Thinking about Art vs. being Entetained by Art

[Mark]

I recently went to an outdoor art festival in my home city. The purpose of
this annual festival, when it began twenty years ago, was to develop an
interest in the area where the festival is held. The festival grounds are
surrounded by a concert hall a theater where musicals are usually performed,
and an art college. It is know locally as the "Cultural Center."

I was wondering among the street displays, when I overheard a conversation.
A man was viewing an artwork and he said to his companion, "I just don't get
this one." It made me think. Just what do art festival attendees expect from
art.

I asked one of them this question. (read this without condescension) He
basically said he likes to see to see "pretty pictures.you know, like Norman
Rockwell and Thomas Kincaid." I was immediately transported to the images of
my middle class, Middle American upbringing. These were the images that hung
in the suburban homes of the neighborhood in which I grew up.

All of this brings me to my questions. I am curious to know as artists and
as folks interested in art how were you changed by your formal art
education. Did you ever yearn for "pretty pictures?" Do you still yearn for
them, or do you now seek to learn the message the artist is trying to
communicate? Is it always necessary for artists to communicate an idea?

This brings into focus the concept that fine art is something that
stimulates the mind and curiosity. And eye-candy is something, which
distracts us from serious thought. What do you think? I think street art
festivals have evolved into entertainment events.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
To read what others have said and to add your own comments please click on
the following link:
http://www.InsideTheWeb.com/messageboard/mbs.cgi?acct=mb1007575&MyNum=964794
097&P=No&TL=964794097

[SynthSky]

hello:

I participate in several on-line discussion groups, and the subject of Thomas
Kinkade comes up regularly.

While I don't care for his work, I can't agree that it's wrong for people to
like his art. Everyone has the right to decide what they like, and (in
America, most of the time) we are free to like Thomas Kinkade, or not--whatever
we, as individuals, choose.

I call my own work 'science fiction fine art', and I participate in numerous
outdoor art fairs across the country each year.

I'm stuck in a rather strange position. At first glance, my work LOOKS
commercial (it's painted with airbrush, often considered a strictly commercial
art-making tool...) and being science fiction art, it is often looked at as
'illustration'--NOT fine art.

But, after participating in science fiction convention art shows (including
several national and world exhibitions) I found that my work didn't have great
appeal for publishers. Instead, it has been increasingly popular with
collectors seeking high-quality original science fiction artwork.

This gives me the freedom to paint what I want, without interference from art
directors, deadlines, and restrictions. I offer my paintings for sale only
upon completion.

I am working to put more levels of meaning into my work, so that it's not just
'eye-candy'.

At the same time, I want my work to be fun (entertaining)--but also, more than
just that. I don't think that only ugly or non-objective artwork can be
considered 'serious' art. I think 'pretty', 'beautiful', and representational
artwork can still be viewed as 'serious' work. I don't see any reason why we
should separate our taste: so that if we like abstract work we must despise
representational art, or if we like representational work we have to despise
the abstract.

Not everyone who goes to an art fair is going to understand everything they
see. But, at least the two Kinkade fans you met WENT to the show. So many
people don't even go to art shows. They may not have cared for much, but they
saw it--and that's a tremendous start.

Your reply gets mine,

Keith Russell
Synthetic Sky Studios
Science Fiction Fine Art
synt...@aol.com

[jeff_l...@my-deja.com]

Mark

I like the way you're avoiding condescension when asking. I think it's
the responsibility of those making more 'cerebral' art to give it the
necessary context and make it exciting for folk brought up on pretty
pictures. We're all bombarded daily with eye-candy, so decorative
considerations have enormous reinforcement, nay, marketing.

I hope that's where my new site makes a contribution:-

http://website.lineone.net/~jeff_lee

I welcome comments / critique.

Jeff

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.