|
Q:
How do you see the state of contemporary international art? How does art
function in today’s global society?
A: I think the word “art” is difficult because
it covers so much. I prefer to discuss my own area of expertise, pictures.
Pictures in numerous media serve mankind in applications such as language,
entertainment, illustration, research and more. It also has a leading
edge of creative research. This is where I attempt to be with my artwork.
Pictures on the creative edge are what society seems to
expect of what is called painting when they seek the best of pictures.
But different shades of understanding admit different things as advanced.
Further, practical fulfillment differs from stated goals. While the art
lover may say they want advanced painting, they in fact may want something
they understand and are comforted by. Besides the art lover, there is
the collector who might temporarily secure excess value so that it will
not be lost in the maneuverings of finance. Many collectors also purchase
for the brag value of this or that ‘established’ artist. All
think that they are procuring pictures as the leading edge of development,
past or contemporary, and all hope for the preservation and increase of
its value.
It is important to remember however, that all these shades
of consumption of pictures, in the real or unproven creative edge, are
a part of capitalist exchange and as such are natural motion in the social
and economic workings of capitalism. It is equally important to remember
that this capitalist motion is part of the natural development of mankind
and that its findings are not false. We still need to understand the artists
this market embraces and why it embraces them just as we need to understand
the revolutionary artists and how they are affected by capitalist motion
and/or by the success or failure of revolutionary change.
The state of art follows the state of society, which since
the mid 19th century has experienced the growth of class struggle. Throughout
this period, advanced pictorial art has been created by those who support
working class revolution, whether with deep lifelong understanding or
for specific periods of revolutionary zeal. The remainder of artists,
the vast majority, range in shades of loyalty to the bourgeoisie or to
being unaware. Political intuition and their life’s situation have
enlightened them in different ways.
This graduation of persuasions from revolutionary enthusiasm
to levels of innocence to bourgeois loyalty asserts itself in the pictorial
arts. Historically, the revolutionary avant-guarde receives attention
from the bourgeois art market a bit late but is then embraced and co-opted
so that its message would be dulled. This co-optation takes many forms.
There are many examples, misrepresenting the Soviet Constructivists, setting
Arschille Gorky as a the first abstractionist, attempting to limit the
giant Diego Rivera, co-opting and terrorizing the Abstract Expressionists,
the disregarding of the American leftist Stewart Davis, embracing modernism,
washing it clean of its content, and finally condemning it as passé
by spokespersons of post-modernism.
We need to study the motion of the past century-and-a-half
within its own social and economic context and with the light of knowing
the maturing class contradictions worldwide. We also need to place it
within the larger perspective of the development of the visual language
since the earliest available record. Once we develop as clear and accurate
a view, we might then look for the nature of art’s motion and on
that basis deepen our capacity to judge what we study and give it its
proper place and description.
|