|
"Art Speak" is applied to realism as well as "Modern Art" and in either case what writers and critics have to say is far too often more of their own creative effort to say and write something equal to the works in question. Or worse yet to establish their own esteem or bias.
Though my efforts have been almost exclusively in the area of realistic painting I have an honest appreciation for what has been done under the heading of "Modern Art" but stopped reading the "Arts" magazines in the 60's because I found it uncomprehensible, tortured and unlikely to give much of a clue as to what the artist intended.
I bought Tom Wolfe's book "The Painted Word" (because you read it) and found his ranting was mostly his argument with writers and critics who made their living publishing their view of what made "art" and I believe he slights the serious attempts of artists to suggest that it is the writers (and dealers) who have determined the direction of artist. This is somewhat insulting to the many artists that have chosen to pursue a career that usually provides no great reward for most of them short of finding teaching positions.
The writers that are intent on making modern artists work a cruel hoax are no better than those writers that thought it neccessary to declare realism passe and of little merit throughout the 20th century.
The title "The Painted Word" is apt as the writers and critics try to explain and "paint" in word what might be better left to the artist and his efforts.
In his epilogue Wolfe suggested that in the year 2000 (25 years after his book was published) when the Met or MOMA has a retrospective of American Art 1945-1975, the three artist featured will be not Pollock, de Kooning, and Johns---but Greenberg, Rosenberg, and Steinberg. (Several of the many writers, critics and tastemakers of that era) That sounds a lot like too much importance is placed on the written/painted word and I would hope that all artist would continue to develop their skills and follow the directions of heart and instinct and keep the writers and critics at length.
I for one do not need the bias and have seen a lot of good and mediocre art from many schools of painting and strange explanations for and against their work. Most should be ignored.
|