Anish Kapoor's Cloud Gate in Chicago (photo Jeff Jahn)
Tomorrow at Place
the latest Praxis salon discussion presents Jason Brown's Paper "In
the Defense of Beauty: The Guise and The Intangible
." Grant Hottle's
paintings will be on display as well.
Beauty was a hot topic in the mid 90's when Dave Hickey challenged the decades
long bias against it in contemporary art with his essay, The
Invisible Dragon: Four Essays on Beauty
. It was essentially an all out and
ultimately successful attack on a lot of French postmodernism theory that had
metastasized into a kind of academic koan, one which treated visual pleasure
as a kind of intellectual failing. What Hickey most effectively assaulted was
the academic conceit rather than the theoreticians themselves and suddenly it
was fine to make beautiful things again and craft suddenly stopped being a dirty
word... not that Anish Kapoor and Jeff Koons weren't already doing it and artists
like Murakami, Hirst, Andreas Gursky, Josiah McElheny and Olafur Elliason eventually
removed all doubt. Likewise, the resurgent interest in Ed Ruscha, Ellsworth
Kelly, Richard Serra, Robert Irwin and Judd ultimately solidified the argument
that beautiful (or relentlessly visual/kinesthetic) work could be intellectually
Overall, I'm interested in seeing where this discussion around Brown's paper
hinges on and diverges from the art history of the past 20 years and hopefully
some discussion of local examples will ensue (Storm Tharp, Jacqueline Ehlis
(who studied with Hickey), Eva Speer, Arcy Douglass, Laura Highes, Jordan Tull,
Laura Fritz, Midori Hirose, Adam Sorenson, the Appendix crew and James Lavadour
are all germane). Lastly, does beauty still require defending and from whom?
Perhaps reading Arcy's essay
from 2008 On Form (or from Polykleitos to Janine Antoni
) might be helpful?
@ Pioneer Place
700 Sw Fith Ave. Third floor at settlement
5:30 - 8:30PM
Posted by Jeff Jahn
on August 23, 2011 at 21:27
| Comments (5)
Or.. you could just go in with an open mind and see if the ideas make sense. Yeah, i could listen to Abbey Road before the new Dr. Dog album.. but why not just enjoy it?
Posted by: Christopher Buckingham at August 24, 2011 10:55 AM
"Lastly, does beauty still require defending..."
No. Beauty is -- like painting and representational art -- a perennial hardy enough to effortlessly survive any attempt -- however intellectually rigorous or fashionable -- to dismiss it.
"...and from whom?"
Adventurers who wandered away from the obvious and got lost.
Posted by: rosenak at August 24, 2011 06:08 PM
This is an interesting topic. Yes beauty and aesthetics must still be defended or it might wander into the territory of saying "art is everything or anything" which is dangerous. If art is everything then it is nothing. It has no independent definition. Ultimately it is a defense of truth.
@rosenak: Your last sentence is beautiful.
Posted by: Faure at August 30, 2011 01:02 PM
The paradox of everything and nothing is an interesting loop. However, it does seem more dangerous to start talking about what isn't art as opposed to anointing what is.
That is the truth.
Posted by: ST at August 31, 2011 01:08 PM
(@ST) We are definitely starting from different places. It seems there is two lines of thoughts about language. One popular one, right now, is to be very literal about “meaning”. With that, few things meet the requirements to hold their definitions. The other line of thought recognizes that meaning has always been fluid and that there is no reason to give up on categories. Language recognizes naturally occurring categories and simply gives them a name. A group of objects are recognized as similar, (exp. Flowers, subcategory Roses.) With categories there is variety. If everything is everything, it is all neutral grey.
Back to Art… I think Art holds it’s own definition. It is fluid because we are human. Does some art lie? Yes, some Artists are happy with creating the impression of success instead of true success. (But that sound very human too.) For me, Cult of personality art is very boring but the members of the Cult always look like they are having a good time.
Posted by: Faure at September 6, 2011 07:44 AM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in,
. Now you can comment. (sign
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by
the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear
on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)