Karen Sullivan on wed 11 apr 01
I think the book you refer to is Thomas Wolfe, The Painted Word.
I also think the book refers to the world of art of the 50's and 60's
which is significantly different than the world today.
My sense is that in the 60's Clement Greenberg and other critics
were in large part instrumental in developing a party line...
that there were not as many artists, and there was a limited
field in the practice of art making.
Rush...the advantage you have today is a tremendously diverse
field...geographic or regional trends...but overall the
freedom to do whatever you want and the ability to find a
market for the production of work...Power in numbers.
I think what separates the work is in large part the nature
of the ideas one works with...There is a world of difference
in the questions one asks when making...
The information communicated, whether to make
in your face narrative or subtle quiet historically motivated pure
form. Function can be physical, metaphoric, spiritual, custodial...
So freedom to do what you want is vast...
I find the limitation is totally self imposed...based on what
I am physically or intellectually able to accomplish in
the physical act of making or the intellectual, conceptual, or
narrative complexity of the idea.
I do see trends...think of the work produced in the 60's...
it seems frozen in a time...the aesthetic of the moment.
The existing technology of glazes and surfaces....
So history is significant..Think of the trends of surfaces used.
Wood fire would be a current surface that will signify the 90's....
One can only do what one is able to...and to push for improvement
and push for new goals...Just try to ask good questions when making stuff.
bamboo karen
| |
|
