Art, Judgement, and Preference

 

            How does one judge Art?  Measuring artwork is notoriously difficult because the standard for art is unlike any other field of endeavor.  In sports one may time the speed or distance as well as the final score.  In the sciences an experiment is either repeatable or not.  And yet, there are items in the Arts that one may calculate.  Can one follow a rule for a ballet move?  Yes.  Is there a particular tone for music?  Of course.  May I distinguish among hue, chroma, and value in color?  Naturally.

            None of these formal qualities, however, comprise the essence of what is thought of as “Art.”  And the preference for a unique move, sound, or visual effect becomes subjective to the judge although one may describe these qualities in an objective manner.  Detailing a dance move, acoustical character, or shimmer of color is certainly important when noting what is attractive in an artistic work and that’s all very well.  What does this mean for a preference as to what is Art or, more distinctively, what is “good Art”?

            Preference for Art becomes subjective, to be sure, though one finds that most critics may reach a consensus when comparing and contrasting, say, a painting by Frans Hals with the work of Thomas de Keyser.  No offense to de Keyser, but when reviewing and sifting through 17^th century Dutch paintings I would say that the consensus is correct.  It is alike listening to the music of Antonio Salieri, whose overtures are playing in the background as I write this.  I can play simple tunes on the piano and otherwise know little about music, but I would say Salieri was a very good composer.  And yet, music critics note that his students Beethoven, Schubert, and Liszt surpassed him.

            If I find that I agree with expert critics or with a majority, then while I still may think that Hals was more artistic than de Keyser I need to demonstrate why formally.  That might assist one to understand why I think that way, but why is one formal application better than another?  Apparently, it is because I like it.

            Even if I can come up with a set of guidelines as to what is good Art then I will have to account for the long view as to how this compares and contrasts with the history of Art.  I am hopelessly locked into my life, however, and although I can see backward into the past I cannot look forward to the future.  Despite that restriction, I know that what is thought artful today may not be so tomorrow.  Art may suffer less of a depreciation than does fashion but it does change if only just a little.

            If I have a preference when judging then let it be for the long view of Art and not the short term fashion, for the innovative and not for the novelty, let it be for philosophy or pleasure and not for propaganda or profit.

29th WNY Regional Exhibition in Buffalo, NY

 

 Double-Play; mixed-media on acrylic sheet and board, 26" x 32"

Autumn brings theater openings, football games, and new art exhibitions and this season is no different.  This year my entry the juror accepted for the 29th Regional Artists Exhibition is Double-Play.  The show does not have a particular theme and will run from October 16 to November 20 at the Artists Group Gallery on North Street in Buffalo, NY.  The judge for this exhibit was Burchfield Penney Art director Dennis Kois.    

This artwork continues the experiment in the use of a transparency, here I employed a thin acrylic sheet with a DNA helix covering the middle panel drawing of a maple tree.  It is a challenge to overlay one drawing over another without taking away the integrity of each.  Does it work? 

And it was enjoyable presenting two different perspectives of the same house while keeping the two connected as one with the figures in the left- and right-side panels. 

Art: Philosophy, Pleasure, Prophecy, Profit, or Propaganda?

What is Art? Is it for philosophy, pleasure, prophecy, profit, or propaganda? 

It is unfortunate that there have been those who purchase what is thought to be a work of Art because it fits a preconceived notion as to what is “Art.”  E.g., a person of great means has the money to buy a 17th century Dutch oil painting portrait, the artist may be well known or not, and the cost may be $500k.   [Well, it’s not a Rembrandt since that would go into the millions.]  

Anyway, they buy the painting and it’s a good example of 17th century Dutch portraiture.  So what?  They just bought the equivalent of a snapshot of someone else’s family member from a few centuries ago for $500k so they can hang it in their house?  What makes this Art—or is it really just a commodity, either a conspicuous consumption or an investment? 

Critical Cat

 

Just as Roxy tried to engage my artwork (vid. 2 October 2019) so does Rosie, pet of son Daniel P. Ross.  Not sure what to make of my latest drawing Rosie appears to be interested enough to review it, but not excited enough to rate it.  That's okay, give that cat a treat! 

Sheldon Berlyn (1929-2020), UB Professor Emeritus

Former faculty of Studio Art Sheldon Berlyn passed away 12 April 2020.  I was sorry to hear about this but glad I had the opportunity to see him again at the 2015 Finger Lakes Exhibition at the Rochester, NY Memorial Art Gallery.  It was an honor to be in the same show.  Back in the 1970s as an Art student, I always appreciated that he tried to assess my artwork with empathy.   

Best to his family and friends.

 

The Procrustean Bed of Judgement

Procrustes, son of Poseidon, was a figure in Greek story who lived in Attica (sorry, not Attica, NY or the prison but a region in which is the city of Athens, Greece).  A rude and discourteous fellow, Procrustes was said to take passersby and lie them down on a bed.   If too short, then he would stretch them out until they fit; if too long, then he would chop off the excess until they did (as in the vase-painting here).

While that’s enough to make him a candidate for Attica state prison, it has also become a figure of speech to describe particular judgements made with preconceived standards.  Granted, any judgement has a preconceived standard according to some foundational understanding as to what is appropriate.  And yet, it is one thing to judge the weight of a guinea pig and another to judge the best flavor of ice cream.  

An Latin adage says it best, de gustibus non disputandum est or “there’s no point arguing about taste.”

Does this apply to the visual Fine Arts?  I think so.  It’s one thing to judge an artwork based upon some formal application of what the artist was trying to accomplish and it is another to make those distinctions according to what you think it should present.  

E.g., if the artist was painting a still-life, then one may make distinctions based upon that.  Of course, it’s not just any still-life as there is more than one way to do this.  And so, one makes leeway for the artist’s take on the method and the subject matter instead of presuming that there is only one acceptable way.  

The latter indicates the standard of the Procrustean bed by presuming a preconceived standard.  The “bed” is the preconceived notion as to what is Art, and in making decisions as to how an artwork is Art, unless one can stretch or shorten the artwork’s ideas to fit the standard, then likely the Procrustean critic will dismiss the artwork. 

I know that it’s a challenge to me to review unfamiliar artwork that doesn’t meet what I would consider to be hallmarks of intriguing expression.  That’s why, usually, I tend to caution.  This wasn’t always the case as decades ago I would be too quick to dismiss artwork that didn’t meet whatever was my standard.  

Now, however, I try to meet the artwork on its own terms in the dialogue between viewer and Art.  It’s not easy, and sometimes I still tend to think that “this looks like…” or “this should be more like…” instead of allowing the art to speak as Art and for itself.