In the late '60's the hippy era died from lack of realism and art kind of dried up. What might have been a renaissance turned into it's opposite; our younger brothers went to business schools and excelled at sciences. Conceptual art followed with it's humour, paradigm-breaking ideas, a return to Appolonian spirit and rule of the intellect. This little Dyonesian party had run it's course, the times called for an enlightened reserve, the supremacy of intellect in the fine arts. Back in the 1960's the Canada Council for the Arts had created a nation-wide artist-run parallel gallery system. In the U.S. the post-war G.I. bill set the first wave of university-trained artists, nor was Canada negligent with it's own education system. Perhaps the problem arose at this time, in the belief it was possible to teach art in academia. In any case, in the early seventies the Canadian parallel gallery system was changing. The pioneer spirit was replaced by administrative attitudes. Politically astute artists voted out the old guard through strength of organization. Grant applications stood better when styled according to marketing techniques rather than a messy inspired creativity. Such form was easier on jurors, who preferred a thesis-like exposition to the need of relying on their own judgement. Clean work with a clean presentation was easier to comprehend. And yet... "The mainstream climate - fueled by the miracle of Reganomics- allowed mediocre artists to find world acceptance and to become transformed into "art stars" overnight. The issue of quality in a work of art - at least from a critical point of view- seemed less than necessary. Art no longer had to be substantial; it merely had to make a statement or to have a certain appearance or to be politically correct or theoretically astute. The jargon was in place. Code words, borrowed from French theory, were rampant. Devotees were reading English translations of Lacan, Foucault, Derrida, and Baudrillard. Sociology had come to replace aesthetics. Psychoanalysis had come to replace the elusiveness of personal content. This made perfect sense. Theoretical methods were borrowed from the social sciences, and they could be proven, in contrast to issues of quality and resonance advocated by a minority of art critics, which could not be proven. By the end of the Eighties, art had suddenly become an
air-tight case. The typical scenarion, direct from art school, might occur
as follows: One stated an intention in some quasi-conceptual manner and
then attempted to prove it, or to denounce it in an all too self-conscious
manner. In many cases, this process had less to do with art and increasingly
more to do with making a "successful" career. Careerism became foreground
with respect to artistic practice."
An ideology and a lifetime of work invariably means vested interests. Thus we have the cycles; the birth, growth and decay of ideas as times change and new problems arise. New solutions, instead of finding ready acceptance, must challenge outdated ideologies. In this historical pattern, vital new concept eventually wins and becomes entrenched within a single generation, to a point of ubiquity. © Miklos Legrady 1995
AESTHETICS ON TRIAL BODY ART AT EXIT ART WHAT HAPPENED? THE EMPEROR'S NEW CLOTHES CYCLES OF CHANGE IN ART MOVEMENTS THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY KAREN FINLEY ACADEMIA AWAKE! AMERICAN ART THIS WORK IS A POLITICAL ACT CONTRADICTIONARY SEX, RELIGION, IMAGE ITS MY FAULT LAPDOGS FOOTNOTES
|