Whither The Arts?
It isn't often that stone steps inspire chills, but to walk where centuries of human feet have literally worn down the stone is to simultaneously become part of history and to realize one's utter insignificance to it. Walking up the steps and into the magnificent structure, the eye is drawn inexorably from the stones below, upward, high beyond the massive columns, up further where the very walls seem to tilt toward each other and meet at dark, dizzying heights. It was 1989, and I was standing inside the massive cathedral in Cologne, Germany.
I had just finished reading a biography of German WWI ace Barron Manfred von Richthofen in which he described his very first airplane ride as a student pilot. As the plane rolled out for takeoff, the prop wash blew Richthofen's leather helmet off, along with his goggles and scarf. As the plane rose, and his gloves were also lost to the blast of wind from the propellor, his attention turned to that of viewing the landscape from the air for the very first time. And he wrote of his astonishment at seeing the spires of the Cologne Cathedral from a great distance.
That Cathedral had been there over 600 years when The Red Barron's canvass and wood plane did battle in the First World War. Those old stone steps were as old as the US Constitution by the time Christopher Columbus set sail for the New World. And yet there we stood in 1989, struck dumb it seemed, trying desperately to comprehend the sheer size and endless intricacies of this colossal structure which literally dwarfed everything around it. To view it from the outside is to feel rather like an ant contemplating a redwood.
To venture inside and see The Shrine of the Three Holy Kings (purported to hold the crowned skulls of the Three Wise Men), or the Gero Cross which dates back to 976, or the legions of statues, is to become virtually intoxicated with the divine devotion that conceived and constructed such a solemn place.
Where is there anything in modernity to compare? Camille Paglia poses just such a question, asking (and answering) the question of why so much of our fine arts have devolved into a "wasteland." "Painting was the prestige genre in the fine arts from the Renaissance on. But painting was dethroned by the brash multimedia revolution of the 1960s and '70s," writes Paglia, who then zeros in on a central point: "What do contemporary artists have to say, and to whom are they saying it? Unfortunately, too many artists have lost touch with the general audience and have retreated to an airless echo chamber."
It's a chamber where the avant-garde first yielded to iconoclasm, which in turn has yielded to unimaginative and vulgar conformity. One need look no further than the artist who submerses a crucifix in urine, and then congratulates himself for bravely giving the finger to orthodoxy, all while carefully avoiding a cartoon of Mohammed so as to avoid getting his head chopped off. So much for breaking new ground.
So where do we now turn for art? Snoop Dog? Our smartphones? I use my smartphone constantly. Thanks to technological wizardry, I can have a conversation with the thing (it even says, "Who's there?" when I say, "Knock knock"), but art it isn't. Among my personal effects is an old pocket watch that belonged to my great grandfather. A functional piece, it retains just enough ornate decoration to hearken back to another time and place. As long as that old watch is around, I feel grounded somehow, which is a feeling that so much of what passes for art fails to elicit. Now, am I channeling my inner fuddy-duddy, or is society losing something? Where art once celebrated eternal truths, what is its point today? To rail against the culture and system that enables it? Again from Paglia:
Capitalism has its weaknesses. But it is capitalism that ended the stranglehold of the hereditary aristocracies, raised the standard of living for most of the world and enabled the emancipation of women. The routine defamation of capitalism by the armchair leftists in academe and the mainstream media has cut young artists and thinkers off from the authentic cultural energies of our time.
"We do not consider ourselves a Christian nation, a Jewish nation, or Muslim nation," said President Obama, adding, "We consider ourselves a nation of citizens." This ideology that seeks to disconnect an entire people from their heritage and culture is the same ideology that teaches students to ridicule and scorn the very system that has afforded them a standard of living and a wealth of knowledge that previous generations could never have imagined. To defeat that ideology is to make possible the day when abiding truths are celebrated and the arts again, as in the past, lift the human spirit up, up toward the Author of all that is truly beautiful.
-- If you wish to join the conversation on this post, we invite you to click here to sign up for a One-Month Free Trial Offer. --. Enjoy great content and podcasts, post your own opinions, converse with leading figures on the Right, and much more. Ricochet - The Right People. The Right Tone. The Right Place.
- Comment (151)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (16)
Comments:
May '10
Re: Whither The Arts?
Architecturally speaking, I think there are many structures of the modern era that are awe-inspiring. I largely agree with Paglia's piece, but I do think her argument that "No major figure of profound influence has emerged in painting or sculpture since the waning of Pop Art and the birth of Minimalism in the early 1970s" is troubling. First, it implies that there has been no art deemed significant since Pop Art or Minimalism. Significant to whom? I admire many artists, painters especially, that have done tremendous work since. The bigger culprit in this is academia. Being liberal and anti-religion were almost prerequisites when I studied painting. For nearly 100 years, there's has been definitive push in the art world to declare what has gone before to be derivative and staid, and relevant, modern art must be provocative. The preferred way to achieve this is to make the profane sacred, and the sacred profane. The Dadaists, Futurists, Surrealists, etc, set the stage for this, and it has been cultivated by art schools. Art, like education, politics, and journalism have been hijacked by the Left, and subsequently ruined.
Apr '11
Re: Whither The Arts?
Oh...how you can touch a soul with words!
In that church you are part of a whole, not the center of the universe, as you can be in many old structures that people built with their hands and their hearts. It represents the enormous skill of the workman to define his view of the world.
We have lost an appreciation of craftsmanship because of mass production. I don't think there is anything wrong with mass production. But rare are the lofty goals of raising an edifice to God in an attempt to get closer to heaven. We fail to appreciate the time and effort that goes into crafting something that is special and unique, that can be shared by many, that attempts to praise workmanship for the glory of God
This is not only about buidings...it is about building a life as well. Working as hard as we can to better ourselves and our families by living good lives. It is also an attempt to get closer to God. It too is good craftmanship. and takes many years to build.
Apr '12
Re: Whither The Arts?
By the way, my wife works at a studio arts school that awards MFA and Master of Architecture degrees. I see a lot of work by current and up-and-coming artists. Every once in a while, someone goes and impresses me despite the environment and culture of the art world.
I remember one metalsmith named Smith who was making furniture in which he incorporated landscapes or aspects of certain landscapes. It was not immediately striking, but when one realized what he had done, it enhanced the works. It was functional and conceptual.
Jan '11
Re: Whither The Arts?
I'm a church freak. I love them. In the mid-1980s, I studied a semester in Mannheim, (then West) Germany. That meant I was in easy traveling distance to the great churches of Heidelberg, Mainz, and several others. Cologne was a weekend trip, which I enjoyed immensely. Later, they let me vacation in Munich, Austria, and then a week in Rome. It was a church tour.
But I must recount my first trip, to the Cathedral in Worms. On first entering the church, you go into a narrow entrance, almost a tunnel. It then expands, gradually, into the huge interior. It's almost a birth experience, entering into a separate world.
While walking around this new interior world, treating it like a tourist trap, a wedding party came in. They had a wedding, while we tourists wandered around. Later, a set of monks came into the back choir and prayed the Liturgy of the Hours.
It occurred to me that this was a "working" cathedral. It was a "working" spiritual space, integral to the people who live there. It was art-in-life, and life-in-art.
"Modern" art is navel-gazing. Real art must be entwined in life.
Apr '12
Re: Whither The Arts?
One other thing on architecture, someone mentioned César Pelli. If you're ever in the newer section of Washington National Airport, look up. The place is a modern cathedral. If you're just walking around looking at people, you'll miss it.
Jun '10
Re: Whither The Arts?
For quite a while, a significant proportion of artists have come through the university system. And the art programs have been influenced by the same culture that imbues the entire rest of the liberal arts curriculum. I think I've said it before here, but it wasn't long ago that if your "artist statement" or reviews of your work did not include the words "transgressive" or "challenges the dominant cultural paradigm", you were pretty much dismissed as not a "real" artist.
Artists read Paglia - and they can't dismiss her. Their artistic response will be interesting to see.
Mar '11
Re: Whither The Arts?
Before we disparage the contemporary art scene as a wasteland when compared to the Gothic wonder that is the Cologne Cathedral, let us remember that the term "Gothic" itself was used by Italian contemporaries to express how barbaric and unworthy they found the style.
It is a cliche to ask, but how many of the works we now count as timeless masterpieces were met with absolute derision during their time? How many now-celebrated composers died bitter paupers, because their work would not be appreciated for another 50 years?
I shudder to think that our grandchildren will revere the artwork being produced today, but it is probably inevitable.
Edited on October 7, 2012 at 6:45amMar '11
Re: Whither The Arts?
A similar miracle was the survival of the Cathedral in Freiburg: every surrounding house was hit, it received nary a scratch:
Mar '11
Re: Whither The Arts?
A beautiful building used to be the Chrysler Building or Independence Hall. Now it's glass monstrosities like "the Freedom Tower" and the Seagram Building. Read Tom Wolfe's short-but-insightful book From Bauhaus to Our House. The fathers of "modern architecture"... Corbusier, Mies van der Rohe, etc, intentially destroyed architectural beauty as a "bourgeois value" in their Marxist-inspired quest to start society "from zero". Amazing that van der Rohe was made rich by capitalist dollars while he mocked his clients with every building he made. Only in America are we such suckers to reward the very people that loathe us.
May '10
Re: Whither The Arts?
Also, I'd like to make an observation about the Serrano work that people have gotten so upset about. His intention, as I understand it, was not to attack or belittle Christianity, but to criticize certain practitioners of Christianity who exploit and deceive fellow followers for personal gain. I'd point to as example the high profile scandals involving well-known televangelists in 1986. The photograph Piss Christ is dated 1987. Of those two, I find the former more offensive and corrosive, than than the latter, but that's just me. I don't like everything Serrano has done, and he enjoys and benefits from the shock-value of his work. But here's what I would ask of people who find contemporary art offensive and unpalatable - give a work the benefit of the doubt before passing judgment. Don't dismiss it without attempting to at least try to understand where the artist is coming from. If you have done that and still hate it, fine, but dismissing it outright because it doesn't follow your aesthetic sensibilities is really unfair. There is so much beautiful and even reverential work out there to be discovered.
Mar '11
Re: Whither The Arts?
katievs:
BUT, on the other hand, I do see lots of what John Paul II called "signs of the new spring". I think a renewal is coming. · 1 hour ago
I pray you're right. And I say that not just as a slogan or an expression, but I mean it. I pray to Him that you're right. That would mean that we have some time left here and that it's not yet that horrid twilight that's been promised. I confess that I am... literally... tired of the world going to hell.
Jan '11
Re: Whither The Arts?
Why? Why do I owe an artist the benefit of anything?
When an artist is expressing himself, the burden is on him. If he wants to offer something for me to consider beautiful or meaningful, the burden is on him.
The problem with art forms like painting, photography, or sculpture is that they're a one-way, one-shot statement. Normally, criticizing society starts a conversation in which the provocateur explains his criticism. But criticizing society through a one-shot artistic statement (that can't be counter-criticized) lacks credibility. It's no better than giving society the finger as you drive by.
A provocative artist can't flip the bird to society, but then expect us to take the time to understand him.
May '10
Re: Whither The Arts?
Motivations. Art follows a different course when sponsored by a nobly born patron or devoted to the glory of God (a Heavenly king, rather than a non-judgmental buddy) than when it is produced for the consumption of teenage angst and melodrama or for artists' own exclusive clubs.
Where the artist looks, so his or her art follows. The grander one's focus, the grander one's works.
Even artists with great talent too often focus on themselves. I share that fault.
Apr '12
Re: Whither The Arts?
KC Mulville Why? Why do I owe an artist the benefit of anything?
When an artist is expressing himself, the burden is on him. If he wants to offer something for me to consider beautiful or meaningful, the burden is on him.
You don't owe the artist anything. You owe KC the chance to find magic. I have seen the art of hundreds of artists. Many of them are vapid airheads filled full of liberal ideology and creating future landfill. But usually I will find at least one work or one artist in a show that delights me, whether it is a Firebird decked out as a baroque boudoir or a sculpture of folded paper, and every once in a while, reading the description of a work will put it into a new context that makes me laugh out loud.
Now, it might be like searching through the blogs of truckdrivers to find a Dave Carter, but sometimes even contemporary art is worth a second look.
Apr '12
Re: Whither The Arts?
Steam punk. Another thought about contemporary art that is often interesting and whimsical is the whole steampunk movement. It incorporates the artisanship of the early industrial era with utility or perceived utility for a certain time period.
Apr '12
Re: Whither The Arts?
Here is another art exhibit that delighted me:
Yugos
Jul '10
Re: Whither The Arts?
Listening to O Magnum Mysterium as I write this reminded me of a comment by Leonard Bernstein: Music differs from the rest of the arts. It is the only thing known to man that can go straight to the heart, bypassing the brain. Yet much of today's 'classical' music is written for other contemporary musicians – mostly academicians – not written from the heart. I've heard it said that each tries to outdo the others by moving further and further away from anything satisfying to the ear in its atonality. Much of art is the same. A group of self-appointed guardians of the contemporary scene define what the ‘great’ works will be – from a commercial standpoint. Where once great works of art, music, architecture represented that which was much larger than oneself – often the glory of God – today it’s all about oneself. How small and disappointing that thinking.
And yet, when a truly great operatic singer appears on, say, America’s Got Talent (or Britain’s Got Talent), the audience is moved and responds to the beauty of that moment. Perhaps not all is lost.
Mar '11
Re: Whither The Arts?
Art speaks to the individual, but only if it has something to say.
This is a work by Jackson Pollock. Actually, it isn't. I rotated an actual work of Pollock's 180 degrees. Are your sensibilities shocked? Mine neither.
(I've always wondered...are there instructions, such as "this end up" on the reverse side of his canvases?)
Dec '10
Re: Whither The Arts?
I think that those of you who find modern life devoid of beauty and artistry are simply looking at the wrong mediums.
Painting is dead, for the most part, as is traditional sculpture. As you've all said, their works now appeal only to themselves.
However, things of beauty are still made every day by extremely talented artists (who may be more properly called "Artisans").
People who form armor from sheet steel or forge fine knives and axes from raw stock are doing what sculptors did hundreds of years ago, but doing them one better in the process. When they are done, their beautiful object is also useful.
People are making exquisitely crafted firearms now, better than anything ever made. More useful and more beautiful than any before them, and made from stronger materials which means more accurate and longer lived to boot.
Same thing with hotrods and sports cars. There are men and women out there right now hand forming some of the most beautiful automobiles that have ever been built. Faster and better handling than before, while also being easier to maintain and enjoy. Again, useful.
The beauty is there, you just have to know where to look.
Edited on October 7, 2012 at 11:39amJun '10
Re: Whither The Arts?
I am with Foxfier. The idea that you can move characters around in an ever evolving interactive picture is completely remarkable. The environments rendered are amazing. The great masters would no doubt be astonished - even without all the blowing stuff up.
It seems to me that art historians looking back from a couple of hundred years from now will find Warner Brothers, Disney, Pixar, Bungie, NCsoft, etc to have been the great art producers of the era. Attribution is problematic because there are multiple artists, creative directors, and programmer's code (which may reach the level of art by itself - only another programmer could know right?). Does art have to have signatures?
There is plenty of great art in the traditional artistic mediums being produced currently and ever since the Modern Art movements got momentum. Much of it is poo-pooed by the avant garde. Even some of those movements produced beautiful images and quality work. These orifice obsessed noodle heads, their apologists, and supporters should be ignored (except for ridicule).
Katievs, look a little closer. There are more artistic images in one trip to the store than a medieval pilgrim saw in a year. We take it for granted.