I've been wondering about a certain kind of artist. The past few days I've been reading about & watching docs on artists who have one thing in common; they don't physically make their art. To clarify I mean artists who have workshops + employees + systematized, conveyor-like ways of making their art.
The question running through my head is a variation on the debate that always surrounded Warhol; is it really art or is he really an artist if all he ever did was slap his name on work that drones did in his factory? That's been debated ad nauseum for too long and we're not going to add anything to the conversation here but maybe we can chatter a bit about my dilemma. See, I hate this kind of "art." Warhol doesn't bother me so much, but I was watching Chihuly (he's the glass wizard, you've seen his work on a calendar somewhere) in this doc and all he did was shout suggestions from the sidelines while this frenzy of artisans manipulated glass + pigments into an awesome assemblage. Somehow his rough sketches get him the credit as the Artist. At least he gives them credit and calls them partners. But what about someone like Damien Hirst? He has (or had if the latest news about him is to be believed) factories where drones pumped out his ideas. He was so removed from the creation of his artwork that when word leaked Hirst was holed up in his studio painting by his own hand it was News.
I don't have a clear question so much as a clear dislike for anyone who abuses the idea of art in this way; they've commodified + industrialized it. My question then is: who is really the artist when the Name runs the factory but the labor of creating art is outsourced?
Let me know what you think. As you may be able to tell, I haven't thought a ton about this. I'm running on gut feeling here so if you have clearer and better informed thoughts please comment.
PS - artists that shuffled through iTunes while was writing this:
Mars Ill, Matisyahu, Tool, Yeah Yeah Yeahs, Five Iron Frenzy, Iron + Wine, Melt-Banana, MF Doom, U2...not important but I wanted to share.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
A place for artists of all kinds to engage Christ & the world, to encourage one another, to stay connected.
5 comments:
i see your point about the commodofication of a process that is supposed to come from the soul. Sure, the very mass-production of commercialized art is what can compromise its aesthetic value. i guess for me that the value of such an approach is not so much in its far-reach or its ability to render for mass consumption, but (potentially) the philosophy (or theology) behind such a decision. I've always been intrigued by folks like Brian Eno and John Cage, for example, that have embodied a sort of spiritual poverty in their work, in the sense that they understood the shortcomings of a distinctly individualistic approach to creating art. Hence, they would employ methods like Chance Operations or even a relational approach to art. This may not be what you are talking about, but i sometimes get inspired by artists that not only create directly, but their real art is the ability to facilitate space for the creative process to be birthed. Eno took the use of studio players to a whole new level, as did Dr. dre with hip hop production; While Cage has a musical composition that is being played out live for the next 800 years by sand bags (See "As Slow As Possible"); or even Lars Von trier's Automavision which used randomized framing and audio settings. Or what about the creation of art based on a preset algorithm? The art would be in the setting of the algorithm, not the actual art object. Or my friend had an idea of writing a story, one line at a time, but each line was written by a different person as it was passed around. Such a project my be really interesting, provided their were pre-established goals and aims to adhere to. There the art would be in the casting of a vision, not so much in the writing of a story. you get the idea...
(ps when's the arthaus gonna meet in person!?)
quick response: my problem with the artists I mentioned was that there was no credit given to anyone they worked with. It wasn't a truly collaborative experience. They simply pushed a button and their work was created. (The exception is Chihuly who has different lines of work that he creates because or, and with, specific collaborators.)
But as I've thought of this more I see 2 ways out of this for me. The first is what you mentioned Josh, collaboration. The second is realted. If I can think of the process as that very specific type of collaboration seen in film/video/cinema production I can better understand it. An artist (or director) works with other artists (or writers perhaps) and craftsmen (cinematographer, set designer, actor, etc.) to achieve some sort of artistic goal. This second one is more along the lines of what I've seen these high-profile artists doing of late. Jeff Koons spends his time in front of a computer designing very very frighteningly specifically detaled images with very specific instructions for how to turn them into giant paintings or sculptures. Then a team of craftspeople achieves his artistic goal. Everyone agrees the paintings are Jeff Koons' art. I can deal with that. (Again the exception here is Chihuly who is more in line with your suggestion Josh. Collaboration with other artists.)
Anyhow, I may have opened another can of worms here with my division of artists and craftspeople. In short I think of an artist as someone who creates from scratch (not nothing, that's a bit much. I think we all agree there's only one who did/does that) to achieve/communicate some idea. A craftsperson is given a idea or goal or uses a form (i.e. - pattern) to achieve an end that has no message (sometimes a chair is just a chair) or contains the message of another.
PS - Arthaus will meet in person as I transition from what I'm doing now to the next stage of life. In other words, soon but not that soon.
i just love the space for anonyminity, if that's even a word. no, i'm sure it's not. but anyway, the "craftsmen" that you mention, dan, the workhorses, so to speak, are what truly inspire me. The people you've never heard of. It's like the early christian martyrs. They are no great St. Augustine or Thomas Aquinas or St. Francis, but the quiet ones who put their hands to the plow and never, not for their lives, look back.
its funny because i guess i always thought of myself as a 'big picture' kind of guy, but lately i've been realizing that there is no intrinsic difference in worth between the 'artists' and 'craftsmen'. i think it is a sign of our corrupt culture that we place such high emphasis on a singular personality.
btw i just learned about this collective of italian authors that write novels under the psuedonyms Luther Blissett and Wu Ming. Anyone ever heard of or read them? As Dan would say, "Fascinating!"
ive decided to comment before reading others comments because, i want to give you my raw thoughts.
i think if the artists shouting directions from the sideline are to be disliked, then the drones are too. they're willingly taking orders and doing someone elses work. but personally, i feel that it depends on what area of art you happen to be working in.
take film for instance, the director is most definitely not doing everything himself; he simply couldnt. even robert rodriguez has a crew with him. in this instance, i feel its okay for there to be people taking orders and running with them. film is a collaborative art. it has to be, at least on the large scale stuff.
but with sculpture, or painting, i feel the artist should be directly hands on with what he/she/it is creating. however, if more than one artist were collaborating from the very beginning, the conception of an idea for a sculpture or painting, then thats cool. maybe they could figure out who does the hand on stuff at some point, me no no...
another thought, artists who cant physically work on their ideas. maybe paralysis or something keeps them from it. this is another case where they would simply have to have someone else brush for them, or chip away. and yes i know theres that one dude who paints with them brush in his mouth, but not everyone can do that.
Post a Comment