Aperture?

[Jim Chinn]

All art in some way reflects the time and circumstances in which it was made. So I understand the need to provide background to works that were made as a reaction to a time and place. Some of this work (imo) can stand on its own because of the universality of its message or intrinsic beauty that underlies what was then a contemporary message. A lot of contemporary work does not have that component of beauty that makes it enduring over time.

That is probably why I enjoy the early abstractionists, mid-20th century artists and post 20s and 30s photography so much. I think there is elements in the work that will always resonate with a viewer without having to know any background. Color, line, form, volume, depth- simple concepts that combine to form incredible impressions on the viewer.

n some ways I am also approaching this discussion as if I were a sort of neophyte who goes to a gallery on occasion. that is how I was 20 years ago when I made my first trips that included major museums such as AIC, MOMA, SFMOMA, LCM, Cochoran, Whitney etc. After many trips to view modern works I began learning and exploring via biographes, critical essays etc. But my first impressions and enthusiasm for such works was formed long before I knew the difference between impressionism, cubism or abstract expressionism.

 

[Helen B]

On this subject of nailing jelly to the wall, or meaning in visual art, here are a couple of things you may be interested in:

Thing One
Bill Jay's End Notes in Lenswork 59 include a note about the two very different explanations Aaron Siskind gave for some pictures that Bill Jay had passed over for publication because he felt that they were insignificant.


Thing Two
Cook and Moore did an extensive study of da Vinci's cartoons*. Working on the assumption that they must have been hilariously funny when Leonardo drew them, they were unable to find what it was that had been funny. The conclusion was that the humour had been entirely lost because of changes in the cultural frame of reference.

Best,
Helen

*P Cook and D Moore. Published in full in Proc. Roy. Soc. Com. Sing. Burl. Varty Art. Vol 93, pp 1137 to 1376.

 

[bjorke]

Thing Two
Cook and Moore did an extensive study of da Vinci's cartoons*. Working on the assumption that they must have been hilariously funny when Leonardo drew them, they were unable to find what it was that had been funny. The conclusion was that the humour had been entirely lost because of changes in the cultural frame of reference.

Didn't Terry Jones write a similar book about jokes in The Canterbury Tales?

 

[firecracker]

Another feature had people in various stages of , it appeared, boredom or ennui; one showed a kid sitting on a bed as if he had just woken up.

I wonder if "boredom" and "ennui" is sort of part of the trend. I keep hearing the word, "ennui" quite often lately, but usually people (not you here) who use it don't really know the meaning or they just look up on a dictionary.

 

[jd callow]

I wonder if "boredom" and "ennui" is sort of part of the trend. I keep hearing the word, "ennui" quite often lately, but usually people (not you here) who use it don't really know the meaning or they just look up on a dictionary.

20 years ago, it was a popular word amongst artists I hung out with. It was (comically) portentous, but it also might have been a bit of a slap at the mundane (think waterfalls and TV).


In my experience among current artists of note their is often 10+ pretentious works (or simply unsuccessful works hiding behind their obtuseness) for every good work of art. Time tends to sort them out, but you can't blame the mag for trying to pick them now. There is also the tendency from art lovers (the viewers) to add legend and myth (read pretention) to an artist's works.