Art that does not stOit

[LCR]

Chronicle Rafael ants in the journal L'Ekspress », 29.10.2009

I translated an article by a relatively small influential French critic, some of the arguments seemed to me it is not devoid of common sense.

Why the actual art is elite? First, the quality of the works of current artists are often extremely doubtful, therefore, to justify its existence and success of contemporary art appeals to the common place, stating: that it is impossible to understand genius by definition. Indeed, how to sell brown rectangles on the gray squares, watermelon on a pedestal (exhibited at FIAC-2009) and other products for the minimalism that hides the emptiness? The only way - to rely on the audience snobbery, are proud to see the boldness and novelty of such proizvedeney, picks up their hidden meaning, and are willing to surrender to the anathema of all skeptics who christened their herd of reactionaries, fuddy-duddy or just fools?
Secondly, because the actual art is individualistic: how not to be a maverick when you consider that in order to become an artist, it is enough to express yourself? Actual art, mixing, according to our irritable academician Jean Clair, "to the idiocy, which expresses infantile whims of the individual, confident that he owed nothing to anybody," was the scene of surprising roles of displaced, in which the artist to be easier than a spectator. Paradoxically, Hermeticism (and, therefore, and elitism) of modern art due to the democratization of the gesture of the artist: "Taking ourselves seriously and completely replacing talent alone the desire to express himself, he frees himself from any effort - in particular, of trying to be clear and understood. But when anyone can become an artist, art does not address to anyone. In this sense, the audience of modern art right in believing that modern art does not exist, but there is so much actual arts, how much actual artists.
Finally, and most importantly, because the actual art is conceptually and replaces emotion thought. In contrast to the visual arts actual art requires explanation. In this sense, under the guise of avant-garde, it revives the Platonic aesthetics, which asserts that beauty is only a means to achieve truth, and therefore art is not self-sufficient, it must serve some purpose. Thus the works of modern art is doubly speculative: their value is determined by the market, because they do not apply to the sensitivity of the viewer, but to his mind.

[NATA NOVA]

Сообщение от LCR

Actual art .... it became the scene of displaced surprising roles, in which the artist to be easier than a spectator.

Сообщение от LCR

Finally, and most importantly, because the actual art is conceptually and replaces emotion thought.

Сообщение от LCR

Thus the work of modern art is doubly speculative: their value is determined by the market, because they do not apply to the sensitivity of the viewer, but to his mind.

QUOTE="LCR; 675351"] The only way out - make a bet on snobbery spectator, are proud to see the boldness and novelty of such proizvedeney, picks up their hidden meaning, [/QUOTE]
And the snobs have always been there and will be! (Lived snobbery, snobbery is alive, snobbery will live !")..
Novem again: "demand determines supply"? (or both H.: The proposal defines the demand?)

[таша]

Сообщение от LCR

Why is the actual art is elite? First, the quality of the works of current artists are often extremely doubtful, therefore, to justify its existence and success of contemporary art appeals to the common place, stating: that it is impossible to understand genius, by definition

Quality is a relative term. For example, Raphael paintings by Kandinsky certainly seemed to be of poor quality daubs, than they certainly are not. If we consider the work of modern art as a kind of "thing", like any commodity, designed and manufactured by some large producer of consumer goods, many of them (the works of modern art), it is qualitatively satisfied. Another thing is that this quality is "thing".
I think the actual art elite rather why:

Сообщение от LCR

because the actual art is conceptually and replaces emotion thought. In contrast to the visual arts actual art requires explanation.

and

Сообщение от LCR

because they do not apply to the sensitivity of the viewer, but to his mind.

Perceive the product at the level of feelings and emotions really is much easier than trying to comprehend something.

Сообщение от LCR

Second, because the actual art is individualistic: how not to be a maverick when you consider that in order to become an artist, it is enough to express yourself?

In my opinion, current artists no longer express themselves, passing it the right "naive" and "Salon".
I think that as a result of "bombing" of modern human visual information in the art of an era of inflation picture. What led to the emergence of "poor", conceptual art forms. Some kind of protest forms. Artist simply nowhere to go. The concepts of beautiful, expressive quality or long prisvoiny "compartment", so in the field of contemporary artist's concepts are ugly, inexpressive, and poor. And this is not the fault of the artist, but rather a misfortune.

[Jasmin]

I remembered how at one site an artist all his work (quite high quality) gave the same name: "For the nervous, not painting." Enjoyed not only works, but the author's wit and understanding of the situation

[Pavel]

Repetition, variation, kompelirovanie do these things dull and sluggish. Long gone are discovering new ways of 20-30g. Make orrrriginalnoe enough-one must be still and talent. Talent rare thing.

[таша]

Сообщение от Pavel

Talent rare thing.

And difficult to define.

Сообщение от Pavel

Do not orrrriginalnoe

Exactly. Originality too long ago privatized design.