content_copy

The complaisant Art patron

October 3, 2016
In 1917 Marcel Duchamp, one of my favorite artists, produced a porcelain urinal and submitted for the exhibition of the Society of Independent Artists as a work of art.

No! Mr.Duchamp, that mass produced Urinal is not art. Not to me anyway. As much as I admire Duchamp as an artist I disagree with his Urinal as a piece of art argument. A true work of art should move the viewer, evoke a reaction, a feeling, perhaps a new visual exploration of the world, a beautiful, realistic representation of the familiar. A true work of art is a blend of artist's sweat and tears, skill and creativity. A true work of art is not rebranding, redefining or reinterpreting an object. To me this is a philosophical or intellectual argument not an artistic one.

This is why I never understood why Mr.Warhol is considered to be among the greatest artist of 20th century yet Mr.Leroy Neiman's work is scoffed at by serious art collectors. I believe Mr.Neiman fits the description of an artists more than Mr.Andy Warhol does. All Mr.Warhol did was to re market the Soup can, The Barilo detergent, just like Duchamp tried to do years earlier with the urinal. No, Andy Warhol was always more of a celebrity than an artist. I will skip over the awful silk screen paintings hanging at the museums, specially the celebrity portraits. My God!!!

As for artistic skill and talents please go and take a look at Mr.Warhol's illustrations when he worked in advertising and fashion industry. No wonder he picked up on silk screening and photography. Here was a man with no artistic skill whose only talent was to copy Duchamp. Except, this time with advent of new media and celebrity the art world "elite dealers" were able to shove the "celebrity artist" down our throats.

The multimillionaire who buys a Warhol silk screen painting for $20,000,000 does not question the artistic merits of the painting. No, his ego is satisfied, a complaisant good boy in the pockets of the art dealers, who does as he is told, scared to question his motivation for the purchase. Yet, if a Leroy Neiman painting was hung next to his beloved Warhol his gaze would always gravitate towards the Neiman painting. Such is the power of true Art.

Unfortunately, there is a lingering insecurity among art fans and art collectors. After all who knows what constitutes good art. It is a very subjective matter. This has created a culture of complaisance and for too long the art dealers have taken advantage of this fact and sold us on fake artists.

Please take a look at Willem De Kooning or Jasper Johns to see true artists creating real art.
 

STENBERG BROTHERS: Revolution in Soviet Design

April 12, 2016
I couldn't have said it better myself. Please read the following by Christopher Mount about the genius of
the Stenberg Brothers.

Written by Christopher Mount:

The 1920s and early 1930s were a revolutionary period for the graphic arts throughout Europe. A drastic

change took place in the way graphic designers worked that was a direct consequence of experimentation in both the fine and the applied arts. Not only did the formal vocabulary of graphic design change, but also the designer's perception of self. The concept of the designer as "constructor"—or, as the Dadaist Raoul Hausmann preferred, "monteur" (mechanic or engineer)—marked a paradigmatic shift within the field, from an essentially illustrative approach to one of assemblage and nonlinear narrativity. This new idea of assembling preexisting images, primarily photographs, into something new freed design from its previous dependence on realism. The subsequent use of collage—a defining element of modern graphic design—enabled the graphic arts to become increasingly nonobjective in character. 


In Russia, these new artist-engineers were attracted to the functional arts by political ideology. The avant-gardists' rejection of the fine arts, deemed useless in a new Communist society, in favor of "art for use" in the service of the state, was key in the evolution of the poster. Advertising was now a morally superior occupation with ramifications for the new society; as such, it began to attract those outside the usual illustrative or painterly backgrounds—sculptors, architects, photographers—who brought new ideas and techniques to the field. 


Vladimir and Georgii Stenberg were prominent members of this group, which was centered in Moscow and active throughout the 1920s and early 1930s. The Stenberg brothers produced a large body of work in a multiplicity of mediums, initially achieving renown as Constructivist sculptors and later working as successful theatrical designers, architects, and draftsmen; in addition, they completed design commissions that ranged from railway cars to women's shoes. Their most significant accomplishment, however, was in the field of graphic design, specifically, the advertising posters they created for the newly burgeoning cinema in Soviet Russia. 


These works merged two of the most important agitational tools available to the new Communist regime: cinema and the graphic arts. Both were endorsed by the state, and flourished in the first fifteen years of Bolshevik rule. In a country where illiteracy was endemic, film played a critical role in the conversion of the masses to the new social order. Graphic design, particularly as applied in the political placard, was a highly useful instrument for agitation, as it was both direct and economical. The symbiotic relationship of the cinema and the graphic arts would result in a revolutionary new art form: the film poster. 


The film posters of the Stenberg bothers, produced from 1923 until Georgii's untimely death in 1933, represent an uncommon synthesis of the philosophical, formal, and theoretical elements of what has become known as the Russian avant-garde. These posters, radical even from current perspectives, are not the consequence of some brief flame of eccentric artistic creativity, but rather a consolidation of the Stenbergs' own eclectic experience—possible only in this era—and the formal artistic inventions of the time. Their intimate knowledge of contemporary film theory, Suprematist painting, Constructivism, and avant-garde theater, as well as their skill in the graphic arts, was essential to the genesis of these works. 


These works, albeit of a popular genre, were revolutionary with respect to the history of design. The Stenberg's numerous innovations—the rethinking of the content of the film poster, the introduction of implied movement, the expressive use of typography and color, the distortion of scale and perspective—were subsequently investigated and extended by other designers and movements. Many of the Stenbergs' experiments with letterforms can be seen as precursors to the phototypographic advertisements of the 1960s. And their facile manipulation of pictorial space seems remarkably prescient in light of the infinite mutability of the photographic image made possible by the desktop computer only in the last ten years. 


Evident in all of the Stenberg's posters is a sense of playfulness and an openness to experimentation. Often humorous, sexy, and psychologically complex, they display a confident autonomy from the dictates of commissioning studios and what would soon become a totalitarian regime—and not only in terms of their plurality of themes, an obvious reason for which is the broad range of films for which the posters were produced, from Hollywood slapstick to Soviet propaganda. 


Most importantly, the Stenbergs explicitly understood the function of the poster, and their remarkable innovations, while strikingly beautiful, were clearly means to a desired end: the creation of a visually compelling work. The purpose of any poster is to attract the eye in the briefest of intervals.



The preceding text was excerpted from Christopher Mount's essay.

 

A.M Cassandre - 1901-1968

June 15, 2013
I give credit to Braque and Picasso for creating a new  visual language, a new language of art called "Cubism". However, I believe they ventured outside the parameters of Cubism  as they progressed and their technique started to border on abstract art. This is fine but one should not call these particular paintings Cubist. Once the basic essence of Cubism is lost; the 3 view points of an object presented on 2 dimensional plane; a painting should not be called cubist. This can only leave the viewer feel cheated and confused. After all, every language has unique letters of alphabet of its own. Once letters of alphabet from another language are mixed then the message is lost and it can only lead to confusion.

Unlike Picasso and Braque, A.M. Casandre was true to the principles of his art and design. I really appreciate his use of grid spacing, positive and negative space, use of ovals vs. vertical and horizontal lines, and texture. A.M. Cassandre was born Adolphe Jean Edouard Mouron and studied at the Ecoles des Beaux Arts in Paris.His poster works celebrate architectonic structure and the machine. His attraction and use of the steamboat and locomotive elements were close to embracing the poetic spirit of friend Le Corbusier. Close inspection of his works reveal a knowledge of the Purist principles and the use of grid structures.
 He also designed the
famous YVSL logo I can says he stood true to his visual language throughout his career and he will always be an important influence on my work.

 

Categories