When it comes to ‘Controversial Art’ most think of it is showing political, sexual, violent or all of the above. But in the art world and general public sometimes that is not what gets people going. Sometimes it stems from something that is new to the art world, or funny and non-threatening that academics might find most fearful. With the general public it can be the most academic work that gets them going, the “Nude” painting or drawing. If you attended art school, you drew a nude or two. I always laugh when friends tell me, “oh I could never have done that”. At my school the model’s I drew were friends.
Some of my own work has been somewhat controversial. I have had people tell me that my work is not serious enough. That is fine with me. I find there is a lot of serious work and I like mixing in a little fun. Somehow fun scares some academics. I can’t quite figure out why that scares them. I have been told it not their cup of tea. Which is fine, not everything can be. I’m not a personal fan of everything, but if it is well done I will give it a chance.
It really never seems like there is one thing that won’t offend someone. The Vietnam Wall generated much controversy when it was being made. That was why there was a realistic bronze sculpture installed at one end of the wall to make some people happy, but no one talks about it now because of the power that comes from the Wall. Most controversial art wouldn’t be such a big deal if some people didn’t stir it up as much as they do. A lot of people would have never realized the show in New York City in the late 90’s (look for copy of story) was even going on, if it wasn’t for the Mayor making such a big deal out of it. It probably would have stayed in the art world and no one else would have known about it.
Now I’m not forgetting the main subject of this blog, street art. Just by work showing up on walls, sculptures being placed and all sorts of other things, street art has controversy stamped on it right from the start. Some like it, others don’t. Vandalism or not. (Personally if it is insults, racial slurs, and so on, to me that is down right vandalism, other wise a grey area.) Some say public spaces are allowed, but if an owner allows it on their wall, and the neighbor doesn’t like it, well then what? It’s hard to not get someone mad in art, no matter how hard you try.
The funnest era in art history was Pop Art.
ReplyDeleteI loved seeing 4 of Lichenstein's Cathedral Rouens answering back to 4 of Monet's Cathedral Rouens (on loan from Musee D'Orsay, France) at the MFA Boston recently in a special gallery set up just for this exhibit! Now THAT was fun!
But back to original topic "Public Art," I think for public art to be successful or appeal to the masses it has to be free of politcal commentary. FUN = GOOD TO LOOK AT. That's my .02, for what it's worth. Doesn't mean I am right, doesn't mean I'm wrong either.
I will agree that public art should be "fun" and politically free. But the thing is that even something fun, will be found political to someone. That is why art is always found as controversy no matter what. And it can be thought just by the money spent to make the work.
ReplyDelete