This post, which I had crossposted at Dodgeblogium drew this reply there and a question that I've been meaning to get around to for awhile. So here goes:
These are primarily Pre-Raphaelite painters, a group who consciously tried to recreate the ideas of the early Renaissance in the mid-to-late Victorian era. To me they are the most beautiful of all paintings, and are specifically what the cubists and fauvists and dadaists of the early twentieth century were reacting against.
Which do you think will survive the judgement of history?
I think there's room for both, but the critics of any particular era tend to be an incestuous pack of herd-followers, incapable of appreciating anything that doesn't fit their narrow view.
What isn't going to survive are the Dadaists of today, who are so eager to negate the idea of art that they've entirely succeeded. At least Duchamp, et. al. seemed to have a sense of humor about what they were up to. A hundred years from now, if it's remembered at all, something like Serrano's "Piss Christ" will be thought of as only a cheap stunt.
Many thanks for the question, Bruce. I'd like to expand on some of these ideas in a post on my blog (I'll most likely crosspost it here, too) but I probably won't have much time to do so until next week.
Bruce responded:
Good. A balanced and thoughtful answer. Now let's rephrase the question. Which will President-For-Life Timur Goering Khan remove to his capitol in Nuevo Cheyenne in the year 2505, A.D., and which will he consign to the flames?
I understand Man Ray. But I know which paintings I'd steal.
He's trying to pin me down, I can tell. Watch me weasel out of this one.
Not knowing much about our hypothetical Pres-for-Life (except that it's refreshing to see a dictator against abortion), I can only speculate that he'd opt for the most valuable pieces.
The highest price ever paid for a painting (as of May 2004, unless I've missed something more recent) at an auction was $104.1 million for Picasso's Garçon à la pipe (pictured at left). This is misleading, though, in that much of the world's finest art is not and probably never will be for sale. The Louvre had the Mona Lisa appraised for insurance purposes in 1962 prior to a tour of the US and came up with a figure of $100 million; in today's dollars that would be about $630M. You could expect similar or even higher prices for Rembrandt or Michaelangelo (how much would the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel command?).
Our presumptive world dictator isn't going to be concerned about price, but the status of possessing priceless objects will prove irresistible. So I'm guessing that his collection would largely consist of classical/Renaissance pieces -- what he, and the public at large, would consider easily recognizable as "art."
The question is: do these have greater intrinsic value than more abstract work? I would say yes, because they display the artist's utter mastery of his craft. And art without craft remains at best an interesting idea, undeveloped. Now I would argue that artists like Cézanne, Matisse (who, ironically enough, studied under Bouguereau) etc., exhibited similar expertise in rejecting formalism -- it's a debatable point, but I think a strong case can be made for it.
The painting at right, Primera Comunión, was done by Picasso at the age of 14. The studies of nudes by him in his only year in art school are near photographic in their detail. Whatever else he was, Picasso was no phony; as T.S. Eliot remarked, "You must understand the rules before you can break them."
Modern art is too often an exercise in intellectualism -- more energy is spent in explaining why a particular piece is important than, it seems, was spent in producing it. I'm fully capable of appreciating art non-verbally: if I like the composition and execution, then I like it, with no further explanation necessary.
Enough, or I'll never get this posted. Here's a game that might tickle your antiquated fancies:
Curator Defense is a homebrewed blend of the Real Time Strategy and Puzzle genres. The player must defend his museum from the hordes of modern art that attempt to raid his storeroom in hopes of being put on the main floor. Using an array of unique defensive objects, the player must stun, slow, and eventually defeat each wave of modern art.
Unfortunately, you can't play online -- it's a 55MB download. I'll just link to the main page, as it's offered on 5 different mirrors. Click "Download" on the left side of the screen to get to them.
