I found myself defending this art (that I did not have a particular like for) against my four friends, who demanded to know why this should be seen as art. Is it art? Yes and no. But should it be dismissed outright? No.
Just because we don’t understand something, doesn’t automatically mean that it is bad. When at first you read ‘Romeo and Juliet’, did you understand every line that Shakespeare wrote? If I sat down and looked at a French poem, I wouldn’t have a clue to the meaning, despite recognising the letters. So why is it that people who know nothing about art, assume that everything they would need to know about it is there right in front of them?
Where I work a new exhibition has just opened, called ‘Pursuit of Imperceptibility: Crypto’ by Dick Bixby. Basically the title means – as far as I can tell anyway – looking or trying to find what you can’t see/hear/touch, even if it is hidden. I like the art more now that I understand the title. The more time I spend in the gallery, the more I see. Yesterday a tiny person popped out of the black paint. Art doesn’t have to be easy or difficult. It just is. I think it’s important to remember that, even if it means defending some bright blue scrawled paint on a white wall.
I think that you are spot on.
Contemporary art is about letting go. Letting go of one perspective. Of one way of looking. Myriad perspectives. A dazzling array of ideas all clamouring for attention. A bit like life, really. Juggling soot, this is what we do every day. Work, home, kids, shopping, looking, feeling, learning, being. Should art have to affirm one idea at a time?
Pollock could do it, so could Rothko but not the many pretensious “artists” who it would seem get degrees for lazy work from failed lazy artists, so called teachers.
Geoff Powell.
http://www.geoffpowellart.co.uk