[lbo-talk] Questions from before the Global Minotaur...

[Wojtek S]

[WS:] From where I sit, a great deal of what passes for modern art has
a rather low ratio of craftsmanship to showmanship, which tends to
turn me off.  To illustrate: Vermeer was mostly superb craftsmanship
even though his paintings could be rendered by photographic processes
today. Warhol is mostly gimmicks aimed to razzle dazzle the public.
It is not that modern artists do not possess good craftsmanship, most
of them probably do, but rather that craftsmanship does not sell
nowadays.  Showmanship does.  And artists tend to do what sells.  Art
is another victim of the market, if you will.

Wojtek

On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 8:53 PM, Somebody Somebody
<philos_case at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>Modern art looks like a big joke from where I am sitting at the moment.
>
> Fair enough, but when was it ever different?
>
> I'm always curious when people say this. Does it mean that the quality of art is constant, and that while styles and artistic media change, there's never a rise or decline in the aesthetic value of the art, despite the fact that some periods have more working artists than others, have different economic systems, have more or less political oppression and censorship, etc.
>
> It would seem to me to be a remarkable thing if this were the case. It would suggest, moreover, a disconnect between economic and artistic production. The bright side is that we can be assured there is no threat of barbarism in cultural terms if the struggle for socialism lapses.
>
> At any rate, between Contemporary Art of the last thirty, forty years and Dutch Golden Age painting say, I would say one looks like more of a joke than the other.
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>