Through A Fine Disregard, Kirk Varnedoe tackles the complex issue of explaining the genesis of modern art. Modern art, as explained by Varnedoe in the text, began with the rejection of traditional aesthetic practices in favor of exploring new ways of communication. This movement pushed art from the literal into the realm of abstraction. Varnedoe repeats the argument made by many art historians that there was a sense of predestination to this movement. Proponents of this argument see the current aesthetic practices as superior to the former practices, and view the modern art movement as a product of “the most advanced intellectual spirit of its time and place.” In this sense, the progression of art has a logical sense and it’s development can be tracked and predicted. Varnedoe rejects this argument as ignorant of the complexity of art; the idea of predestination does little justice to the innovation that begat modern art.
In addition to rejecting the argument of predestination, Varnedoe also discusses the argument on the opposite side of the spectrum: Modern art was not a product of the search for a superior aesthetic, but rather a response to the social conditions of the time. This argument has basis in that behind a piece of art there is an intention to express a viewpoint. Similar themes across art by the same artist give the observer a sense of the ideologies of the artist. Varnedoe accepts this argument as having more validity than the previous, but still finds discongruity between the argument and the art. This argument does not explain the pursuit of new forms characteristic of early modern art. Varnedoe explains that “if literalism and critical precision were the aims, certainly these artists were foolish to pursue them in terms of unfamiliar and often willfully illegible, nonreferencial new forms.” The new forms became a device to respond to social conditions, but the new forms did not emerge because they needed to fill that role. Again, this argument overly simplifies the modern art movement.
Instead of accepting these previous explanations for the beginning of modern art, Varnedoe chooses to speak in more vague terms about this story. Varnedoe speaks about a “frame of mind” that was essential in propelling this movement. When artists did not feel as restricted to follow traditions, they allowed themselves to explore the options that were always available to them, but never acted upon. The specific aesthetics cultivated during early modern art were not as important as the willingness to experiment beyond the previously established confines. Varnedoe also mentions that the environment around the artists played a large role in encouraging this movement. The readiness of the observers to accept new forms created an “interplay between the possibilities a culture offered, and those it proved willing to accept.” This interplay drove the evolution of the modern art movement.
Defining a movement with such expansive and diverse qualities like modern art proves to be a difficult task. While Varnedoe rejects many explanations for how modern art began, he offers little of his own explanation for why modern art began at that specific moment in time. Varnedoe gives detailed information on how the movement progressed and the creative environment it created; however, it seems he believes the origin to be simply someone tried it and it worked. Perhaps there is no rational justification beyond what is stated by Varnedoe, but his lack of addressing the issue he continues to raise makes the writing feel incomplete. Varnedoe speaks briefly about how modern art should be viewed as a product of evolution, much like the natural world, but again his analogy is missing its “big bang theory” to explain its primary source. A Fine Disregard may never answer these questions, but it successfully articulates the importance of the modern art movement and gives good reason why these questions should be addressed.
No comments:
Post a Comment