So you found some Art you like and you think to yourself, “I want to find out about this Artist!”
Beware.
You may find out something about the Artist that you Don’t Like. You might even Hate It.
This is another “art” question for the ages: Must Art be considered in the context of the Maker, or can It be evaluated in a void? Should Art be Moral?
As with my feeling about what makes something “art” – I don’t think this is a valid question. Yes, if you find a contemporary maker offensive but like what they do, it can be a conundrum. This is more a question of supporting “the arts” but… What if the maker is dead?
Again, I feel like any evaluation of a person’s work must begin with the reaction and an understanding or knowledge of the making. This gives the work context. Comparing reactions pre-knowledge and post-knowledge can be a transformative experience. But once a work is presented, it does become its own thing, independent of the process and the person. The audience brings its own language and interpretations – and, in doing so, becomes a participant in the work.
Ultimately, I think the Artist is at the mercy of the Work. And we need to stop apologizing for the shitty things that dead Artists may have believed or done, because in most cases, their Work is the only unfiltered voice we have be given to listen to.
I think the question that we should be asked is, “Does the Art matter more than the Artist?” and I think the answer is “Yes.”
I had this exact same conversation a month or two ago! What I said was that I try most times to separate the Artist from the Art. However, if I find out that the Artist is a douchebag, it can affect my relationship to the Art because I may suddenly notice the fingerprints of the Artist’s particular brand of douchebaggery all over the work.
When I was at Evergreen I was criticized in a seminar for saying that the artist’s intention was irrelevant and that the art speaks for itself because of or in spite of that original intention. Really, I think they were just pissed because ‘art’ was their soapbox, not their message. You dig?
Nathan, do I dig that crazy beat!
It’s my #1 reason for not reading artist statements at gallery shows and for trying not to read interviews with writers, directors, etc.
It’s why I think Tim’s painting “Texas” is one of the most amazing things I have ever seen. I don’t know what he was about, but that painting was telling me Something Important. I wish I could have bought it.
Crazy Tim could even begin to fathom an explanation. All he said was “I fucking hate that place.”
‘couldn’t', dawg