So how did these artists, from the last post, become feral in the first place a gentle reader would like to know. Turns out it’s an interesting story of international intrigue and the sheer power of concentrated wealth to shape human consciousness -- something to ponder. The details of how it was done, names and dates, are well documented, as well as the stated and unstated motives for why.
That was long ago, yet an event so catastrophic art history began over at year one. State sponsored 'radical extremists' stormed the bastions of art, already sadly demoralized by a devastating war, lifted a leg to art history and slathered the walls with slung and smeared paint. An ‘influenced’ press called them heroes, and false-front foundations started trading chunks of cash, on paper, for a piece of them, since the public wouldn’t buy any for a generation or two.
Books by the learned were published by the truckload explaining that slavishly ‘copying nature’ was a sign of retro-grade stupid, lack of imagination commercial crap, such as that, whereas this smearing and scraping portends deep wells of significance, meaning, as well as being a commercial bonanza for that most elite brand of hustler specializing in ‘intangibles,’ all sizzle and no steak at all. Teaching institutions happily withdrew from public scrutiny and began promoting art only a grant committee, or some other faculty member, could love.
The unseen collateral damage was suffered primarily by two groups, independent artists who felt an urge to communicate with those around them, and a public robbed of their own visual heritage and art’s significant influence in their lives. Painters who for some reason just wanted to paint what they saw were 'internally exiled' to menial occupations in their hometowns, and that includes established artists run out of NY, careers terminated, when the abstractionists first came to power.
That’s how come wooly artists lurk in the woods working as printers and waiters and such, because the academics who control access to the public through non-profit galleries and university activities won’t even acknowledge them as artists, won’t accept their artwork in competitions, ignores them completely and urges everyone else to. They protect their small, self-selecting elitist turf, and who can blame them? Up until now they’ve been holding all the cards, including what gets reviewed in local media, but times are changing.
Long estranged, a public suddenly curious and increasingly aware that art offers satisfactions which can’t be had by just constantly buying new stuff, and the artists, heating their studios with sterno cans and wearing out their clothes, can finally find each other, stagger across the dmz of academic disapproval to reconnect in local businesses, bars and restaurants, and galleries devoted to local art. This authentic movement will eventually replace the cardboard edifice of the current art establishment.
This article was recently cited on facebook: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/modern-art-was-cia-weapon-1578808.html
No comments:
Post a Comment