[ Contents | Search | Post | Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: Fons Bloemen
Date: 06 Mar 2000
Time: 11:52:26
Remote Name: hercules.cuci.nl
Do artists create images according to a philosophy and are that a crucial part of the art
object? Or is the philosophy the artist adhered to just an occasional side effect of the time he
lived in? Or do artists make their own logos, so to speak: not in words but in images? Is art a sort of
philosophy crystallized in images? Or is art a kind of irrationalism; according to this point of view: art is not art any more
once we become accustomed to the object? If this is true, the esthetic experience of this art
will be very short, what will remain are icons of a “once upon a time there was a surprise”!
Art managers and other art lovers are according to this point of view looking for new
irrational images, which they call art, and artists who agree on this try to create as
irrational (-new or original) as possible. Or was the original aspect of art traditionally only one valuable aspect of art and has this
aspect grown beyond it proportions in the last 40 years?