Question: Why is Modern Art so Bad?

I mean when Pope Benedict asked Giotto for a drawing to prove his worth as an artist, what he did was draw a perfect circle freehand. Perfection is a powerful message.
The Sphere

I stumbled upon the video “Why is Modern Art so Bad?” by PragerU(niversity, a conservative organization). It is well worth watching.

Personally, I think he does have some good points. Art does have a function (other than ego-stroking and money making), and art which fails this function is not art. And it’s incredibly arrogant to claim to address all people with ones’ art, and then hold the audience responsible for their lack of understanding. (If you want to make art for a small circle of ‘elites’ that’s fine, just expect society to pay for or think highly of it.) On the other hand, modern art can be made accessible, if it does have a point. I’m thinking of MoMA’s “I see” here.

But in any case, the connection to the audience has to be made. And yeah, art requires skills and discipline.

1 Comment

  1. I have to agree. Art that does not make a connection simply fails. This is the same for writing or photography or any other medium of communication. If you cannot make a visceral connection to your audience, you either have the wrong audience or your work is poor. modern part makes me angry because apparently I need some sort of education to appreciate. The argument is that even for reading you need some kind of background education to understand. While this is true, I also think that visual communication relies on more deeper structures and understanding in our brain. We are communicating in a common language of living experience. We should not need more experience than the simple act of living provides. If I cannot appreciate a piece of art in terms of symmetry, shape, or colour then I’m clearly the wrong audience for the piece of art. But, I will not be made to feel “worthless” for my lack of education and my lack of appreciation. I have a great deal more appreciation for a Robert Bateman painting than many of the other pieces of work I saw in the Tate Museum. This painting communicated far more emotion than a photograph. Many of the pieces of artwork that I saw the Tate Museum communicated very little to me. In my uneducated state I appreciate skill and realism more than an explosion of inexplicable emotion. This is the same way that I appreciate writing it is clear, concise and has a purpose rather than a ramble. On that note I should and my comment because I’m getting dangerously close to even more rambling

Comments are closed.