43. Conceptual Art

July 27, 2022

43. Conceptual Art

Black Paintings, by Ad Reinhardt, 1960's

“A quarter century ago, Ad Reinhardt announced that his black paintings had made him history's ultimate artist. He said he had taken art as far as it could go. He had solved all its problems. There was nothing left to do. The critics were impressed. But unfortunately, a lot of other artists refused to hand in their brushes, so art continued.

“Ever since, Modern Art has resembled a doomsday cult on the day after the deadline for the end of the world. The true believers have awakened to find that the sun has risen, the mad prophet's disappeared and they've all got to find something to do with the rest of their lives. They dissolve into factions with rival theories about what happened, what it means and what they're going to do next.

“In art, this predicament is what they call Postmodernism. And if you're confused about it, it's probably because you're beginning to understand it.” – Brad Holland

“Postmodernists believe that truth is myth, and myth, truth. This equation has its roots in pop psychology. The same people also believe that emotions are a form of reality. There used to be another name for this state of mind. It used to be called psychosis.” – Brad Holland

"If it wasn't worth money, it wouldn't be worth anything." – Kev Ferrara

What was it about? What were the goals?

Post Modernism is an umbrella term for many smaller kinds of art making that are not always related. It's an academic attempt to organize and make sense of what's happened in the art world since 1960, even though it makes little sense. These different movements include (often mixed together): conceptual art, installation art, land (nature) art, pop art, feminist art, appropriation (i.e. plagiarism), and performance art (not to be confused with performing arts like dance or theater).

“Art Theory: the typical Modern artist produces a small body of work wrapped in theory. Some even dispense with the work itself and exhibit only their theories, typed up on paper. To me, this seems a sensible economy of style. If the purpose of art is to redefine art, then words should do the trick. There's no use cluttering up the world with redundant examples.” – Brad Holland

Almost all of Postmodern art is conceptual, meaning the idea is more important than the final art object. The idea is the art. The object merely presents an example, it holds no other value (although they sure sell for a lot). Because the idea is what matters, conceptual artists often don't make anything at all, instead hiring craftsmen to make things for them. Or they fabricate a simple example with cheap materials, like plywood, or a simple piece of paper taped to a wall. The idea was to make great art without objects to sell, because art was about great ideas, not making money. Ironically, these objects still end up selling for thousands of dollars, and now that this is accepted, the artists have forgotten their noble (naïve) roots.

The notion of conceptual art was first introduced by the Dadaists, back in 1916, but it was supposed to be crazy back then. Now people just shrug their shoulders and accept it. You can think of conceptual art as the Return of the Living Dadaists, a shambling zombie puking art all over museums fifty years after it died:

Rainbow Body, Puke Painting, by Millie Brown, c. 2003? – did you think I was kidding?

A bit of historical context:

Postmodernism began in the 1950’s and 60’s, right when hippies were protesting wars. Just as Impressionism died from pessimism, Modern art also showed early promise for a better world, only to suffer two world wars, nuclear bombs, a new cold war, and endless fighting in tiny countries like Vietnam and Cuba, where the actions of a small group of leaders could lead to a nuclear holocaust. In place of a new peaceful era, we were living a political nightmare, and it’s still ongoing...

Conceptual artists sought to “dematerialize” art, partly due to the increasingly materialistic and money-driven art world in which they found themselves. Artists felt upstaged by their own work. Robert Rauschenberg protested outside of Sotheby’s auction hall as his most famous works went for bidding at sky high prices, and he didn’t get a cent out of it. He was sick at the thought his single greatest patron, Robert Scull, was only in it for the money.

Artists began to feel that the only way to show you were an artist for the right reasons, was to make are that no one could possibly buy or sell. This was based on the flawed notion that accepting money for one’s art was a corrupting influence. It’s not. In reality you can make what you really want, while finding an art market that likes and supports your work, and will even give feedback as to what would make it better - a collaborative process not unlike two artists working toegether.

The underlying philosophy of the period:

Post Modernism began with a host of new philosophers around 1950-60 called either deconstructionists or post-structuralists (same thing), most notably Jacques Derrida and Michel Foucault. The structuralists who came before had theorized that the way we experience and understand the world is through our culture, especially language. Without language, along with a system (or structure) of beliefs based on nature, science, religion, politics, etc., we wouldn’t be able to function or operate in the world. It’s these filters that help us make sense of the world we live in, without which, we’d be lost.

Post-Structuralists agreed with this premise, but complained, since the way we understand these cultural structures is biased, just as our perceptions of history are biased, there’s no way we’ll ever see beyond them, at true reality. We’re still lost, we just don’t know it. Foucault argued that modern society wasn’t nearly so advanced, progressive, or superior as people believed. They argued that this was why there are no simple answers to life’s big questions, and that acceptance of this was a sign of maturity.

So, the job of an artist became to explore one’s environment. Society shapes you. Without your parents, community, church, school, technology, language, etc. you’d be nothing. So, art should focus on the things that make you who you are––it should critique society. This was a popular notion in the 1960’s when America was at war in Vietnam. You can think of Post Modernism as protest or hippy culture.

Not all artists working today are interested in Post Modernism, or the philosophy involved. If an artist working today paints portraits or landscapes, he or she is contemporary, but probably not so post-modern, although little bits of the post modern world sometimes slip in. When I draw and paint, for example, I have zero interest in any of the major figures of postmodernism, nor their philosophies.

How was it represented in the other arts – music, architecture, and literature?

Apart from fine art, postmodernism is most prevalent in music, literature, and architecture, manifesting in a variety of different ways.

Was it great?

No? Not in general? I mean, this covers a great deal of people and art, some of which you could argue was really great – if you like to argue. But, incontestably, it made for some great comedy. Most postmodern artists can be best understood and appreciated as comedians. PoMo art is probably about 85% satire.

One of the worst effects of PoMo art is the lack of appreciation and even denigration of skill, which has seeped into art education. Some classes and courses no longer offer instruction in technique, focusing solely on what the artwork means. The teachers don’t show you how to do anything. They give an assignment, leave the students to work alone, then critique the results, judging solely on the work’s deeper meanings.

Meanwhile, students commonly state their work couldn’t have mistakes because “it’s my art, it’s exactly how I wanted it to be.” People didn’t say this in the past. And, I’ve seen art teachers that openly say they have no skills, but it doesn’t matter, and I’ve seen other teachers complain about judging student work, and how it upsets their poor, sensitive egos.

But, art is about humility. You don’t come into the studio an artist, you come as a student, and you stay that way for most, if not all, of your life. The bar for quality has already been set by Michelangelo, Da Vinci, Bernini, Rembrandt, Picasso, and so on. That’s the goal, and most of us will never get there, and that’s okay––it shouldn’t come as a shock or embarrassment. It doesn’t mean you can’t judge your progress over time, the same as if you started running daily, or practicing the piano. Lying to yourself that quality doesn’t matter, or that it doesn’t even exist, is not going to get you anywhere. Lying to yourself is what should be embarrassing.

Some leading figures:

Balthus (1908-2001) (not considered PoMo, yet)

Francis Bacon (1909-1992)

Lucien Freud (1922-2011)

Robert Rauschenberg (1925-2008)

Cy Twombly (1928-2011)

Jasper Johns (1930-)

Faith Ringgold (1930-)

On Kawara (Japanese-American, 1932-2014)

Gerhard Richter (1932-)

Eva Hesse (1936-1970)

David Hockney (1937-)