One day when I
felt brave and wanted to clear up some doubts I got ready to answer some
questions which go round in my head in no order whenever I hear the word ‘Art’.
The first thing that draws my attention is the fact that we live in an age in
which texts, publications, circles and experts discussing art appear by the
thousand, so I think of another word: ‘Paradox’. The more people talk about Art,
the more confused we are about what it means: Is everything Art ? Why not ? Who
sets the limits ? In the age of freedom people are not free to define Art
because a definition implies setting limits and everyone, every expert, has an
interest in some limits; people working for an avant-garde, ultra-modern
publication will be interested in a definition which tends towards everything
goes, criticizing figuring as obsolete and will want to be so progressive that
they would even swap heaven for hell provided that something changes and would
defend a can of paint thrown blindly as long as it gets sold even though in
their heart they are dying to hang a Rembrandt in their house. The defender of
the interests of a collection of 18th or 19th century paintings would tell us
that that was real art, that the craft has disappeared today etc.
More paradoxes: we are given reasons why a painter produces a work in one way or another and then sold the idea that art is not rational. We are told that teachers are not necessary, that they contaminate, that nobody does better than the teacher and yet many times an artist has been looked down on for not being recommended by a gallery owner or critic. Is the artist free? Who would give a chance to an artist who wasn’t an admirer of Picasso? Their work would be judged before being exhibited.
[ BIOGRAPHY | OIL PAINTING | WATERCOLOUR | NOTES&INTERVIEW ]
Copyright ©2003-2012 AnaPardo.com - All rights reserved
Public contact: firstname.lastname@example.org
Personal contact: email@example.com