I am one of the many Jerry Saltz facebook followers - i think there are 5000 of us or so....anytime he announces that he is cleaning house and taking out followers - i comment to please leave me in. I want to be in the group, man!
He has so far. We'll see.
But maybe I don't even deserve it - i will 'like' something but i don't comment very often...i am on the periphery...ever since i got into some kind of digital argument with another of his followers. It was about women in art and that's a sore spot for me (there are so many people out there trying to be provocative and poke at obvious non- politically correct sore spots for their own sport {i hate those people- they are only out for themselves and their own arrogant inside joke - bastards that need to be hit in the nuts} and they get me rowdy on sexism...still to this day... even if i try not to fall for it anymore.
Anyway - i do often read Jerry's fb posts and his ny mag articles from time to time (not often enough). I find that when reading them, i get drawn into the comments that whirl around and around and back and forth ... and hours later.... oh, i just don't have that kind of time! I honestly get lost in it. I could dive in more but I often avoid going too deep because I get overwhelmed.
Well, today, in between working - I was trying to lightly read a jerry article:
"Ask an Art Critic: Jerry Saltz Answers Your Questions About London Art and Power Lists"
(Actually, i haven't even read it yet. I will after this post and some dayjob work is done) I was somehow drawn into some comments first - jesus - comments about people trying to understand contemporary art, viewing art, conceptual theory etc.
This one gentlemen, JustinRWood, wrote eloquently about how he thinks people should look at art. It was a long thread, taking up three comment sections but I'm posting some of it here:
"Frank Gillette told me while I was at SVA about experiments that were done with newly hatched chicks. Apparently after they were hatched the researchers cast shadows on them. When the chicken hawk shadow was cast over them, they ran in fear. When they cast shadows of other non threatening birds over them, they didn't react. So somehow that fear of the chicken hawk shadow/shape was pre-engineered into the chickens. And he told me that that was what art is. "
"Looking for the intended experience in a work of art is the same thing as looking for an intended experience in life. There isn't one. Its all about leading you in to have your own experience. It is out of the artists hand.
Now, of course there is a lot writing that has been done, and there is entire scope of art history to which new works of art are always compared against and are made to fit into - but that structure is an illusion as well. Having knowledge of art history and reading criticism of contemporary art can help to enrich your experience - but they are certainly not necessary to the experience. Certainly there are a lot of artists that play with themes from art history and many many many of them that endlessly repeat certain styles and movements. So knowing about that stuff helps you to make connections and contextualize the work, but it isn't necessary."
"The perception of inaccessibility is an illusion. Artists use that to hide the fact that the work does not actually mean anything.
My most moving experiences with works of art are those with which I have no thought going through my mind. They wipe thought away and bring me into that meditative hum of consciousness feeling. That is what I am looking for works of art to do for me. They are how I get to that religious feeling."
I love what Justin has said. Don't get me wrong, I also have an affection for theory, art history, and philosophy - I can go there (there are degrees in which i go there in comparison to others that go there more often and in a deeper way than myself but, still, I do like some theory).
There is something so liberating about what he has said. And its not like i haven't heard every side of this argument -- but I think there are many people out there that hate art because of the inaccessibility - and why shouldn't they? Of course they do. Considering how much I love art, I am appreciative of Justin's words - it will allow those that felt left out to enter. It allows me, as an art maker, to not over-analyze my work while I'm making it - analyze it with others later and let it be what it is.
refreshing.
No comments:
Post a Comment