question: "Are we more doubtful today about the possibility of our affecting life?" I would say most people are unaware that art could affect life, that it is not simply part of a marketing plan intended to sell them coffee or a car.
Do you think that we are more doubtful today about the possibility of art affecting life?
My reply:
If the early 21st century were to be defined in a single term, I feel that term would best be "cynicism." We are leaving an era of post-World War II excess and consumerism, which has defined life in terms of marketing. The majority of people today consume art as a part of a product. It is understandable that the majority of people today, when faced with artistic creations, are suspicious that "someone is trying to sell them something" because this is often literally the case. Any new artistic concept or style is just another marketing ploy as insincere as Starbucks' pseudo-primitive decorations were Disney's plastic childhood.
The whirlwind of changing the artistic movements of the early 20th century has accelerated into a kaleidoscope state of coexisting movements from the past. The futurist's vision of blurred confusion has come to fruition in the form of a society in which we choose eras of the past to emulate without a current, cohesive theory or vision of our own. A brief walk around the mall will afford the sight of people wearing clothing, which imitates fashions from virtually every decade of the last century. These past, heartfelt movements are now merely choices and flavors on the shelf that we may choose to discard.
In answer to the question: "Are we more doubtful today about the possibility of our affecting life?" I would say most people are unaware that art could affect life, that it is not simply part of a marketing plan intended to sell them coffee or a car.