Where to find art (or "it")

Imagery

Information

Artist Statements

What is Sketchbook?

Work Information

Other

Where to find art (or "it")

"Admittedly, art making probably does require something special, but just what that something might be has remained remarkably elusive - elusive enough to suggest that it may be something particular to each artist, rather than universal to them all."

- David Bayles & Ted Orland (excerpt from Art & Fear)

The it of art

This philosophy/opinion is a combination of many theories that I have come across through the years.

Anyone interested in books and names should feel free to contact me, and I will provide the titles.

I have had many people tell me that they don't really have art in their lives. They don't go to galleries, so they don't see art, and they wouldn't know how to appreciate it anyway. I'm an artist, and even I can't find a whole lot of time to go to galleries to see it. They don't have any paintings in their homes, so they never see it. Who knows where it is, maybe I'm missing it. If I missed it, how would I know? They go on to say that they are studying (or wish they could study) art in order to be educated about it- because they don't get it.

They all want to know what the deal is with the orange NYC Central Park curtains, or the guy who shot himself, or the crucifix in the jar of urine. It makes them angry. In other words: I don't know much about art, but I know what I like. Most of the time, many people do not realize how much art is around them each day, so I thought I'd look around my surroundings to see what I found. But first...

What is it ? I have heard that everything can be art. If that is the case, then what isn't art? It seems as if anyone can be an artist, no matter what they do- or what they produce. What makes it art? I can only give my opinion on it.

The difference between a work of art, and a hobby or craft is the connection of artist and viewer, and a standard. A viewer must have some base knowledge (or standard) to work with (the previously mentioned adage of: I don't know much about art, but I know what I like...is just plain lazy). Would you go out and buy a car without doing any research? What about buying the first car you see? Are they all good simply because they are called "cars"? Once you have sought out a base understanding of art principles (what the universal & general rules are for appreciation), then you have to go out and look at art, a lot of art. What strikes you as "art"? What do they have in common? Every profession has a way of judging quality, and art is not an exception. Here are 3 good measurements once you have a base understanding (From author Ted Orland).

#1: Art should glorify a life-based or spiritual belief.

#2: Art should educate/enlighten our neighbors.

#3: Art must continue to expand our technical and cognitive abilities.

It has been argued for many years that art should not have to be held to the standards of the "Masters" (as in realism from the past-usually the 1600's through the 1800's), and I agree. But art has lost its way. The connection to a viewer no longer is vital in modern art. That changed with the phrase "Art for art's sake." Coined by the artist James Whistler in the early 20th century. This ushered in "modern art". The Modernist movement in art created a new way of thinking, but soon after- art didn't seem to think anymore. Increasingly, artists gravitated towards controversy, choosing shock over substance and depth that reached large groups. As the saying goes: the boundary pushers were just preaching to the choir. But, art continued on (as it always will because individual self-expression is vital to our survival). But in reality it is that connection of artist and viewer that gives art its power in society.

Art is powerful, and it is all around us.

Many people cringe when I say that there is "good" art and there is "bad" art. But there is good and bad in every field, there has to be. You cannot establish good, without having some scale that identifies bad.

The appreciation of art is based on generalized mechanics that provide for effective visual (and conceptual) analysis, add some appreciation for the overlooked elements, and maybe you have it. Even with Modernist concepts- Form is still the material used to create, and Content (or the message)-still matters. Yes, there are exceptions, but every time the rules are broken does not mean you have quality- or even art.

Adhering to principles that created great work some 2- 400 years ago is discriminatory towards the advancement of a civilization. But outright abandonment of sound principles simply for the sake of change leaves a cognitive vacuum. A balance of history and progression has the possibility to re-establish art as a powerful force in society. Change is necessary for us as a people. Are we supposed to just sit and listen to the same music over and over again? Should we continue with the same wars, the same marketing, the same trivial disputes, the same tractor-pulls, the same depressions, the same poverty, the same addictions? When is the same way not the only way? How do we go forward if we are always looking back?

To quote Susan Sontag: The only real answers DESTROY the questions.

(click on the thumbnail to enlarge)

The mainstays of it are painting, photography, sculpture, printing, architecture, design, drawing, and other main artistic formats...But it also is influenced by:

The appreciation of architecture, wood, stone, pattern, culture, shape, texture, and color (and it doesn't stop for snacks).

It appreciates light and shadow, nature, decorations, and skilled crafts-

and it enhances packaging, popular culture, products, and other fun stuff...