Shhhhhh
Just had one of the most disturbing conversations. Got off the phone with an art league that refused to take our information for their annoucement board. There organization can not take art this is politically or religiously subjective. Reason being is that they are a non-profit and are worried that they would loose some of their donors. My God!!!
How can an art council except anything else? What art exists that isn't subjective? Why are we compelled to create anything else? If you look at the legacy of art, a huge percentage of it has made an influential spiritual or political comment. Sometimes it even happend unintentionally. But it always happens. We go to art galleries, are douced with imagery, and leave compelled almost always by something visually we saw that changed our perception.
If this is the case with this art council, I doubt that we'd ever see a Pollock, Arbus, Sherman, Chagall, Da Vinci, Rivera, and let's not discuss literature greats. But I wonder how many donors would love to personally own a piece from any of the artists just mentioned.
Hmmm? I wonder?
Guess we'll never know!
BTW....I love Laurel & Hardy!
How can an art council except anything else? What art exists that isn't subjective? Why are we compelled to create anything else? If you look at the legacy of art, a huge percentage of it has made an influential spiritual or political comment. Sometimes it even happend unintentionally. But it always happens. We go to art galleries, are douced with imagery, and leave compelled almost always by something visually we saw that changed our perception.
If this is the case with this art council, I doubt that we'd ever see a Pollock, Arbus, Sherman, Chagall, Da Vinci, Rivera, and let's not discuss literature greats. But I wonder how many donors would love to personally own a piece from any of the artists just mentioned.
Hmmm? I wonder?
Guess we'll never know!
BTW....I love Laurel & Hardy!
Comments