I recently saw the exhibition on the Beats at the Beaubourg in Paris. Much of it has not aged well. However, I did emerge with a stronger sense of their place in mid-late 20th century art and culture.
Yesterday I followed up with a trip to the Abstract Expressionists exhibition in the RA. Pollock and Rothko particularly strong. Also some of Smith's sculptures. To some extent my reaction reflected the gallery's commentary: I favoured the works in dark colours and (Rothko aside) those with vigorous (let's not say violent) strokes.
Along the way I noticed a piece of sculpture that looked like the sort of thing I had seen in the background of some of photos in the Beaubourg. Formless rustic space-fillers thrown together from bric-a-brac. Such things had seemed unremarkable in the context of a boho "anti-art" living space. Placing it on a pedestal, literally, in the RA exposed it for what it is. For my part, if I want to consume some art, I want to consume some art, not "anti-art" (or "non-art" or "Sunday art", or call-it-what-you-will).
In the art shop afterwards I noticed a CD of jazz that goes with the exhibition. I imagine that the track list well represents what your average Beat will have listened to. All very nice. But it struck me that the musical equivalent of the "anti-art" thing gained ground somewhat later; in jazz anyway.
I came way thinking that it is hard enough to produce art that works. What are your chances of producing "anti-art" that works as art? If you manage, all you have done is produce some art anyway. So, you have failed on your own terms.
Best consumed in small quantities, I find.
Those who know their art will forgive my canvassing of hackneyed themes.
Yesterday I followed up with a trip to the Abstract Expressionists exhibition in the RA. Pollock and Rothko particularly strong. Also some of Smith's sculptures. To some extent my reaction reflected the gallery's commentary: I favoured the works in dark colours and (Rothko aside) those with vigorous (let's not say violent) strokes.
Along the way I noticed a piece of sculpture that looked like the sort of thing I had seen in the background of some of photos in the Beaubourg. Formless rustic space-fillers thrown together from bric-a-brac. Such things had seemed unremarkable in the context of a boho "anti-art" living space. Placing it on a pedestal, literally, in the RA exposed it for what it is. For my part, if I want to consume some art, I want to consume some art, not "anti-art" (or "non-art" or "Sunday art", or call-it-what-you-will).
In the art shop afterwards I noticed a CD of jazz that goes with the exhibition. I imagine that the track list well represents what your average Beat will have listened to. All very nice. But it struck me that the musical equivalent of the "anti-art" thing gained ground somewhat later; in jazz anyway.
I came way thinking that it is hard enough to produce art that works. What are your chances of producing "anti-art" that works as art? If you manage, all you have done is produce some art anyway. So, you have failed on your own terms.
Best consumed in small quantities, I find.
Those who know their art will forgive my canvassing of hackneyed themes.
Comment