Beauty in Contemporary Art/ I Like America and America Likes Me

In the article “Beauty in Contemporary Art,” there were several discussions and ideas about what defines art, and what should actually be considered art. Also, the question of an artist’s responsibility and impact on society induced many different points of view. Some artists don’t believe that they have any social responsibility and that the only responsibility they have is to the attitude in which they create their art. Artists like Georg Baselitz have even said things like “art does not change the world.” He says this because society as a whole could go on without the artist. In this light, art is a world in which the artist’s only incentives are the goals of attaining commodities and money. The main focus is to achieve a level of power and prestige from their works through selling and showing their creations.

In another light, art can be seen through actions, as opposed to an actual product. Many feel that it is important for artists and art to reflect the times in which they have been created or done, and to be socially aware. It is wrong to ignore society’s problems, and to not incorporate them into their art. Art can be expressed by doing things such as cleaning up the environment, and becoming a friend of nature. Producing an actual tangible piece of work is not the only way to create art. Furthermore, art does not have to be recognized and boasted about. It doesn’t have to be publicized, or shown in exhibits or museums and sold. The direction that only few artists seem to be taking is an art in action. They are taking a more socially aware approach on problems that currently exist in society, such as environmental safety, pollution, and being involved in the beauty of true nature. The argument for art in action is centered around the fact that something does not have to be produced to be considered art, such as paintings, drawings, sculptures etc. The view of art is in desperate need of more artists understanding that art can change the world, and by taking action, the beauty of the world and nature may be preserved.

Art can exist in other actions other than servicing nature. Another form of art as action is the servicing of humanity. The most important things existence are nature, the environment, and the existence of the beings whom live in the environment. It is imperative that action be taken to preserve these things. Until art is reconnected with life, it is going to continue to be marginal and play no part in the bigger picture. From now on, art should not be created for the sole purpose of the pursuit of money and commodities, but rather to play a role in changing the world.

In Bueys’ Coyote action, he stays in a room with a coyote with nothing but newspaper, felt blankets, and a cane. The coyote itself is an animal that represents action, and is the most adaptable mammal in existence other than Homo sapiens. Mythologically and biologically, the coyote is exemplary of evolutionary change. In the article, Bueys recognizes that our society is in major need of social change. He describes it as a “wounded traumatized body in need of treatment.” He says that he is not against materialism as it is necessary in some forms, yet if we do not let it stop consuming our lives we will not be able to accordingly evolve to survive. Bueys states that “Everything begins with art,” and “Art alone makes life.” So is his point of view, art can change the world, and the form of art that could most successfully do this is an art that involves action and evolution. The coyote action was overall an attempt to get America to understand that all of the elements in the world as a whole are greater than the individual elements. All things work together to produce a larger and much greater effect. To further change life, and art, each of these components must evolve and become active in our social

transformation.

Walking to the Sky

"Walking to the Sky" is a public sculpture created by Johnathan Borofsky. The sculpture is located in Rockefeller Center, and is made of stainless steel with fiberglass figures. I remember seeing this sculpture in person when I was a child, and being amazed at it's size and realistic features, (other than the fact that people are walking on a pole on a 75 degree angle). As I study it now it perplexes me as to why this was so special as to have it placed in the middle of such a main city as New York City. Obviously the artist had a purpose or message in mind that motivated him to create such a sculpture. It obviously is not trying to encourage people to try doing this because this would be physically impossible. After revieiwing it further, and reading the background of the artist and of this sculpture, I can now appreciate the beauty in the purpose of this art, as I already admired it's physical presence simply because of it's overwhelming size. (100 feet tall)


The reason why I can now appreciate this work of art is because it has sentimental meaning to the artist. It reflects a time in his life when he was a child, and his father used to tell him a story of a friendly giant who lived in the sky. In these stories, the father and his son would meet the giant in the sky, and the giant would give them advice about what everyone needed to do back on earth to live better lives and to enjoy them to the fullest. It was a way for Borofsky's father to intrigue his son with a compelling unrealistic story that would teach his son positive underlying messages and instill important values in him. From these memories, Borofsky created a sculpture resembling a similar story of people traveling to the sky. It portrays what he derived from these childhood stories.


When asked about his sculpture, the artist described it as being a "celebration of the human potential for discovering who we are and where we need to go." With a message so pure, it makes it hard not to appreciate the artist's work. It is such an inspirational piece of art, but may not be admired upon forst encounter. Now understanding what the motivation and message behind this sculpture is, I admire it and support the message it gives to it's viewers.

Towards a Newer Laocoon

The essay titled "Towards a Newer Laocoon," explains the author's view of his time period. In he majority of this essay, Clement Greenberg is summarizing the history of art in the past century, and trying to explain what he thinks happened to it. Art was changing during this time period, and he was trying to make sense of it all by producing some of his own theories.

During this time period, art was going through cycles of imitation. This immitation was occuring in painting, literature and music. The reason for this imitation was driven by the desire to combine all of the appealing elements of each type of art into the others. They each took something from each other and incorporated it into themselves.

Greenberg describes these art forms as trying to find themselves outside of themselves. This was a losing battle, and only after they had no other option did they return to their true nature. He believed that that these art forms made unnecessary attempts to try to go "outside the box," if you will. He believes that they didn't have to deny their fundamental values for such a period of time just to arrive at their true recognition. Painting took the steepest fall of all of the art forms in his eyes. It was no longer fundamentally sound. The fundamentals of painting are canvas and paint. It started as a fight against the medium, working to be categorized as an illusion, an imitation. This soon subsided and it returned to its true fundamental state with the help of some admirable painters.

Greenbergs argument that the "prensent supremacy" of abstract art had to do with music being the dominant form of art during this period. Previously, the dominance of literature caused painting to closely relate to literary characteristics. During the 19th century, literature reigned as the dominant form of art. During this time literature was influenced by the Romantic Revolution. The Romantic theory of art was "that the artist feels something and passes on this feeling-not the situation or thing which stimulated it-to his audience." During this period, painters lost respect for their mediums, and for the first time academicism was born. Greenberg describes painting as being at an "all time low" during this period. Greenberg's opinion for art during this period is shown in the quote, " the fate of our particular tradition of art depends upon that into which abstract art develops." He believed that a good painting does not have to be successful. Rather it should be "stimulating," "interesting," "original," and "creative."

Despite his criticisms, Clement Greenberg did have a few excpetions to his dismay. He approved of some artists who held true to the virtue, and rather than imitating, expressed emotion and character in their pieces. He was fond of the work of such artists as Miró, Léger and Kandinsky.

Clement Greenberg outlined the course of art for the future. After this essay was written, Abstract Expressionist paintings were produced and became extremely popular. The purpose of this type of art parallels the way Greenberg felt art needed to be, and how it needed to change. Greenberg wrote this essay about the natural course of change in art, and the outburst of Abstract Expressionsim exemplifies a natural course of change.

Phenomena Waves Without Wind

This piece of Art is associated with Abstract Expressionism and was created by Paul Jenkins in the year 1977. It reflects his fascination with Eastern religions and metaphysical writings, mainly his fascination with Asian art. This particular piece captures his signature style characterized by controlled paint pouring and intense, pure colors.