Alexi Sayle stopped producing artwork......?

Question

because, he said, he couldn't explain why he was painting the things he was. This was after 3yrs at Art College.And by all accounts he was very good.
Do you think that you HAVE to understand a piece of art to be allowed to like it and do you have to be able to explain why?
Or are you of the opinion " I don't know much about Art but I know what I like"?

Answer 1

This question is a very good one, but i feel it will not give you the answers you are looking for,however i shall attempt to enlighten you, as i see it. any artist who recognizes his art form sits within a section that is fairly well defined, painters sculptors, etc ect, they then define that down to contemporary, installationist conceptual, ect there in lies the problem for many artist are outside of the definition
not only are artists who are post war have to be able to slot thier work into the assemblages of the la belling within their chosen Field. you are asked to Analise your own work, to make a rational explanation of it ,what was motivation, where did you derive your inspiration from, what other artist had an influence upon your subject, how did they deal with the chosen medium.
If you buy in to the merchandising of art, these analytical studies of your own work are almost mandatory, you have to explain your work. from your account he could not, i suspect that far from not knowing why he was painting the way he was, it was more a case of him not wanting to buy into the merchandising of art
to obtain his qualification he would have been required to offer some explanation, as indicated above.
I personally do not think that all art needs explaining,some are required to be explained because of the conceptual nature of the work in question. an example would be the marble carving of the thalidomide artist Alision Lapper by Damien Hurst, there is no explanation from my perspective required. he did not carve the work, he paid others to do that, but it was his conceptual thought that initiated the work.
And i am of the opinion that art is what art is it is a reflection of the artist thoughts at that time,wether that can hold my interest is a personal thought, and is purely subjective to the work on view.
regards FL