In the last reading, Barrett approaches a rather amorphous topic - the formal points of how to judge art (in this case, photography). Reading it reminded me in many ways of logic proofs from back in Quantitative Literacy. It doesn't seem like there should be a "right" answer, but there is a rhyme and reason to properly evaluating works of art. When you dissect the process, even the most harshly opinionated art critic follows a certain formula.
Early on Barrett establishes the idea that judgment is different from a criticism, in that judging is the act of evaluating a work based on various criteria to determine it's worth. Since the value of art is always subjective to the eye of the viewer, the attempt to establish a kind of "fairness factor" to all pieces of art. These are fairly neutral questions that one can apply to any piece of art, such as questioning it's cultural relevance, difficulty level, and of course visual appeal. These are the sorts of things a good critic will always abide by for every piece they evaluate.
The variable that changes most dramatically from critic to critic is their own personal interpretation of a piece of art. Though in theory this should only be part of the equation, it factors largely into how the critic will judge a particular work. In actuality it is not the critics job to speak definitively on the interpretation of the meaning of a work of art, since every person could see something different in it. Judgment is grounds on which someone can argue the value of art. For example, the value of Duchamp's "Fountain" can be judged to be greater than that of crude drawings scribbled in a bathroom stall. While in theory neither one is particularly superior, it is the cultural context of "Fountain" that sets it in the realm of fine art. However it is here that we reach the gap between perceived value and individual opinion. Who is to say that the intent of the bathroom graffiti is really all that different from Duchamp's proposal of a urinal as art? Both are equally profane in their own right, so it comes down to personal interpretation. One could argue that since Duchamp was the first one to put his work on public display that he clearly showed a more formal understanding of artistic perception. But one could also theorize that the bathroom artist was taking Duchamp's principle and bringing it into a 21st century context? This is all hypothetical of course, so there is no real right answer to this scenario, however it does express the conflict between judging and attempting to interpret a piece of art. In short, the only one who knows the true meaning of artwork is the artist who created it (and sometimes not even then).
On a similar thread, I'd like to play the critic and judge the Filter Photo Festival which we attended as a class last week. I will state upfront that I did enjoy getting the opportunity to go and get an inside look at the photo festival, and the speakers clearly had a lot of experience and insider info to share at the lecture. However I feel that the lecture we attended fell more into the realm of semi-professionals. While there was talk about getting grants for your work, and best ways to compile it, but I felt that despite our student group making up a fair percentage of the audience, most of the information the speakers had prepared to give us wasn't even applicable to people our age, much less those of us in our current financial standing. This part of the Filter Festival I did not particularly resound with, for obvious reasons. Nevertheless, it is always valuable to hear an insider's take on the process, since those are the people we will be working with in our future jobs (with any luck). Sarah Hadley, who organized the event, was a very open and enthusiastic individual who clearly cared about photographers of all age brackets, but I feel like this emerging event has yet to catch on with young photographers. The booths were aimed at high-end art dealers, and even the location was not very well placed if they in fact intended for young artists to attend. Had it not been for this class, I wouldn't have known the Photo Festival was even going on so close to school. Being a photographer in the city of Chicago, you'd think I would be made more aware of something like this beyond the walls of a classroom. But their general lack of advertising at local art schools leads me to believe they haven't quite worked out a line up aimed specifically at the younger generation. I feel that the makings of a good photo event are latent in Filter, but since it is so new I think it's still kind of growing into itself. With luck, they will learn to branch out and reach other groups of individuals.
No comments:
Post a Comment