Tell me that ART is essentially discourse which can easily exclude didacticism and I will laugh a little.
Tell me you create ART as dialogue which has no room for didacticism and I will call you fool because you present a PIECE purportedly as a GIFT for personal reaction. No charity accepted.
You present with intent, even if it is subconscious. My response must be to intent and, within intent, there is subjective agenda. If you claim you merely wish to ELICIT I will not doubt you. If you claim no intent behind ELICITING I call you LIAR.
You are intent on teaching me your mind.
Art IS didactic.
Is discharge Dada? No, it is not. Influenced by and with a similar attitude to, but not Dada..
Is discharge Fluxus?
No, it is not.
Influenced by and with a similar attitude to, but not Fluxus.
Is discharge art for intellectuals? No, discharge is for anyone and everyone who appreciates creativity in all its myriad forms. Be it static visual, audio or moving image; the written word or the deconstructed, non-linear form. The spoken word and noise.
All creativity is the springboard for discharge. It highjack’s a multitude of genres and disciplines and transposes them onto the internet. discharge is electronically transmitted art, be it via blog, myspace or whatever format possible, it can also be produced and seen in classic formats.
The discharge Chapbook. The discharge Building by Parts book. discharge has no rules. All contributors to discharge are responsible adults. discharge has no leaders although it has an elected body of rotating editors who oversee rather than dictate the flow of the group.
The aim of discharge is to profile creative people and to do away with the pretension of the art world.
Everyday people creating art everyday to an exceptional quality.
Art by barrow boys and girls.
discharge is international.
3 comments:
Art IS didactic.
YES IT IS!
I confess. I want you to see what I see how I see it, 'cause I think/feel my 'vision' is worthy/important. Deeply conceited, huh?
That's what you just did, huh? ;-)
Hell, yeah! My thanks to both of you for making me bigger, brighter, shinier & more important than the rest!
Conceit aside, I've grown weary of theoretical fabrications denying the narrative 'I'. From growing weary, I've simply grown angry. I've read far too many manifestos denying the 'artist' any input once their work is displayed to an 'audience'. This academic premise (the Philosophy of Art) would have the least talented artist as being great according to audience interpretation as the measuring stick (read as the Elitist Industry of Art Criticism).
Academia would have it that the only way to recognise good from bad art is to listen to the opinions of the professional Critics. They've even imposed themselves of popular culture (there's a mighty good living to be made of being a 'critic').
Most recently, I've encountered 'artists' themselves reiterating this rubbish and claiming to be some great deity embodying both critic and audience. Claims to not being didactic are rife!
I don't care whether you're a postmodernist, posthumanist, surrealist, dadaist, naivest or a wanker who claims to challenge to whole concept of 'art' from another stance altogether. If you are someone who creates for non-utilitarian purposes, you are making a point. It's that simple.
Why do the people who contribute to this blog (and others) keep working on technique and remain fastidious as to what they are prepared to present to an audience?
Philosophy, technique and never being quite satisfied with the product - in as much as I've never met an artist who feels that they couldn't have done far better in conveying that which they wished to convey - speaks to intent in the act of creating for an audience.
Anyone who claims that they are outside of either camp (or inside both) is either a liar or so talentless that they don't deserve attention. Creating/being an artist demands humility, self criticism and the courage to continue to put the 'self' into a position of criticism is an agonising discipline.
I am extremely mediocre as 'artist'... and I know it. Despite that, I have persevered for a few decades and know that I will continue to persevere. I have something I fondly call my 'paper mortuary': an enormous number of works using various mediums which will never be presented to an audience. If art is not didactic and, as 'artist', I am not in any position to judge that which is good/better from that which is rubbish/has no more than personal meaning to me, I wouldn't bother with more than keeping a diary.
I am proud to say that I'm crap but aspire to create something sort of alright before I kick the bucket.
Post a Comment