7 comments on ““Oh, how quaint – even the rabble.”

  1. My own working (i.e., constantly changing) definition of art from last August via this link. I agree that digital media should be called something different (I refer to the tradition fine arts now as the “tactile” arts), although when it comes to the art/craft debate I find distinctions much more muddy.

  2. Aha! That’s the post I wanted to link to. I didn’t dig deep enough.
    I think even “digital media” is a vague description. That can include animators, web designers, graphic artists, net art, etc.

    And its not that I hate them. I just think there is a difference in goals when participating in more “practical” forms versus “intellectual” forms.

  3. Well, I guess the problem is do we expect money from the city/government if we continue to make art that is too “intellecutal” or “acedemic” for the general public? Do we want art to be consumed by the masses?? Can it ever be??
    For art to exist in the hearts in minds of the public and be supported financially by that public then, for a time, it needs to be more accessible. Simple as that. Sell out and they will slowly come. Only then can art then be gradually taken to a higher level as the public becomes more intrested and hungry for more complex ideas. One would hope…
    Otherwise art will ultimatley become privatley funded art for a select few.
    Most people unfortunatley dont give a damn about public art and dont want to pay for it or keep it in school. Why?

  4. Most people don’t give a damn ’bout public SCHOOL and don’t want to pay for it or keep it. Why’s that?

    And then there are those that don’t give a damn ’bout public school and don’t want to attend or take advantage of that step up. But that’s another conversation.

    “Do we want art to be consumed by the masses?? Can it ever be??”
    I say yes. I’ve witnessed Shakespeare affect individuals that I didn’t think would take to it. And I know about visual art that has found audience in similarly unlikely persons.
    I think I’ll change that last sentence to:
    Public | Art | Education – interest me

    “… it needs to be more accessible.”
    Accessibility does not mean you have to dumb things down. Public art should be relateable, then that’s when contemplation occurs.

    Welcome! Y’all come back now!

  5. Pingback: Fine art, digital art, visual art: Art? « The Aesthetic Elevator

  6. Actually, the public school comment was supposed to mean that art is rarely taught in public schools anymore. If the majority of the public is educated in public schools.. .and it is, then how do we expect them to except some high concept art when they barely get a basic education in art?

    Shakespear is required in all four years of high school so it would not be difficult to believe that the public by and large would be affected by a preformance.

    You cant wrap the white house in pink fabric and expect the public to get it. That would just make them hate art more… really. That is why the big painted guitars are loved.

  7. Lori,
    I understood what you meant in your public school comment. I just threw in that reference to bigger problems concerning public education. Problems that are more acute in the largest US metros. We can see the same problems in Texas, but headlines go to Chicago/NY/DC.

    I only did Shakespeare my senior year (I attended high school here in Austin). And I wasn’t referring to an audience getting it. An individual really adopted R&J and transcribed that understanding to the rest of the class. I was impressed.

    I don’t think I’d get the White House being wrapped in pink fabric either.
    But I’d like to see a public that can call bullshit on Art like that and not have to turn to craft and say “Now that is Art”. Perfectly rendered landscapes by the likes of Ross or Kinkade contain no experimentation. They only replicate past techniques in an almost factory production of work (without a concious effort to comment on art production). That’s the kind of understanding I’d like the general public to be aware of.

    That awareness might be achieved if art, whether in public environments or in school settings, is presented on merit and not on the “accessibility” that you described.
    And I know that’s a tall order when we consider what our leaders would rather spend our money on.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s