Can anything being produced in this era of pluralism once again shock the audience as did much of what occurred before the age of post modernism? Is there anywhere left to go artistically or have we reached the limit of artistic breakthroughs or the possibility of another venture into radical form? Innovation seems a long way off when anything and everything can be considered as art.
Perhaps the answer to the question lies in two areas. One could be a nostalgic yearning for the era of craftsmanship in the face of factory-driven mass production. The other could be what might be called a simplifying of life. The photorealist image arrives without emotional entanglements, complete within itself and defying interpretation. It simply is.
Every time I hear that old chestnut of a cliché that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, I am left wondering.
Recently I have seen any number of artists, particularly abstract artists, asking what titles they should put on their works. The original function of a title in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries was to identify the work for sale purposes and was more often...
The fact though is that self-taught artists abound today with endless online tutorials and discussion groups from which to choose. Whether they progress to an individual vision and approach beyond just technique is another matter but attending an art school is also no guarantee.
One of the theoretical divisions of modern and contemporary art recognises that the object can assert its own meaning and exist as a purely aesthetic statement or conversely reflect an ethic standpoint which refers to a socially motivated desire to change or affect the social order.