Previous: We interrupt this roundup (10)

Next: Audience (92)

New in the WDB Archive

Post #980 • March 31, 2007, 7:49 PM • 29 Comments

Artbroken: What Art Is and How We Stopped Making It, and the eulogy delivered for Jules Olitski at his memorial service.

Comment

1.

Jack

March 31, 2007, 9:13 PM

Mere common sense, alas, is too plain and simple to be fashionable, glamorous or "challenging." It is right, of course, but right doesn't go very far with those who don't really care about that and never did. Same goes for quality. "New and different," no matter how empty and contrived, is what is wanted. The cynical need it to manipulate the shallow, and the shallow always fall for it. It is their nature to do so, and they deserve what they get.

2.

Marc Country

March 31, 2007, 9:30 PM

Aren't all Faustian bargains bad ones?

3.

ahab

March 31, 2007, 11:24 PM

Any deal with the devil will seem to have its up side - to the short-sighted or the corrupt, at least.

4.

Noah

April 1, 2007, 1:28 AM

The eulogy was very moving.
I appreciate the the essay as well.
I don't know if I'd call the bargain being made Faustian . It doesn't have the grand tragic element. It's more like revenge of the philistines. Faustus knew who he was cutting a deal with. If one believes God and the devil are equals or don't exist, the contract loses weight. In the present situation there's no good or bad. There's just a lot of posturing and "whatever."There are probably a few instructors- maybe a few artists too- wandering around wondering if they should repent because they've sold out, but I seem to run into more who either are content to keep their position even if it means nothing more than a regular salary or fleeting celebrity or they're content to be cheerleaders. Faustus may have wanted wealth and power but he wanted knowledge - I don't sense the same crazily ambitious desire for knowledge at the root of contemporary "sell- outs."

5.

ahab

April 1, 2007, 2:08 AM

Mann's Faust-figure was a composer whose bargain was with the creator of high culture: his foreshortened life in exchange for the mother of all songs.

6.

ahab

April 1, 2007, 2:18 AM

Rhetorically into the ether: provided you'd been given sure guarantee that it would make your art better than the best, what lengths would you go to for your art? Or rather, what wouldn't you?

7.

opie

April 1, 2007, 7:30 AM

I think the comments re "Faustian" are well, taken, and leave it to Marc to point out the redundancy.

8.

Jack

April 1, 2007, 8:43 AM

Noah has a point. It's one thing for someone with great talent or serious promise to sell out. It's quite another to jump on the bandwagon and adopt the party line to get a certain kind of material success, when no other type of success was ever likely to happen. A lot of these people didn't have much going for them to begin with, and you can't "sell out" if you never really had anything truly worthwhile to sell.

9.

catfish

April 1, 2007, 8:50 AM

About "first place": yes indeed it exists. One of the "mathematical problems" in great art is that "many" artists reside there, the goodness of one is virtually indistinguisable from the goodness of the others. We must grasp that more than one can be best but only as long as each is the best. The systemic failure to understand this has led to pluralism, where "many" means everyone who conforms and is currently certified.

10.

catfish

April 1, 2007, 9:22 AM

About the FATE talk as a whole: right on. Foundations can't be important unless something important is conveyed. So, like everything else in art, it gets down to good judgment about what matters. For those who believe in "relevant" and "current", Bannard's talk might give them some problems. How did the talk go over with the crowd in attendance? Anyone know?

My guess is that it resonated with at least a few but that is a guess. The theme of the conference suggests that it would not be many.

11.

catfish

April 1, 2007, 9:34 AM

I'm not as confident as Bannard that "EVOLVE" means to sneak what is important to art in by the back door, though his definition of figure drawing is very funny. Instead, it could simply mean "get with it" and "SHIFT" into a contemporary mode that will allow students to "CONNECT" with what's hot.

Again, anyone know which way the conference attendees leaned on the EVOLE issue?

12.

opie

April 1, 2007, 9:48 AM

I think your interpretation of the conference theme is probably correct, Catfish, if it can be taken to be definite at all. I am sure Bannards interpretaion was ironic or satirical..

13.

BMD72

April 1, 2007, 4:41 PM

How does one know it's a faustian bargain until after they agree to it?

14.

BMD72

April 1, 2007, 4:43 PM

I meant to say, How does one know it's a faustian bargain BEFORE they agree to it?

Sorry, looooooooooooong night.

15.

opie

April 1, 2007, 4:58 PM

Because the devil comes up and says he will give you all sorts of earthly rewards if you sell your soul.

And also if your name is Faust.

16.

catfish

April 1, 2007, 5:33 PM

Devil/Faust questions aside, Bannard made one hell of a statement.

17.

Jack

April 1, 2007, 5:41 PM

Yes, Catfish, and certainly one worth making, but I'm afraid the target audience may be too far gone for it to do much good. Still, it can't hurt.

18.

Jack

April 1, 2007, 8:32 PM

I've been looking at some drawings by Claude from his Liber Veritatis (now in the British Museum). These are just sketches, the sort of thing he could probably toss off in his sleep, yet the degree of sheer visual poetry and rightness is just, well, sort of like listening to Mozart. It seems completely natural and effortless, like it was nothing for him to do it, and yet it's so beautiful, exquisitely so, like a delicious breeze.

This is the sort of thing that art students should be looking at, learning from and emulating, at least in spirit, not some labored "with-it" gobbledygook. It's a wonder these utilitarian clowns don't explode from aesthetic constipation.

19.

Jack

April 1, 2007, 10:18 PM

Re Claude's work, no one needs to take my word for it. However, if it was good enough for J.M.W. Turner (who revered Claude), it should be good enough for art students--then or now.

20.

Painters Today.

April 2, 2007, 9:05 AM

That was serious?
We read Bannard's "statement' as satire..

He was serious?
Jeez.....what a (oil) stick in the mud....

21.

Noah

April 2, 2007, 9:45 AM

Painters Today, clarify your objections.

22.

Marc Country

April 2, 2007, 10:17 AM

I have a theory: that artists who don't recognize the problems with the contemporary art world (as described by Bannard here, and elsewhere throughout this blog) are very likely part of the problem itself.

It reminds me a little of the old saying about poker: if you look around the table, and don't know who the sucker is, then the sucker is you.

23.

Jack

April 2, 2007, 11:09 AM

It's not necessarily a failure to recognize the problem; it may be a refusal to do so. The current system can clearly benefit its adherents, and they are hardly likely to denounce or oppose it. Reflexively and furiously attacking those who do, however, is completely predictable--as we see time and time again.

24.

Jack

April 2, 2007, 4:41 PM

Franklin, those carpet swatches have to go. When I cover them up with my hand, there's a definite improvement. It's just visual clutter for no good reason.

25.

otto

April 2, 2007, 4:46 PM

Jack - Just get a small swatch of nice arches paper and tape it on to your Monitor over that part of the screen. Works for me, except I can never seem to close any windows ????

26.

ahab

April 2, 2007, 9:23 PM

That's a little bit funny Otto.

27.

Elizabeth

April 4, 2007, 4:18 AM

Franklin, please put Jack out of his pain....and they do look like carpet swatches...your work would be more fun to see.

28.

morganusvitus

April 4, 2007, 10:10 AM

The site looks great ! Thanks for all your help ( past, present and future !)

29.

ahab

April 4, 2007, 9:18 PM

An open letter to Walter Darby Bannard:

Dear WDB,
Thankyou.
Sincerely, RBW.

Subscribe

@franklin_e

franklin.e

Offers

Other Projects

Legal

Design and content ©2003-2017 Franklin Einspruch except where otherwise noted