Thinking about issues raised by Jane Boyer and others, writing and writing, it is easy to drift from one thought sideways to another, ending with a foggy mess of word associations – a kind of Chinese whisper. There are several strands to Jane’s blog, and from other contributions. They seem to be to do with.
An idea of the artist’s indebtedness to society.
The notion of justifying art.
The accusation that art is a self indulgent activity.
The nature and place of Political art.
Art for Art’s sake.
I think that the discussion begs questions of some underlying assumptions.
The demand to justify and the felt need on the part of the artist to justify is to do with hierarchical relationships.
Ranciere’s ‘The Ignorant Schoolmaster’ approaches a related issue through notions of equality and inequality. Jane’s reference to Buchloh is apposite. Much of what we are puzzling about has been looked at in far greater depth elsewhere.
The few words of his that I have encountered are sharp reminders of my naiveté in engaging in this discourse. In his terms, the kind of flimsy pictures that I and others produce are a complete and utter trivial irrelevance; self indulgent and useless; I am a trespasser. And in a sense I cannot mind.
In naiveté there is hope. My motto.
