Painting From Life vs. From Photos
Who are the great, the truly great artists of our times? — let’s say, artists active in the period 1975 to 2000.
I realize that some might say that it is too early to judge. If this is your opinion, I’d like to ask a parallel question: who are the artists active prior to 1975-2000 who came to be recognized as great during that period?
Also, let’s not confuse ‘great’ with ‘important.’ Andy Warhol, was undoubtedly an important artist, but a great one? I don’t know — maybe you do!
These things are not by nature “knowable” being entirely and forever matters of opinion.
I am of the opinion that the vast panorama of twentieth century art will be largely dismissed by future generations. It will be regarded as an example of how decadent societies deteriorate, and this will occur because our society is deteriorating. Our work ethic is going. Our political ideals are dying. Our freedom is waning. We are becoming slaves.
The art was the art of a power elite, not the people.
But the people’s art, the art jeered at by the sophisticated today, will survive. They will say, “See, even during that time, there were those who maintained and pushed forward the great traditions, and thanks to them, Art survived.”
Helen Frankenthaler
Joan Mitchell
Chuck Close
James Turrell (spelling?)
David Hockney
Andy Goldsworthy
I like your distinction between “important” and “great.” Warhol is the former but not the latter.
June,
Thank you for the excellent education in contemporary art.
Rex,
you remind me of an Asimov’s novel in which a civilization could only barely repair spaceships but no longer built them.
My opinion about some of the artists who will stand the test of time for their contributions and ongoing influence on art:
Important:
Andy Warhol
Judy Chicago
Nam June Paik
Important and Great:
Andy Warhol (how’s that for conflicted? He belongs on both lists for me)
Joseph Beuys
Guerilla Girls
Gerhard Richter
Louise Bourgeois
I am using the distinction between great and important according to my own personal tastes, as I don’t know that absolute declarations about what is great are very helpful.
Rex,
Couldn’t disagree more. I believe in tradition and its very important place in some artists’ practice, my own included. I believe just as strongly in breaking tradition, experimentation and innovation in the arts. There are too many groups of people “traditionally” excluded from the world of traditional art (women for one) for it be all encompassing to me.
I’m not too interested in trying to decide who’s great. Here are a few of the most important ones (biggest influence on other artists):
Henry Ford
Steve Jobs
Albert Einstein
Picasso
Joni Mitchell
Beatles
Marilyn Monroe
James Joyce
Leo Castelli
Mary Boone
Charles Saatchi
Peggy Guggenheim
Jesse Helms
I ignored the 1975 mark, and am considering our time to be 20th and 21st centuries.
Karl,
I see that dealing with the commentators on this list is like herding cats –between Rex and David, I feel squeezed out of existence and stretched on the rack.
Leslie,
I have a serious question. On another list we talked a bit about Chicago (who has been in the news since lately because the Dinner Party has gotten a permanent home). I haven’t seen her work since I was an art-illiterate (and heavy duty feminist) in the late 70’s. I was enthralled then, but didn’t have a critical eye to assess her work. How does it stand up over time and from the point of view of an educated eye (ie your own)? (I’m still a heavy duty feminist, albeit rather out of the scene.).
I see you don’t put her up as “Great” and I know nothing of her other work.
I thought Judy Chicago was out there and inspirtational. Don’t know about great.
I would have to say for me Ansel Adams,
Pablita Velarda are some greats.
…between Rex and David, I feel squeezed out of existence and stretched on the rack.
June, I’ll be happy to add you to my list if you like :)
June,
My eye doesn’t feel that educated (it is tired of the computer screen at the moment), but I will give your question a try. Chicago and other feminist artists of her time broke open the art world in terms of questioning the predominantly male canon of modernist art and introducing a more inclusive approach to art making. The feminists were largely instrumental in the development of postmodernist sensibilities that allow for diverse materials (including traditional women’s “crafts” of quilting and sewing), styles, points of view. In fact, Miriam Schapiro (whose quilts you may enjoy if you don’t know them) questioned the notion that Picasso “invented” collage because women had been quilting (collage with cloth) for centuries.
I didn’t put chicago in the great list because I don’t enjoy her aesthetics that much. The pure act of looking at them without knwoing her place in the history of art is not that interesting to me. She has a big range of work however, including a relatively recent series on the Holocaust. She is also somewhat controversial by the way, because although she employs many many women to assist with her large scale pieces, she takes full credit for them, thus contributing to the individual “art star” mystique as opposed to a recognition of a more collaberative creation that would be more in line with her feminisit sensibilities.
JBeuys
RSmithson
BNauman
BTraylor
GRichter
HFletcher
The greatness of our time, though, is not determined by the Few but the Many.
Thanks, Leslie,
I know Miriam Shapiro’s work, which I admire but don’t like all that much. She, like Chicago, pursued her ideas — still doing it.
I won’t fault Chicago for using others to do the incredibly labor intensive job until I hear Jeff Koons, Dale Chihuly, Damien Hirst and so forth get clobbered for outsourcing their work. If nothing else, it employs glassworkers and fabricators of various sorts.
Your answer about Chicago’s place in history was precisely what I was getting at — beyond the feminism (and the at-the-time shock value) I was wondering if the art held up visually. I have looked at some of the books more recently; maybe I’ll have to go to Brooklyn on an excursion….
And David, I wouldn’t mind being put on that list , although there are a couple I might have trouble breaking bread with.
And D (and Leslie) I think I’m with you about Beuys and perhaps Richter, and I know I’m with you, D., about Nauman. I don’t know Fletcher at all.
David, I wouldn’t mind being put on that list , although there are a couple I might have trouble breaking bread with.
June, I agree. I listed people who I think have made a big impact on contemporary art, some good and some quite negative. It’s definitely not a guest list for dinner.
June,
Harrell Fletcher.
http://www.harrellfletcher.com/index3b.html
I’m having trouble not contributing to the cumulative advantage effect. Also, I’m sure I’m forgetting a bunch of people.
Eva Hesse (second category)
Terry Winters
Jasper Johns
Robert Rauschenberg
Chuck Close
Saul Steinberg
Richard Diebenkorn
Helen Frankenthaler
D.,
I like her approach:
Harrellfletcher.com I’ll Follow You 2005
I wanna be Harrell Fletcher. I read his essay on pieces of his life (written in 2001, I believe) and he did more by then than I have time left to do. He really lives!
I want to go to Headlands and make art. Or at least make waves and have fun.
Fletcher lived in Portland for a couple months, and from his description, he was right across Hawthorne Boulevard from us, in Ladd’s Addition. And I didn’t know of him. I didn’t even see the exhibit that came of his meanderings around the neighborhood.
Oh my — and “I’ll Follow You” is likewise wonderful. Birgit, you and I could start a school….
I don’t know how you define an artist, but I know how I’d like to live, if only….
Sorry guys, but you really should follow D’s Url: http://www.harrellfletcher.com/index3b.html
I guess I got to a certain stage of life where I decided it was time to say what I really thought whether it was popular or not. It was either that or remain silent. The latter was not an option.
For example, I compare the sculpture of, say, the gables of the Parthenon with just about anything you’ll see in the business districts of any modern metropolis and I laugh. I laugh out loud.
No, it will not be remembered except as a horrid joke. A dark age for art.
And Leslie, you and I will both be long dead by the time my prediction comes true, but it will.
And Leslie, you and I will both be long dead by the time my prediction comes true, but it will.
I plan on being here. I’ll let you all know how it turns out.
June,
I am adding ‘starting a school with you’ to my dreams; yesterday’s dream was to start an art gallery/cooperative with Bob on 125th in NYC.
“I guess I got to a certain stage of life where I decided it was time to say what I really thought whether it was popular or not. It was either that or remain silent. The latter was not an option.”
Rex,
I never asked you to not speak your mind – please don’t be silent. That’s what the blog is for, right? I just happen to disagree with you. You are not alone in your opinion, nor are they unpopular in many circles. I have had this discussion many times. You are more in line with many academics than you might like.
“I plan on being here. I’ll let you all know how it turns out.”
Cool! Thanks David! While you’re at it, I’d like to know if some of the materials I am using are really as archival as they profess to be.
Birgit,
Maybe we can have our School for Visually Happy Adults on 125th Street, right next to that art gallery.
Ah the dreams, the dreams. I’m afraid my real life is more like Emily Carr’s — Boarding House blues with an occasional summer in the forest.
And David, while you are at it, let me know how the textile art world is doing, too.
I agree with most of the other names mentioned. Here’s a couple of diverse artists not cited that I think should be remembered:
Sophie Calle
Alex Grey
Valerio Adami
Leslie: While you’re at it, I’d like to know if some of the materials I am using are really as archival as they profess to be.
June: And David, while you are at it, let me know how the textile art world is doing, too.
I’ll be happy to report back when I get there. Don’t worry if you don’t hear from me right way. This really puts a new spin on the idea of time-based arts, doesn’t it :)
June,
It is interesting to me how happy it makes me when I read how much you appreciate Harrell’s work. It is sort of like Art. Harrell’s Art.
D.
Harrell’s transcription of his conversation with his great-aunt is brilliant — heart wrenching, precise, evocative — no one else would have transcribed it with all the warts and missed cues and stops while the transcriber recovered. I wept.
June,
“I Been Wanting To Go Home” is… brilliant (Deadwood!) and it has inspired me in several different ways.
Several years ago, I made 500 photocopies of it and distributed it hand-to-hand to people around town.
I also included it in a show, “Getting Along”, last year in Shanghai.
http://www.island6.org/hfletcher_info.html
More recently, it has incluenced my approach to an on-going, community project, “Our Walks”.
http://dearts.net/OurWalks.htm
For painters:
Great-
Diebenkorn
Richter
Rothko
But the people’s art, the art jeered at by the sophisticated today, will survive. They will say, “See, even during that time, there were those who maintained and pushed forward the great traditions, and thanks to them, Art survived.”
Rex,
Can you clarify which art you mean exactly?
I am of the opinion that the vast panorama of twentieth century art will be largely dismissed by future generations.
Rex,
Are you being a visionary here, or are you simply stating what most people thing about contemporary art at the present?
Mark Rothko died in 1970 (he took his own life).