The mass-media promotes Modern art?
Todd Strickland
gets my goad. The people who make this charge seem never to have read
a newspaper or watched TV. I'm of the opinion that the mass-media is
basically hostile to Modern and Postmodern art (and indifferent to any
other kind). Yet people who don't like Modern art always say that the
mass-media hype is what makes people believe in it. I think anyone
who based their opinion of art solely on mass-media depictions would
come to the conclusion that there's no such thing as art (nor ever
was), only some joke called Modern/Postmodern/Contemporary art which
tries to pass itself off as art.
I'm almost afraid to post this; I can already see a bunch of replies
which say, "Exactly! Modern art IS a joke! What you said above is
true." Well, I already know that some people here feel this way, but
my point in this thread is that the mass-media ALSO feels this way.
My purpose is to deflate the notion that the mass-media push Modern
art on the public, which then accepts it.
Here's a brief list of newpaper article titles about the recent Turner
Award:
Turner Prize won by man who turns lights off - Daily
Telegraph (Dec 10, 2001)
Shock art? Have a word with Madonna - The Times (Dec 10, 2001)
Judges switched on as Turner Prize goes to the Creed of nothingness -
The Guardian (UK). (Dec 10, 2001)
When is a joke not a joke? When it wins the Turner Prize -
The Guardian (UK). (Dec 11, 2001)
The tailor who created the emperor's new clothes - The Independent
(UK) (Dec 11, 2001)
Coveted Turner art prize goes to an empty room - Chicago Tribune (Dec
12, 2001)
I think it's obvious the press is not pushing this art on the people,
but rather having a good laugh (and giving the public entertainment,
which is what most people expect from newspapers).
In a recent post I gave some other past examples of mass-media
belittling of Duchamp, Abstract Expressionism, Andres Serrano, Robert
Maplethorpe...
I wonder if those who say the mass-media promotes Modern art can find
one single article to back up their claim? I'm talking about general
newspapers and magazines, not art related media (which the public at
large never read). I doubt they can.
Todd Strickland
Jay C
I read about the same thing on my favorite hangout, www.sijun.com.
One guy from Britain, who's supposedly a game design artist, commented
that he is ashamed of being a Brit, just because of Tunner prize. Some
other people bashed the winner (the guy with a shit-eating smile),
commenting that Scottish art students are retarded opportunitists...
(that's not my opinion so don't hate me)
Well, some of the entries were; soiled bedsheet(by a female artist
who supposedly peed on the sheet, another cow dung art and an exact
replica of a warehouse door(or maybe the artist hauled the whole
freakin warehouse into the museum).
I bet Lord Leighton will be rolling in the grave. And I just can't
believe that a great maritime artist like Tom Stobald and a great
American illustrator Iain McCaig who worked for Phantom Menace as a
character designer studied art in Britain...
John Ng
> I wonder if those who say the mass-media promotes Modern art can find
> one single article to back up their claim? I'm talking about general
> newspapers and magazines, not art related media (which the public at
> large never read). I doubt they can.
I must admit that the media is beginning to see the light in Art and
slowly, but surely, they sitting back and reassessing art. That is
why I am confident that the 21C will have an art reviver.
However, there are still many mass-promotion media hung on to the old
20C concept of art. I am not talking about press releases but rather
the other silent propaganda agents such as re-copied art books, the
museums, the so-call art shows on TV… all these promotes Modern
art. Just talk to a non-art person as if you are asking them what is
art, and he/she is most likely to respond with the media rubbish.
John