[WS:] I said I did not doubt that. My comment was not about him personally, but about the trend that he represents, or more specifically, the effects of mass market on the art. Your favorite Billy Joel ;) was a classically trained musician afaik, but he produced mostly commercial schmaltz, because this is what sells in mass markets.
To reiterate, there are two points that I am trying to make here - but a judgment about a specific artist is not one of them. One point is an effect of mass market that is favorable to some types of art, but detrimental to other. I have nothing against "market art" as long as it does not crowd out other forms.
The other point is that art (and other things) are being used as signifiers of a set of values, lifestyles and cultural identities (which Barthes calls "mythologies"). Because of this, it is difficult to have a discussion on these subjects without slipping into a kulturkampf of some sort, where rational discussion is not possible. To illustrate: both Warhol and Joel possessed craftsmanship and both produced for mass market. What differentiated them is what cultural identities they signify - the former signifies counterculture whereas the latter - middle class conventionality. My contention is that their art is being judged, in a significant part, by the cultural identities it signifies. Ayn Rand, an otherwise mediocre second class writer, is perceived by many as the best thing since toilet paper not because of the quality of her writing but because of the neo-liberal cultural identity her writing signifies. Had she been associated with, say, cooperativism or kibbutzim nobody would have heard of her in the US.
This pertains not just to the art but other things as well, gun ownership, SUVs, schooling, government, climate and so on. These subjects simply cannot be discussed on its own merits without degenerating into a kulturkampf about cultural identities and values.
Wojtek
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 11:13 PM, Dennis Claxton
<ddclaxton at earthlink.net> wrote:
> At 06:18 PM 11/23/2011, Wojtek S wrote:
>
>
>> 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.
>
>
> I don't like his stuff, but Jeff Koons is a very good craftsman. He's just
> one example. You'd have to be more specific to make this argument.
>
>
>> Warhol is mostly gimmicks aimed to razzle dazzle the public.
>
>
> This is simply not true. Like it or not (and like him or not) he was
> serious about his work, knew very much about art history and, like all good
> artists, was having a conversation with it.
>
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>