Skip to content

On art

“Art” a concept that I have some problems with. When I go to a museum, especially one of “modern” or “contemporary art” I always have to think of the idea that Ananda Coomaraswamy had about art. “Real art” in the eyes of Coomaraswamy is produced when an artist raises him-/herself upto the heavens, takes the ‘idea’ down and makes a good ‘copy’ of it in our domain. (Compare the idea to the world of ideas of Plato.) The work of art is something usefull, something that is used in daily life. With this in mind, a spoon is a work of art, a painting in most cases not. So did the word “art” undergo a grave degeneration? Did the meaning change so drastically that art can now be a large piece of canvas painted black or is there something else? In several books Coomaraswamy questions the usefullness and necessity of museums. Why look at things that should actually be used and if the pieces cannot be used, what is the use of them? Does what we call art today still serve a purpose or is art nothing more than estheticism or the result of someone’s creativity? In most cases it is “look but don’t touch”, now and then something interactive may be made. Also it seems that 99% of the works of art are made to be displayed in a museum, in some public space or elsewhere.
When in New York we visited three museums of modern art; the famous MoMA (Museum of Modern Art), the even more famous Guggenheim and DIA: a bit “upstate” in Beacon. DIA: is an enormous factory complex turned into a museum with large rooms. It has some dull pieces, such as circles and squares on the floor of a large room or dozens of almost-the-same Warhol paintings on the four sides of a large room and enormous metal objects. Nice to look at maybe (sometimes), but is this what we call art nowadays? The Guggenheim has an exhibition of Richard Prince. This exhibition goes from too all-American photos of bikers, biker-women, streetcars, etc. to large plates with jokes to sculptures made from car-parts. Here and there these things are come up with nicely, but in general it all was too American for me. When I was ahead of my girlfriend a bit too far, I sat down and started to listen to the audio-set that was pushed into my hands when entering the museum (which I didn’t really want) and heard some of the background of the artist, the exhibition and the ideas behind the pieces that are shown. It proved that the artist wanted to enlarge typical American things as a form of criticism. When listening further the ideas were actually quite interesting and the exhibition became more enjoyable even when I didn’t really like most of the pieces. Also my girlfriend bought a DVD about and including interviews with Joseph Beuys who supposedly has been a major figure and influence in the field of modern art. Beuys had some peculiar and sometimes interesting ideas and obviously wanted to convey a message with his weird installations, a spiritual message even. It seems that afterall this kind of art does have a message, or at least wants to confuse people so that they start to think. The purpose of art seems to have shifted from material usefullness to ‘mental usefullness’. The point with many contemporary artists is -though- that you won’t get the message if you don’t know the idea behind the works. Moreover, art has become a matter of esthetics and taste. While a spoon not necessarily has to be beautiful, a contemporary artist won’t make it just because of his or her message. Some art-scene-bigcheese will have to like the work in order to bring it to museums and to bring some acknowledgement to the artist.
All in all, modern art is not really my thing. Sometimes there is some amasement, but when I see that most museums of modern art, whether in Europe or America, mostly have the same artists and styles and that “modern” often means 50 years old, I have my doubt about the ‘groundbreakingness’ of modern art or even the esthetic value. It seems that what used to be called art, is nowadays called “craft” and what was creativity is now called art. Museums seem mostly to be for recreation and art to provide the people something different from daily life. The way concepts change…
So what do you think? Is shit in a can in a museum, art? Is a painting of Mondriaan art? And a painting by Rembrandt? What makes art, art?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *