“Art can only be art if it has no other use” …………….
…………….. according to an expert on the subject.
Now with this in mind -
There was a debate on the BBC last week, asking whether graffiti was art or just plain vandalism , and this in turn had been brought about by Bristol City Council asking its taxpayers whether or not it should remove some of it’s own graffiti , including pieces by world famous artist ??? - .Banksy .
Well - graffiti certainly conforms to the original non functionality statement at the start of this piece ……. but is it or isn’t it ……..????
I visited The Louvre in Paris a few years ago , and the crowds around the Moaning
Lisa :) , were about 100 hundred deep, leaving the rest of the wonderful –
Leonardo De Vinci’s – just sitting - without as much as a second glance !!! , which I personally found – astounding !!! .
Talking of Paris - there was also an exhibition of Monet at the Orangerie , and can I put the metaphorical knife through canvas , and say I wasn’t impressed with this at all , and was more interested in the collection of street artists - work at Sacre Coer
Now can I go even further, and break the experts rules by saying I view motorcycles as art , thus breaking the functionality clause , but I’m not alone in this as The Barbican ran an exhibition of Harley’s as art , although - this , as I’ve said in the past does not excuse Damien Hirst’s - customised Harley in which he simply just poured paint over the bike !!!
I do not like traditional art simply because the artist is famous , or modern art because it is outlandish , there has to be some substance to it all, although saying that I simply cannot get away with mundane scenes portrayed in art - as a rule .
This would be for example - portraits , and to an extent – landscapes although actual old photographs of real life and people fascinate me , but that’s a different media altogether.
I suppose you have to accept - what I call traditional art for what it is - a fictional representation via the artists eye , as unless - it’s for example a posed portrait or maybe a still life , it is simply not a true representation of reality , as the scene you are painting is constantly changing , and therefore unlike a photograph – uncapturable , but then again that’s the point of it all - and people tend to miss this .
Modern art - I always think is truly abstract and there fore – totally personal , so unless you are attuned to the artist , you miss the point and dismiss it , now I’m not endorsing any of the more outlandish themes with this statement , as there have always been those to take advantage of this and other situations , especially in this particular field of contention .
Ok back to the original questions ……….
……….Is graffiti art ? ………… you bet :)
………are motorcycles art ? ………….OH YES…… :)
………..are Monet’s best viewed from a distance? ……yes about 100 f**king miles :)
…………Is modern art rubbish ? ……………95% of it :)……………..
………..am I an idiot ? ……………..most definitely……………… :)
