2 ms·

I remember going to the museums on field trips and we kids would all love seeing what would've been the "modern" pieces that were on the tour list (I had some s

I remember going to the museums on field trips and we kids would all love seeing what would've been the "modern" pieces that were on the tour list (I had some somewhat eccentric teachers in middle school). Even in young adulthood (read: in college) I took many a date to MCA in the summers because, and maybe chalk this up to typical youth rebellion, I liked it. Only recently, because I can travel more now, have I gotten to see more Classical and Renaissance period art in person and, honestly, I feel completely robbed - or like I robbed myself. I look back on some of this stuff that we all looked at as "genius" (and would attempt to recreate in art class as kids with construction paper and elmer's glue) and it's just crap to me now. So I guess I disagree that "modern" art isn't "accessible". It seems that there's been a culture invented around it in order to make it look and feel more sophisticated than it actually is.

TheOtherHobbes 7y ago
The use of Abstract Expressionism as a deliberate propaganda tool to promote a politicised concept of "individual freedom" is well-documented. If there's nothing of lasting value there, that would be - ironic. I wouldn't go that far, but I also don't think you can recreate it with construction paper and Elmer's glue. As the OP says, a big element in Modernism is breaking (up) with the past, and you can only really do that once. The thing that gets hung on a wall is a snapshot of a process, and in Modernism the process is more important than the snapshot. What hasn't changed is the use of art as a status marker for the rich and powerful. Those glorious Classical and Renaissance pieces were painted for the same reason. In Modernism the-thing-on-the-wall is more of a repository of intellectual, cultural, and historical and commercial associations as a thing to look at for its own sake. The obvious manual labour - the representational brushstrokes in traditional art - were replaced with the intellectual labour of commercial self-justification as a value in itself. Essentially it's a semi-corporate sales exercise - which of course captures the culture around it much better than classical figurative painting would.
watwut 7y ago
We had to go to see many classic drawings and renaissance etc. It was mostly boring to me whole time. It does not have that awesome feel when you are a kid who is not artist and seen a lot of the same already.

TheOtherHobbes 7y ago

The use of Abstract Expressionism as a deliberate propaganda tool to promote a politicised concept of "individual freedom" is well-documented. If there's nothing of lasting value there, that would be - ironic. I wouldn't go that far, but I also don't think you can recreate it with construction paper and Elmer's glue. As the OP says, a big element in Modernism is breaking (up) with the past, and you can only really do that once. The thing that gets hung on a wall is a snapshot of a process, and in Modernism the process is more important than the snapshot. What hasn't changed is the use of art as a status marker for the rich and powerful. Those glorious Classical and Renaissance pieces were painted for the same reason. In Modernism the-thing-on-the-wall is more of a repository of intellectual, cultural, and historical and commercial associations as a thing to look at for its own sake. The obvious manual labour - the representational brushstrokes in traditional art - were replaced with the intellectual labour of commercial self-justification as a value in itself. Essentially it's a semi-corporate sales exercise - which of course captures the culture around it much better than classical figurative painting would.

watwut 7y ago

We had to go to see many classic drawings and renaissance etc. It was mostly boring to me whole time. It does not have that awesome feel when you are a kid who is not artist and seen a lot of the same already.