Advanced Studio is an interdisciplinary, upper-level studio course at McDaniel College.
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Jess's Questions for "The Art of Being Contemporary"
1. Roelstraete states that we are living in a society where "culture trumps art." Do you think this is true or can be seen in contemporary works of art today?
2. Are Eastern European countries futile in their attempts to jump into the contemporary art scene? Is the art produced a step behind Western Europe and America?
3. What is your view on contemporary art? Is it "art-for-art's sake" or something more?
1. I don't understand if he means that culture is just prevalent in today's art or that the purpose of art is changing due to culture. Artists are going to be influenced by the present. I'm wondering if Roelstraete is saying contemporary art lacks ideas separate from culture.
I feel that the author believes that the purpose of art is changing due to culture. He states the "we're living in a much different art world - colder, more analytical and with a more fraught relation to commercialism". I thought Roelstraete was saying that artists today are making art solely to please the public and with only consumer needs in mind. I don't agree with this though. I believe that artists are influenced by their culture, but don't necessarily create art that is "homogenous to the market". Artists have ideas separate from culture, and still create art with these ideas in mind. I think the problem with contemporary art is with the other side of consumerism - the consumer (not the producer). The public wants a specific kind of art, and has trouble accepting art that is separate from culture. This creates a conflict within the contemporary artist to either please their consumer or do their own thing. I think this is why it is so difficult to define "contemporary art", because there is a divide between the kind of art made today. Some is culture driven and some is individually driven.
1. I believe that culture influences art. Whether that influence is a positive one or not is a different question. I would have to agree with Caitlin though. Is Roelstraete trying to imply the separation of art and culture?
"Culture trumps art." This statement is complicated in its simplicity. Art is best friends with culture- art reflects society, values, morals, etc. But if it trumps it? Well, perhaps this is more of a comentary that art is only "art" if it is culturally interesting/acceptable. Like, do people want to look at it? Is it trendy and a new part of the "art scene?" This comment had an underlying tone of tongue-in-cheek sort of observation. I'm not saying I agree, but I think that's what Roelstraete was getting at.
1. I don't understand if he means that culture is just prevalent in today's art or that the purpose of art is changing due to culture. Artists are going to be influenced by the present. I'm wondering if Roelstraete is saying contemporary art lacks ideas separate from culture.
ReplyDeleteI feel that the author believes that the purpose of art is changing due to culture. He states the "we're living in a much different art world - colder, more analytical and with a more fraught relation to commercialism". I thought Roelstraete was saying that artists today are making art solely to please the public and with only consumer needs in mind. I don't agree with this though. I believe that artists are influenced by their culture, but don't necessarily create art that is "homogenous to the market". Artists have ideas separate from culture, and still create art with these ideas in mind. I think the problem with contemporary art is with the other side of consumerism - the consumer (not the producer). The public wants a specific kind of art, and has trouble accepting art that is separate from culture. This creates a conflict within the contemporary artist to either please their consumer or do their own thing. I think this is why it is so difficult to define "contemporary art", because there is a divide between the kind of art made today. Some is culture driven and some is individually driven.
ReplyDelete1. I believe that culture influences art. Whether that influence is a positive one or not is a different question. I would have to agree with Caitlin though. Is Roelstraete trying to imply the separation of art and culture?
ReplyDelete"Culture trumps art." This statement is complicated in its simplicity. Art is best friends with culture- art reflects society, values, morals, etc. But if it trumps it? Well, perhaps this is more of a comentary that art is only "art" if it is culturally interesting/acceptable. Like, do people want to look at it? Is it trendy and a new part of the "art scene?" This comment had an underlying tone of tongue-in-cheek sort of observation. I'm not saying I agree, but I think that's what Roelstraete was getting at.
ReplyDelete