Sunday, January 24, 2010

Scoping an Audience Response

Marcel Duchamp's urinal is an example of a radical innovation that began the fascination of Concept Art. In 1917, Duchamp bought a porcelain urinal, painted "Richard Mutt" on the sides, sat it on a pedestal and entered it in as a sculpture to the New York Society of Independent Artists. The toilet wasn't accepted in the exhibition, but the idea behind the toilet as art grew passionately from his display. It may not be as enlightening or effervescent as Thomas Kinkade's impressionistic works, but it holds value as a radical innovation because it had bewildered and upset Duchamp's contemporaries, and continues to be of much debate in constituting what makes art. Duchamp's actions have created an entirely new era in art. Photographed porcelain toilets are becoming cliches. In some respect, the concept of Concept Art is becoming a cliche. If art is of the object itself, than why should we have to constitute it as art? Wouldn't everything already be art? The audacity of Duchamp has created a culture of pop art that continues to press the standards when deciding what should be called art.

The kind of person who would rather be excluded from Kinkade's admiring audience is someone with a darker view on humanity. He or she would not view the world in an effervescent glow. They would be far more realistic in knowing and believing that life is hard and full of struggle, dismal and gray. The types of art they admire may provoke a sense of realism, dread, fear, fall of humanity, death (Ruben, Carravaggio, Sally Mann, Kara Walker). They might prefer contemporary artists who work with portraits or stories, allegories, themes and fiction to provoke feelings of uneasiness and discourse (Kehinde Wiley, Richard Avedon, Tina Mion, Alex Melamid).

3 comments:

  1. I think you ask some great questions about what constitutes art. I am of the same mindset that a lot of "Concept Art" (as a movement) has become very cliche and in doing so has turned a number of would be modern, postmodern, or contemporary art lovers off of it. This concept of art as the object itself creates a wide range of perspectives from students, mostly negative, that I have seen in my field experiences when dealing with Duchamp and artists in his same vein. They tend to think that they can make it, especially if the object isn't transformed or distorted much, and hence it is not art. I think it is one of many struggles as an art teacher to challenge students' perceptions of what constitutes art, and to get them to see beyond the obvious "I can do that" or "it's just a toilet" argument and fully appreciate the message and idea behind the concept as art.
    As to Thomas Kinkade - I am not a fan of his work, but it is not because I prefer or have a darker view of humanity. I do know however that life is not all sunshine and rainbows, but that too is not why I dislike his work. I don't like his work simply because it is mass produced and does not suit my personal aesthetic.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Kinkade reminds me of that artist guy from public television with the big hair who talks like he's trying to get someone into putting down a gun with his very soft voice by putting them to sleep. Except, maybe he's a half-cousin to Donald Trump who has marketed himself as the Painter of Light.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Bob Ross?

    That's funny you say that. Because I love Bob Ross and do not enjoy Kinkade's artwork or personality at all.

    ReplyDelete