Showing posts with label purpose of art. Show all posts
Showing posts with label purpose of art. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 30, 2008

dutch visual artist ralf kwaaknijd: the purpose of art is controversy & the hidden in plain sight series 2

the reason that kwaaknijd is being sued by citizens rights' organizations such as the french citoyens contre la contresurveillance is that his unobtrusive hidden-in-plain-sight works are actually being monitored and filmed on a 24/7 basis. the (digital) videorecordings reveal amongst others the general public's reaction to the discovery -for instance- that the object they just sat on is ART. But also the general public's nondiscovery of the object as a work of art.

kwaaknijd uses the footages in a synthesis apotheosis of his hidden-in-plain-sight series, to confront both art experts and the general public with the increasing cryptogenetic content and appearance of modern art, where only the text tags on the wall tell us what is art and what not.

however, for obvious reasons, the videoregistration of the using of the toilets in his carefully painted and designed pub(l)ic art space / hidden in plain sight xxiii is a privacy violation in the eyes of citoyens contre la contresurveillance (cccs).

ralf kwaaknijd - pub(l)ic art space / hidden in plain sight xxiii (2001, louvre paris)

but cccs also fights the enregistration of say, people trying to clean up the debris in rectangular spatial composition with debris / hidden in plain sight xlvii , and then finding out the debris won't budge (since it is glued to the floor) and then noticing the small sign on the wall saying: don't sit on the artwork, do not touch - above the attributal tag with title and artist.

ralf kwaaknijd - rectangular spatial composition with debris / hidden in plain sight xlvii (2008, louvre, paris)

kwaaknijd has repeatedly stated that he is glad with the law suits, since he considers the purpose of art to be to create controversy. art to kwaaknijd is only worthwile as

`anything to shake up the rusted beliefs and mindsets of the public and the art world in particular. we must continuously create new synapses in the brains, faster than our forebears, or we will end up like our forebears and mess up our world. forget esthetics, forget beauty, forget understanding. we must act art, to disrupt and regroup'.

Tuesday, July 29, 2008

dutch visual artist ralf kwaaknijd: the purpose of art is controversy & the hidden in plain sight series

i've been trying to reach the infamous dutch artist ralf kwaaknijd for comments on the controversy over his work, but it seems he is very busy working on his new installation series, which is taking him around the world to leading museums of modern art.

one of his best known series hidden in plain sight still is surrounded with controversy and even law suits from concerned citizens' rights organizations.

let me reproduce some of these `hidden in plain sight' works here, first without commentary.

ralf kwaaknijd, rectangular spatial composition / hidden in plain sight ix

ralf kwaaknijd, rectangular spatial composition / hidden in plain sight ix (2006, stedelijk museum amsterdam)

ralf kwaaknijd - pub(l)ic art space / hidden in plain sight xxiii (2001, louvre paris)

ralf kwaaknijd, pub(l)ic art space / hidden in plain sight xxiii (2001, louvre paris)

ralf kwaaknijd - reflectionary interactive surface composition / hidden in plain sight xxix (2006, stedelijk museum amsterdam)

ralf kwaaknijd, reflectionary interactive surface composition / hidden in plain sight xxix (2006, stedelijk museum amsterdam)

ralf kwaaknijd - rectangular spatial-flat composition with brick background / hidden in plain sight xiv  (2004, bonnefantenmuseum, maastricht)

ralf kwaaknijd, rectangular spatial-flat composition with brick background / hidden in plain sight xiv (2004, bonnefantenmuseum, maastricht)

ralf kwaaknijd - rectangular spatial composition with debris / hidden in plain sight xlvii (2008, louvre, paris)

ralf kwaaknijd rectangular spatial composition with debris / hidden in plain sight xlvii (2008, louvre, paris)

the one below is perhaps a forgery, as stated in an earlier post:

ralf kwaaknijd, paradise snake

ralf kwaaknijd, paradise snake / hidden in plain sight xxxiv (2005, centre pompidou paris)

the purpose of art? a purpose of art? artificial porpoise?

so, alain badiou considers art a domain where important truths arise.

perhaps he agrees with my perception of a purpose of (my) art: deconstruction of existing clichés. a more positive way of saying this would be: the creation of images beyond what is solidified-as-cliché, in order to express and touch inner/outer Reality.

... lighten up! a little humor could work like a torch to dry cinder, i hope.

purpose of art? purpose of life? purpose of love? truth is, i haven't got the foggiest. you?

frank waaldijk, self portrait as unorthodox thinker

self portrait as unorthodox thinker (2005, mixed media on paper)

Wednesday, July 23, 2008

advertising & art 3: conflicting purposes

again and again my thoughts come back to the question: what is the purpose of art?

to be honest, i don't know. in its generality the question even seems unanswerable. of course many people claim some authorative knowledge on this question. i seldom find their answers convincing. the question to me only makes sense on a personal level. then it first becomes: what do i see as the purpose of art? and later, as an artist, the addition: what do i see as the purpose of my art?

in order to explain why i consider advertising the bane of modern art, i should explain what i see as the purpose of modern art. i phrased it a little mystically in the previous post, but even on a personal level i see hardly another way than this mystical phrasing. but perhaps a few more words will help, who knows.

to me, visual art's unique possibilities lie in the opening and widening and deepening of our perceptions of reality. for me personally, i connect this with spirituality in the sense that i believe visual art can help experience spirituality, can help develop human(e) concern for the well-being of others and other living creatures. but visual art can also reveal -brutally, one might think at first glance- la condition humaine: the level of our collective spiritual (un)wellness. as well as the harshness of nature, our fragile existence, our limited role in this universe, etc. etc.

so whatever the precise form or formulation, visual art for me has as its purpose the deconstruction of old clichés -after all most of these stereotypes in my eyes are hampering our progress by cluttering up our brain and heart in the same way as our predecessors, and look what state the world is in because of their and our doings along these stereotypes. the methods, images, contexts etc. used can vary greatly from artist to artist, and from artwork to artwork. one artist might, like goya, depict the horrors of certain types of human behaviour, in order to open our eyes to this behaviour, in order to make us realize: this is what you get when you think and act along these current stereotypes. another artist might depict loving scenes, going beyond what is the current cliché of love, in order to remind us that spiritual love between people is not only possible but even something that deep in our heart many of us crave. yet another artist might go for aesthetic abstract beauty, yet another for unsettling bodily/sensory sensations in some sort of installation.

francisco de goya, los desastres de la guerra

francisco de goya, los desastres de la guerra[one of 80 prints]

therefore, the purpose of advertising to me seems diametrically opposed to the purpose of art.

the ultimate purpose of advertising is to increase sales, i think. the advertising approach to this purpose seems to me to be this: reinforce existing clichés and stereotypes, and then tie these clichés to the product/concept/brand you wish to sell. just look at the simply awful gender stereotyping in advertising (because sex sells? reinforcing stereotypical gender roles makes people happy?), look at all the fake and superficial youth-and-happiness imagery.

now why should i worry about advertising in connection to art?

firstly, it seems to me that increasingly, the purposes of artists and other people in the art world are verging towards the purposes of advertising. (increase sales, to do so first achieve brand recognition, to achieve brand recognition first introduce suitable existing stereotypes, and reinforce them in some `new' (albeit shallow) fashion, then repeat them over and over and over.)

secondly, it seems people are spending more and more time looking at ads, and discussing them, to the point where i'm starting to believe that people derive some sort of personal meaning-to-life from these ads. then, when they see art, they look at art in the same way and if the clichés of an artwork are not as readily scooped up as in advertising, well then people are puzzled, disappointed and distracted and will seldom spend some more time trying to `get' it.

so which of the two approaches to imagery is winning out? that's why i consider advertising to be the bane of modern art. pretty soon modern art will be a branch of advertising, if this isn't already the case.