I would rather not comment on the arts of today other than to say that I think any comment is futile; when a decadence sets in and really gets rolling, there is nothing can stop it; it must run its course before a renaissance can begin.
Charles Burchield (1893-2967)
The "counter-arts" have been with us since times which pre-date William Blake, but art critics first became upset with the decadence of artistic endeavour about seventy years ago, when the world seemed inundated by a flood of painting "styles": impressionism, post-impressionism, construction painting, dada, surrealism, social realism, magic realism, abstract expressionism and pop art, and this is a very short list! These "isms" emerged to confuse art critics, who either responded by making a last-ditch attempts to defend whatever art momentarily prevailed, or more logically, hopped on the current band wagon and rode it until the engine driving it broke down. Proclaiming the discovery of "new art" was always dangerous for art writers since something "newer" is inevitably in the wings. The upsets of the twentieth century must have led to interesting times for the editorial boards of major art magazines, which came to resemble the gatherings of political-writers prior to a presidential campaign in the United States. It would be a good guess that some uneasy compromises had to be fashioned to create a safe platform on which critics might stand for a short time.
Tags:
Share
-
▶ Reply to This