6:24 AM 10/27/2002
Three years ago, at the end of the second millennium, the fine visual arts of Western civilisation, as represented by the powers that were, in the fine arts community at that time, had virtually lost all credibility with the vast majority of the general public. Art had not died, but modernism, and especially Post-Modernism, and whatever it was that followed Post-Modernism, had definitely died, leaving what remained of its following clinging to it, as to a bloated corpse. If Modern Art were a living creature, I would say that it had died of dissipation... as a consequence of its excesses, and unhealthy appetites. The galleries and MoMA's (Museums of Modern Art)... temples dedicated to the worship of the dead 'official art' still stood, and still stand today, but the 'action', and the passion, and the real work being done in the fine visual arts had by then, for all practical purposes, deserted the gallery scene.
'Deserted' is actually incorrect... most of the real work that is being done in the fine visual arts today was never a part of the gallery scene to begin with.
No painter begins his or her career having gallery representation. One begins painting, or attends a school where one is allegedly taught how to paint, and then at some point down the road, when one's skill level reaches a certain threshold, or talent is presumably recognised, one then might expect to find an art dealer who would be interested in representing one's work, and hopefully selling the painter's work for enough money to provide a livelihood for both the painter, and the dealer, while also helping the painter to advance their career, in various ways.
This is not, however, the way things actually work in the gallery scene, at the beginning of the third millennium. Perhaps it never was the way that things worked, between painters and dealers... I cannot say how things were in the past, as I was not there.
Because painting as a profession (as an endeavour of mind and emotion) has not been taken seriously by the fine visual arts community in recent decades, the process which galleries and MoMA's have employed in selecting painters to represent and show, has more to do with the selling of objects, for as much as the market will bear, than it does with any value the work might have, where the advancement of the human condition might be concerned. In fact, it has become anathema to even suggest that painting might have any value intrinsically... beyond that which the dealers, curators, critics, and other various 'star makers' might create, through marketing, advertising, and other sleight-of-hand.
The fine arts, once a well-respected field of endeavour, and peer to science, had been reduced to the level of a marketing scam, to separate wealthy fools from their money. Imagine for a moment, what the state of our technology would be if the sciences were as inundated in hype and bullshit, as the fine visual arts... the computer that I am using to type this would probably be a cheap, painted cardboard box, with a pad of paper where the screen should be, and a pencil where the keyboard currently is. Of course, it would still cost as much, or more... but one could amuse one's self with it, discussing the irony that it represented.
In the meantime, however, while the powers that were, were busy amusing themselves with the irony of body secretions art, and the excesses of victim art, radical feminist art, shock art, and art that demonstrated to the world, the joys of presenting to the world works of utter incompetence, done with studied deliberation, to mean nothing, and to have no redeeming value... there were other painters out there, beyond the borders of the ArtWorld construct, who were carrying on the tradition of painting that began in caves, before even the dawn of the human race... the advancement of human mind and emotion, hopefully in a direction that will better insure survival of species, by moving humankind onto a more mature emotional footing.
Meanwhile, the artist selection process in the galleries and MoMA's, having little to do with the actual merit of the work produced, fell prey to other, less noble factors.
Art schools had for the most part become church schools, where the religion of Modernism and Post-Modernism, was taught as the one, true faith, and tolerance of other artforms... especially realism, were not tolerated.
The graduates of these schools then went forth into ArtWorld in every imaginable capacity... painter, artist, dealer, curator, critic. The selection process where artwork was concerned... what would be presented to the public... was influenced not only by the 'approved religion' concept, but also by the 'good old boys and girls club' mentality... that significant work could only spring forth from the educational system that had spawned the denizens of ArtWorld, and that therefore, there was no sense in looking for work further afield... those without the proper educational credentials, and the currently approved politically correct world-view, need not apply. The only exception to this, seems to be ArtWorld's attraction to primitive, and naive painters... an attraction that seems akin to the affection one has for a favourite pet... as long as it behaves, and knows it's place, it might be granted a brief period of exposure, until the novelty wears off. Of course, spouting art theory is off limits... that is a matter reserved for fully vested members of ArtWorld.
If a painter is to pursue his or her profession more than a few hours per week, in their spare time, they must find the means to bring their production to the public... to trade their work for food and shelter. If a painter is not a member of the ArtWorld culture, his or her chances of having their work represented by an ArtWorld gallery is vanishingly small... especially if that work is representational in nature.
During the last decade of the 20th century, a lot of non- ArtWorld galleries sprung up... mostly in rural and out-of- the-way places, where 'unsophisticated' buyers could get together with more traditional art forms. The prices in these galleries away from the ArtWorld mainstream were fantastically lower than in the fashionable galleries in New York, and other cultural centers... one really has to see the difference with one's own eyes to believe it. In a trendy gallery... some goofy and pointless rendering, paint carelessly strewn onto canvas... with a plaque on the wall next to it proclaiming it to be a rare and important work, by a rare and brilliant individual, with a five or six figure price tag, and a dealer standing behind it, willing to say anything... to tell any lie necessary... to sell the painting to a fool with money. Meanwhile, in a small gallery on the outskirts of a small town, the work of unknown painters is for sale... a few hundred dollars, for canvases and watercolours whose message has the power to move people, in a positive emotional direction. An honest case can be made, that the king's new ArtWorld clothes, which are allegedly very beautiful, but can only be seen by the select, initiated few, are non-existent. As far as I am concerned, the king has no clothes.
During the last decade of the 20th century, an unexpected wildcard appeared in the field of the fine visual arts... the computer. While the most obvious artistic use the computer can be put to is in the field of digital art, the most significant use the computer can be put to, especially as imaging technology improves, is in the presentation or art, and visual ideas, to the general public, without the arbitration of the ArtWorld community, which has a vested interest in maintaining the status quo, and their own considerable power, both financial, and political.
Secondary to the presentation of visual ideas to the general public, is the ability the computer and Internet grants to its users, to present print information to the general public, without having to go through a traditional publishing venue. The ArtWorld establishment has preferred its artist be seen, and not heard, for the most part... criticism, theory, etc., have been usurped by people who do not paint, but are people of letters. The doors to being published in a fine art publication have been closed to all but a few painters... a situation that changes dramatically, in the electronic medium. Imagine a branch of science, in which the scientist was not the individual who analysed the findings, and formulated the theories, and then wrote and published the papers, but was only allowed to perform the experiments.
About a year ago, eBay, the famous on-line auction house, opened a section for self-representing artists. EBay has been extremely savvy and successful in the past, where managing their auction business is concerned. Already, the section has become popular with formerly unknown artists, and with the general public... mostly a general public which has neither the stomach, nor the deep pockets, for what passes for art in the upscale, uptown salons. At the same time, self-representing artist organisations, most notably EBSQ, have sprung up on the Internet. Opportunities exist, on the Internet, for painters to successfully represent themselves, that do not exist elsewhere.
It is unlikely, given the growing number of small, non-ArtWorld galleries, and the proliferation of individual artist's websites, and auctions run by entities like eBay, that the ArtWorld establishment will ever regain the power as arbiters of taste that it once had, and abused. This is for the best, as far as the welfare of human mind and emotion is concerned.
Whatever art is, and whatever its role should be, in the future of the species, it will be decided in a dialogue that includes the painter, and the population at large... and not just a small, self-selected group, who claim to be the only ones with the intellectual acuity to make such a decision.
This essay was written on a GRiD 1520 computer, using Professional Write version 1.0