we want art with actual aesthetic appeal!!
What's with all of this art that has no beauty? Some would argue that art is about beauty alone, that this is the entire meaning of art, period. Art has to have aesthetic qualities as an inherent characteristic, that is, there has to be something about the piece that is beautiful. Not pretty, but pleasing to the eye. Or more than that, outright beautiful (see my other blog about eros and art). We've been exposed to so much art in our times that rejects the aesthetic elements that any work should have. This is much to do with post- Warhol- and- pals- artwork that started happening after the 60's. It's theories rejected `old' concepts that art had to be beautiful so that they could get on with delivering the statement without the decorative packaging. While I kind of agree with this idea in some creative circumstances, this is definately inappropriate territory for still behaving like we're protesting about culture in the '70's. There's a time and place for everything, that time was the '70's. Before I was even born. There's heaps to protest about, I agree but art can't lose it's identity, part of which includes the nature of objects which projects beauty in some way, not only cultural and conceptual clarity. The work has to glow or make you feel in awe or make you feel something like elation. I'd go as far as saying it has to make you feel good, which is what I try and achieve in my own work. Newspapers and television are the arenas for debating sociology. Art is different. Which reminds me of one of my other posts about the importance of skill in artwork- you need more than talent to make something beautiful. Art today is definitely not without defecit in the department of skilled technicians. While there's lots of entertainment- based creative activity going on, how much of it is actually QUALITY? Which is why the female figure has always been an icon in artwork over history, it's an undeniably beautiful form- which is different from seeing it as sexually attractive, the boundaries of which often blur. Sex in art is a different topic, valid but not enirely the same.
VERMEER
VELAZQUEZ
HOCKNEY
HOCKNEY (a recent offering)
WARHOL
WARHOL
DELACROIX
COURBET
COURBET
