Facebook
Twitter
YouTube
What is art?
Why pay good money to see something you can see for free?
Art… what does it mean today? What did it mean half a millennium ago? I suppose that decision can be left up to the individual. This however, is not to say that art always has to be looked at subjectively. Oscar Wilde once wrote that it was “impossible for an artist not to reveal a part of himself in his art, yet arts main objective is still to conceal the artist and reveal the artwork”. Look on this how you will, I am only writing this piece in order to stir the waters.
To me, art must have meaning, some depth and a little substance. Otherwise why bother? Art should not simply ‘be’. I feel it should exist more to prove itself, to state something on a deeper level than what my simple mind could ever comprehend. Art has existed since the creation of man, from the original Palaeolithic beings painting wild beasts on cave walls right up to modern days. Somewhere in between this, I think we got very confused… I am not here to pass my opinion on to you nor am I writing in order to undermine any ‘artistes’. I do have my own opinion which I will express though.
From my VERY miniscule comprehension of art as a broad subject I can recognise the so called masterpieces: Edvard Munch, Da- Vinci, Van Gogh…all of these names spring to mind. More often than not, in a world disassociated with cultural art, names are forgotten while the image is embedded in our minds. All of these artists have claims to fame for their work, and it is only right to have these in galleries today, so that we, the public can appreciate them. We should appreciate the effort and creativity that was so carefully poured into the soul of these images.
There is however one small critique I have about art: modern art. I use this term in the general sense, not specifically referring to modern art as a genre, but more to the modern artists of our world who have sprung up everywhere in the last few years. Maybe, it is I who is out of his mind but I do not appreciate some of the more radical forms of art that have been displayed recently. I can appreciate art, and traditionally it is quite a modest approach to expressing yourself, but nowadays there seems to be more art on the streets then there is in the art galleries!
If you can see something for free while walking your dog, and not have to put up with incessant snobs who can see the various layers of the piece and how the artist felt, and what he had for breakfast, why pay good money to go to an art gallery? I mean where do the lines of art and vandalism blur? It is easy to see many examples of fine art commissioned around this country in urban and local development schemes to keep youths off the street by making the neighbourhood more colourful. And who am I to argue? It is a great idea.
However…has the spray can ‘tag’ replaced the paintbrush stroke?
You can wander through any urban area now and see lovely slogans such as ‘Jamie is a ‘W@nker’. Nice. Paris is also a fine example of tag artistry taken to an extreme. Even in rush hour traffic, the bold adolescents tag vans and cars stuck at a standstill. Can vandalism be seen as a beautiful masterpiece with the youths of today’s society responsible?
I know one so called artist certainly can be seen as a beautiful creator. A man by the pseudonym of ‘Banksy’ has used his art to poke fun at capitalism, religion, law and fascism to name but a few. His artwork is revolutionary and inspiring to many. He truly emulates Oscar Wilde’s words. Everyone is left wondering who is this man, this mysterious Banksy? He has managed to conceal his being and instead reveal something much more in his art. Now that is art at its finest!
By: scruffyjoe
image
