There is no question that artists (unlike, say, cartographers) are entitled to their own singular vision of reality. Some visions are striking, original, and unforgettable (Mantegna's Lamentation of Christ, Bacon's Study after Velázquez's Portrait of Pope Innocent X, Basquiat's Boxer). Some are bland, kitchy, or derivative (Rococo paintings and sculptures, the works of Barnett Newman and Philip Pearlstein). And some are so badly undermined by their hilariously misconceived titles that their artistic merit (if they have any to begin with) is simply irrelevant. Rodin's most famous sculpture is one example. Are we to believe that a man sitting on a stone toilet bowl in anticipation of bowel movement represents a man immersed in thought? With 30+ years in academia I can claim to have seen many people, colleagues and strangers, immersed in thought. Some were reclining in an armchair, some were lying on an office sofa, some were strolling through a park or sitting on a park bench, and some were staring at the screen of their computers. None of them, however, looked like they were about to discharge the contents of their colons.
* * *
No comments:
Post a Comment