Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Sam Cree

Modern art is deconstruction. Each school explored one element to the detriment of others. Impressionists studied light, cubists studied volume etc. Historically, art was comissioned by patrons who supervised the execution to their standards. It was not individual expression. Today, many fine artists work in all kinds of ventures and we are surrounded by their art and it pleases us. The art gallery scene is a cruel hoaz, like all government supported ventures, it seems to me. Often, too, it seems the artists are mocking both critics and viewers.


67 posted on 04/14/2007 9:10:18 PM PDT by ClaireSolt (Have you have gotten mixed up in a mish-masher?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies ]


To: ClaireSolt

I’m inclined to agree with you that much modern art is deconstruction. Ortega Y Gasset referred apparently approvingly to it as “dehumanization.” I posted a thread on Helprin’s essay in which he used Gasset as a springboard to attack modern art yesterday, http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1817366/posts

However, while I agree that in the past, before art had a capital A, served a much more practical master than “self expression,” it was still self expression that made great art great. Velazquez may have spent a lifetime in the service of royalty, but it was his unique vision and his ability to put it on canvas that has elicited admiration and wonder through history. IMO.


85 posted on 04/15/2007 6:21:48 AM PDT by Sam Cree (absolute reality)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson