English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

What are the implications of the public's general disinterest in fine art?

To me, it seems like your average joe doesn't much care for works of "high concept." Theory has dominated discourse in a way so that no artist wants to be too specific, too this, or too that. It has imposed normative standards on art. (This has been done in the past, but contemporary discourse definitely condemns it as censorship by the state, etc...) Do you think these judgements (what is and is not good art, kitzche, craft, bad art, cliche, etc...) are justified and well reasoned? Are they a brand of regulation, making the art experts's discourse contradictory.

Also, the public has become disengaged with the concepts guiding the work. I am curious if anyone has thoughts on why that might be.

Moreover, I mostly am interested in:
1. Whether you think this assessment is correct.
2. What does it mean to have such a large part of (contemporary American) society wary of the fine art world?

2006-10-04 12:19:11 · 2 answers · asked by The Sushi King 3 in Arts & Humanities Visual Arts Other - Visual Arts

2 answers

Indeed the average Joe does not care much for works of high concept because art has become too secularized in its scope for the average person to approach. Especially in terms of postmodern art, the amount of theory, coupled with the amount of art history that you need to approach an appreciation of postmodern art is just not practical for most Americans with their busy lives.
A majority of Americans still hold onto this antiquated, Academy style concept of art which is why you have quasi-artists such as Thomas Kincaide who make millions and who are known by a majority of most mall shopping Americans whereas you have talented artists such as Bruce Nauman or for that matter Joseph Beuys who live in complete obscurity outside the secularized art community. The only modern artist of recent times that I can recall who seems to have pinched a nerve of interest within the United States was Andy Warhol, and thats only because his work was consumed with what makes Americans American, consumerism.
So what does it mean to have a large part of contemporary American society disengaged and wary of fine art? You sort of have to ask yourself what does art have to offer most americans that they dont already get. One of the functions of art(at least past functions) is to transform the ordinary into the sublime, but most americans already seem to get their fair share of the sublime in movies and tv. One of the other past functions of art, at least in the pre photography days was to inform people of important events. Again Americans have access to information coming from all directions. Though I can imagine the form of postmodern art it is really hard for me as an artist to really contemplate what is the function of postmodern art, it certainly is not well defined, though definately guided in certain directions. It is my understanding that when a theorys function is not securely understood or grounded that the output will hence be obscured itself. That is not to say that I don't appreciate postmodern art. I am really enthusiastic about the work that is going on in the field of new media art. Then again this is a field which is even more secularized, the amount of theory:Baudrillard, Godard coupled with the amount of knowledge I had to acquire in simple computer programming is just something that most people dont have time for. Truly this is a field which is at an instersection between art and science. Oh, and regarding brand of regulation being a good or bad thing, wasn't it the Academy system which modern art broke away from, and the reason as to art became so much more interesting? Then again rules and regulatory arenas are good for artists sometimes, it challenges them, sort of a double edged knife I suppose. Also my apologies for that bigfoot artist joke yesterday, I was being facaecious, so the yo mama thing wasnt so nice. I love art and artist, I was just giving the person what they wanted to hear.

2006-10-04 16:18:23 · answer #1 · answered by wackywallwalker 5 · 0 0

Personally, I think we're in 'po-po-mo' now. (post post modernism) Everything has been re re done. Nothing is original anymore, and I think that could be the view of joe public. They are not interested, nor care, for re-makes. They do not understand or want to know the concpets behind it all / the purpose of why things are re-made.
Your average person wants something that looks like what it's supposed to, and that would match their curtains in the living room!

2006-10-04 23:27:36 · answer #2 · answered by nijikin 2 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers