[Mischa Milosevic]

Thank you Steven. Again you bring up some weary important points. There can be little doubt that the chaotic condition of art today has caused confusion in the minds of artists, young and old. We are all asking - by what qualities, according to present standards, can a painting be judged? Is there still a solid foundation on which to base the teaching of art? Is art deteriorating, or is it being revitalized by new concepts?

At the bottom of the national and political crisis today is the struggle for individual liberty and freedom of expression.It is therefore no coincidence that art has moved with the times and given the artist more freedom of expression than was ever known in the history of art.

There is always the danger that freedom can be abused. In art this means that the man/woman without knowledge or ability is granted the same freedom as the skilled technician. Freedom is based on the assumption that the individual is morally and socially responsible, and to grant it to irresponsibility is like opening toe doors to everyone who ever perpetrated a crime against society.

There are painters wielding the brush who do not possess one iota of the fundamentals of art. We, today, have "art" that would make the old masters jump back into their graves, where they to see it. The good seems almost hopelessly mixed with the bad.

Then again, to condemn the past because it is not of the present would be as short-sighted as to stick only to the past for the sake of tradition. Because certain forms of art can become passe, there is no reason to believe that basic knowledge is passe also.

There are two satisfying and basic concepts by which artists have always worked and probably always will. Two dimensional art, art rendered on a flat plane, which will survive as ornamentation of one kind or another. Three dimensional art,art that will seek beauty of form. If we concede that ornamentation is the process of beautifying, then we find that beauty is the basis of both concepts. Mankind has from the beginning sought beauty, and by degrees added it to create beauty, another the desire to seek it or own is, a desire which evidence itself every day in the selection of our possessions. Whether it is creative or possessive, there is an innate desire for perfection, which broadly speaking is the basis for all progress. We seek to improve upon the efforts, accomplishments and worldly goods of our neighbors. For the creative man there is instinctive pride in doing something better than others have done. On the possessive side, man wants the better product, the craftsmanship, the better home, the beautiful wife/husband. His/her desires in this direction seem to be limited only by the power to acquire, or the wherewithal to purchase. This drive toward creating beauty or possessing it is as basic to our lives as the air we breathe.

I think the great danger lies in allowing beauty to get bogged down in personal opinions, trends and isms, in narrowing our individual understanding to the dogmas prated by the few. Beauty must be free, belonging individually to you and me, as far as we are capable of grasping it. Beauty is all around us, waiting to be discovered and every artist interprets it on paper or canvas in his/her own particular way.

In our search for subjects to paint we may concentrate our attention merely on beauty of form, texture or color. There is beauty to be found in pure geometrical forms, in spacing, in creating surfaces, planes and abstract forms.

Realism can be creative, in the selection of the subject and in rendering that subject as it is seen and felt by you as an individual. You may paint an impression in broad terms or you may paint with great fidelity do detail and either way achieve a fine creative work of art. The subject is not the picture it is the way in which it is rendered that makes or breaks a work of art. Abstract art and realistic art are simply two different forms of approach and who is to say that one approach is any better than the other.

Today there seems to be a strong trend toward spontaneous, creative expression, without much regard for classical training. The creative urge is stronger than the will to study and acquire knowledge as the masters did in the past. Therefore we see paintings by men/women who have little or no academic knowledge, by men/women who are endeavoring to paint what they feel rather than what they see. We cannot deny them their right to express themselves in this manner, for it is entirely possible that a thing of beauty may be acheaved by working from an emotional standpoint. In fact, the lack of one element may be more than compensated for by another, for, as everyone knows, there are many academic and expertly painted pictures that express so little emotion that they fail altogether as creative works of art. They can be trite and stiff and lacking altogether in both spirit and originality.

It is true, however, that the abstractionist without a classical training works against greater odds than the experienced realist does. He/she is like a man/woman building a house without any knowledge of the carpenter's trade. All knowledge must come by way of experiment and innate craftsmanship, and he/she faces the extra hazard of being completely misunderstood. His/her creativeness must overshadow his technical faults and lack of technical knowledge is extremely difficult to conceal for long. Imagine the "pro artist" that has not attained and mastered is craft. He/she is asked to produce a work of art outside his/her studio. No photos, no copy machines, no tracing papers etc. Sure we can learn much by copying but without a structured education such a artist will be lost. Such an artist will resort to the gift of gab.

One style is usually the outcome or, one might say, the refinement of another as the artist gains in experience and dexterity.

In viewing gallery exhibitions today, we must understand that many canvases are hung without the remotest expectation of ever being sold. Many are exhibited for the sole purpose of educating the public to new concepts in art. But if the viewer bears in mind that many such works by modern artists are more in the nature of experiments than they are representations of an ideal, his/her attitude toward modern art is likely to be more lenient.

My own opinion is that the canvases that will stand the test of time will be only those with inherent beauty, those which stand on their own merits and can be appreciated without high-sounding literary explanations by the avant-guard reviewer.