At first glance, the absurdist movement seems silly and childish. After all, how can you call this art? To some this is nothing but a strangely placed urinal. And yes, that is exactly what it is, and exactly the first impression the artist wants out of his audience. It is not until further reflection that the work's meaning is revealed. Artists of the absurdist movement are not necessarily striving for beauty, but instead for social commentary on the definition of art.
An upside down urinal on the street is commonly thought of as garbage, just awaiting the dumpster; however, what happens when this everyday object is put in a museum? If people pay to see it, does that make it art? Anything can be called art if it is seen through the correct medium. To define art, we would have to make so many specifications that the creativity of the institution would be lost. Perhaps, there is no purpose to discussing definition of art. After all, if someone wants to build beer can pyramid and call it art, there is no stopping him.
So what is the cultural significance of art if anyone can do it? The answer is obviously too complex for one analysis; however, in my own opinion, art is more of a personal journey for the artist than a business deal or occupation. It is about freedom and political statements and emotions and life events. Museum art, however, is a completely different story.
If people are going to pay to see a masterpiece, I believe they should see something outstanding, something virtuosic. If I go to a museum, I want to be impressed by an amazing photograph, or a statue that is pure perfection. I don't want to see a urinal tipped on its side that made it into the museum because someone famous happened to do the tipping. That would be more personal art, or as said before, a social commentary on the definition of art - a piece better saved for the internet.
To define art is surely an impossible task, that is for certain; however, the question remains, is it our job as a society to pass judgment on what type of stylistic works belong in which venues? Or perhaps, it is up to the artist to decide whether his work is personal, commercial, or a combination of the two. Regardless, I feel that the absurdist movement exists as a platform for these questions rather than a mode of expressing creativity. It is for the sake of the questions that this movement continues to grow.
I don't think it's any person's right to pass judgement on another's work of art in the sense of whether or not the artwork is actually art, though they can have their opinions on their interpretation of the message given. I will admit, however, that the influence of social norms and fads during a period of time can impact how well art is received by the masses, and whether or not people want to even listen to a message the artist may be trying to emphasize. The artist is the creator of his work and his message, so if he wants to try and gear his work towards being more political or simply be personal, that is at his own discretion.
ReplyDeleteOn the idea of the urinal piece being silly and childish, its always interesting to know that "Absurdists" believe their work is progressive and brilliant. The only basis from which art forms like this exist is out of a rejection of more "popular" art (Ex. surrealist painters). Therefore, it would seem that the need for judgement rests on the creator, because he or she knows his purpose, decides when a piece is complete/effective/impressive, knows the audience, and wants a reaction.
ReplyDeleteI believe that we are all free to judge artwork or decide where we want art to be placed, I think the real question is "Does it matter what we think?" We can all whine and complain about what we wish, but whether or not it makes a definite impact on the placement of the art in a museum or not is questionable. Of course, we aren't going to a well-known museum to see macaroni art, but as far as a tilted urinal goes, it must have some sort of outstanding artistic significance if it were to be placed in the louvre...
ReplyDelete