Who bans representational art? Various rigid religious and political systems have either suppressed the representation of gods, persons, any living thing, anything at all, or sponsored only art which supported their interpretation of life on earth, and banned everything else. Examples both ancient and modern abound, and there’s a reason why. For humans, earth is a test kitchen, and it turns out there are several ways to bake the cake. Getting along with each other and sustaining ourselves can be done myriad different ways, but in order to obtain anything like law and order it’s going to be necessary to recruit most people to one way of thinking.
Unless some very focused citizen is just loaded with charisma it’s probably going to be easiest to get them when they’re small and groom their minds for one set of rules, and that’s going to mean limiting the ideas they’re exposed to. There was a time it was thought communism harbored some sort of awful verbal virus that infected the minds of anyone it contacted, and speakers were banned from college campuses, etc. Pictures are even worse because they can be seen by about anyone, and translation from one language to another, not a problem. Even the illiterate can see.
It would seem there are two opposing camps in visual art, non-referential or modern art refers to the movement that broke from tradition about the middle of the last century, with earlier antecedents, and derivations still prevail in the courts of the inordinately wealthy, and this genre of non-objective art has also been generously supported by the state. Seemingly opposed is so-called ‘retinal art,’ generally the people’s choice, a term for art which seems to look like stuff, the more traditional notion. Turns out it’s all a big misunderstanding. There really is no argument here, folks, move along. It was all a trick with mirrors in the first place.
All painters take the same chance, start in the same place, and isn’t that one of the charm’s of visual art? Does it illustrate a story, is it advocating for a political idea or a commercial product, or is it speaking to the person inside with intensity and directness, doesn’t matter. Put everything up at once, lose the referees, and see what happens. One thing certain, the state -- the many tiered NEA, universities and such, shouldn’t really be taking sides, particularly against representational art, such a motley crew to fall in with.
Unless some very focused citizen is just loaded with charisma it’s probably going to be easiest to get them when they’re small and groom their minds for one set of rules, and that’s going to mean limiting the ideas they’re exposed to. There was a time it was thought communism harbored some sort of awful verbal virus that infected the minds of anyone it contacted, and speakers were banned from college campuses, etc. Pictures are even worse because they can be seen by about anyone, and translation from one language to another, not a problem. Even the illiterate can see.
It would seem there are two opposing camps in visual art, non-referential or modern art refers to the movement that broke from tradition about the middle of the last century, with earlier antecedents, and derivations still prevail in the courts of the inordinately wealthy, and this genre of non-objective art has also been generously supported by the state. Seemingly opposed is so-called ‘retinal art,’ generally the people’s choice, a term for art which seems to look like stuff, the more traditional notion. Turns out it’s all a big misunderstanding. There really is no argument here, folks, move along. It was all a trick with mirrors in the first place.
All painters take the same chance, start in the same place, and isn’t that one of the charm’s of visual art? Does it illustrate a story, is it advocating for a political idea or a commercial product, or is it speaking to the person inside with intensity and directness, doesn’t matter. Put everything up at once, lose the referees, and see what happens. One thing certain, the state -- the many tiered NEA, universities and such, shouldn’t really be taking sides, particularly against representational art, such a motley crew to fall in with.
No comments:
Post a Comment