Powered by


(PID:49088829333) Source
posted by jean louis mazieres alias jean louis mazieres on Tuesday 19th of November 2019 10:45:07 AM

Per Kirkeby 1938-2018 Copenhague Untitled 2000 Augsburg Glaspalast Kunstmuseum Walter. 80-60 ART WITHOUT TITLE or ART WITHOUT REFERENCE. You can't make an art that speaks to the masses when you have nothing to say to them. André MALRAUX. "What can the artistic culture of a democratic people consist of, societies in which the individualization and subjectivization of the world results in the collapse of traditions to such an extent that the reference to a world order has withdrawn from its artistic productions? » Luc FERRY. The prohibition of painting as before and providing an image expressing the recognizable world constitutes the founding command of modernity and any transgression entails excommunication by the doctors of the law of so-called contemporary art. Art was, whatever the subject chosen, a transfiguration of the real and even the banal. From ancient Egypt to the breaking of modernity, all painting was transfiguration of reality JEAN LOUIS HARROUEL Contemporary Art, the Great Falsification Jean Cyrille Godefroy 2009 Today we conceive of no other art than of contestation, it is one of the signs of our decomposition. After all there was great art on command, there was even only art on command : Egypt, Mesopotamia, Greece, Byzantium, Maya, Chinese Art, India, our Christian West, Renaissance, Baroque and even classic. It was beautiful, it was ordered, but the artists believed in him. Jean DUCHE. The Shield of Athena. Among the notable contributions of the Official Contemporary Art, the one that can be admired in museums, it should be noted the multiplication of works without title or whose titles have no clear meaning. The refusal to hold a speech, to speak a language, which is accessible to all, understandable by the majority of the population, is a characteristic of official contemporary art. This refusal of meaning appears as well in the works as in the titles which are given to them: Without Title, Composition, Canvas n ° 5, 250x330 ... This absence of significant titles, this refusal to deliver a clear and intelligible message, this relentlessness to speak an incomprehensible language, testify to a double refusal of the official contemporary painters, approved in the museums of the same name: 1 ° The refusal to formulate a clear thought on the contemporary world. 2 ° The refusal to share a vision of the world with their contemporaries. 3 ° These refusals are manifestations of an inability to think "an order of the world" that is exemplary and effective 1 ° For centuries and even millennia, European painting has suggested to elites, but also to the peoples, a conception of the world. These worldviews have evolved according to cultures and ideologies, sacred or profane, that inspired the elites. It has resulted a European art of painting in evolution since Greco-Roman antiquity up to the second world war. But throughout this period European art was an figurative art, meaningful, expressing of ideas and emotions perfectly identifiable. Ideas and emotions which were a reflection of the vision of the world, of the ideologies, sacred or profane, in effect at the time of the painter. Around 1900, non-figurative art (abstract) probably testifies, in the first place, to a desire to find other ways of expressing beauty and meaning, but always starting from reality as it appears to us and as we live it. The non figurative artist of the time is looking for a new meaning, both ideologically and aesthetically but always starting from his environment. Abstract art is discovered everywhere in our world such as perceived by our senses, in a puddle of water, or a flight of birds. This was very well seen by some Chinese painters, the literati, well before the 20th century. But Abstract Art has also quickly appeared as the birth of an artistic thought that refuses to formulate a conception of the world. Because by definition, Abstract Art, non-figurative art, does not represent the real that makes our environment, he abstracts himself from it No doubt, among many other reasons, because he was not consensus in Europe on a unique world view, and that in this situation, abstract art was a convenience, a refuge. The artist said nothing, both because he has nothing to say, and because he does not take the risk of say. Paint a white square or spots without defined shapes and without any meaning was a convenient and consensual solution at the elite level. Of course the artist claims the contrary, and museum notices invent a meaning to tables that do not make sense. Impossible to admit that one has nothing to say, that one dares not say anything, or that a work has no meaning. So we will affirm the contrary and we will invent a discourse, the most obscure possible, on the work. It is the role of explanatory notes in museums of contemporary art. But there remains the obvious observation of the existence of a contemporary political and ideological elite that has become incapable of proposing to peoples a meaningful vision of the world and of translating it into art, of expressing it, of magnifying it through an art shared with the entire population. The suspicion is born then that, in spite of all their learned speeches, our elites have lost the sense, they have lost the north, they do not really know where they are going, nor of course where they lead the people. Or if they know it, they do not want to say it, it's the second suspicion. 2 ° The artists, painters or sculptors, past centuries have painted or carved to be easily understood by the peoples. To be understood by peoples, uneducated, and even illiterate. Art was mainly exoteric, he had to be intelligible to the greatest number. Art was a Sharing of beauty and meaning between ideological and political elites and peoples. This has been the case from Athens and Rome up to Impressionism and the post-Impressionists, including Romanesque art, Gothic art, the art of the "Renaissance", the art of the golden age. from the Netherlands, Baroque art, Romantic art .... The exceptions were extremely rare, and concerned only a few works, esoteric, intended for a very small aristocracy. It is interesting to note that it is in a society that proclaims and displays its democratic ideology that totally esoteric art is born. Art makes in order to that the peoples do not understand it! The statistics highlight this situation: In the early 2000s a survey whose results were published in the newspaper "Le Monde" concluded that 70% of the contemporary French population does not "understand contemporary art", the contemporary art, as it is exhibited in Western museums. It is certain that these statistics are very much below the reality and that a good part of the 30% of French who have pretended to "understand" have responded so as not to appear obscurantist, to be fashionable. The question therefore arises: Why contemporary elites, whose public discourse is a constant praise of the virtues of democracy, sharing, participation and communication, have decided to favor an esoteric art, an absurd official art. An Art in addition ugly and totally separated from the peoples. The ugliness, without being absolutely systematic, is indeed another major feature of contemporary art, which has meanings sometimes similar, sometimes different. 3. To understand Contemporary Art, its meaning and its raison d'être, it must be remembered that one of the fundamental doctrines, inseparable from the Enlightenment, consubstantial with the Enlightenment, is that light is not given to everybody. And understand that "Lights" is the religion of our time, at least in the West. The Enlightened is not you, it is not us, especially it is not the peoples. Enlightened ones are only those in the high parts of the pyramid of insiders. A very small minority "avant-garde enlightened citizens " who occupies the upper ranks of various Masonic or related sects and interconnected. This Pyramid which is represented on the dollar bill, and which was built in the Court of the Louvre in Paris. It is not by chance that this pyramid is thus figured on the billlet of a dollar, or was built in the center of Paris, in the courtyard of the old palaces of the Kings of France or if M Macron was staged in front of she during her election campaign. These are signs reserved for the attention of the enlightened. "The enlightened avant-garde of the proletariat" of the Marxist phraseology is a version now a little out of date of this "Enlightenment" ideology, but which worked a good time, proclaiming itself, obviously, the best. It is the Western version of the "Lights", liberal, who won. This is why contemporary art is absurd and in addition, an added feature, ugly: Contemporary art is a distinctive sign of the Enlightened. The ancients, during the dark times, in the "Middle Ages" had patronized an art beautiful and understandable by the peoples. The enlightened ones of the "New Times", the Initiates, could not continue on the same way, to do the same thing as the elites "of the time of the Shades". It was necessary for the Enlightened ones to invent something new, something never seen, that proclaims the total rupture with the old regime, shows their originality, and makes the difference: They conceived, justified and imposed an art of the Absurd. An art that brings together the only Initiates, a reserved art, which allows them to distinguish themselves from the masses and to recognize each other. This is the new "Good News", but this one does not share with the greatest number. Of course the enlightened ones understand nothing more than the masses to this art, nor do they hold the Truth. The key is this: Contemporary Art is a sign of belonging. Like the Pyramid. This art is their sign of recognition. One of these signs around which they gather together, discreetly, and at the same time a process by which they mark their superiority of Enlightened on the bounded masses. The people must enter a museum of contemporary art, as if entering a Temple of the ancient pagan religions: it must be totally overwhelmed by a strange and disturbing Mystery. "I do not understand anything" is the observation most consistently taken by "the common people", at least by those who do not pretend to understand. This is the goal, it is necessary that the Art of Enlightened is incomprehensible to the masses and keep them at a respectful distance. This is an essential point of the "Enlightenment" doctrine. By definition, there can be no "Lights" if there are no Shadows, and there can not be enlightened ones if there are no obtuse people, to keep in their place. Contemporary painting and sculpture no longer serve to create beauty, nor to please the peoples, nor to transmit to them a message that they can understand. Contemporary Art no longer serves to bring together elites and peoples, it serves instead to maintain the distances between them. Indeed, in the era of mass communication, these arts are no longer a necessary meeting place between elites and peoples. To please the public there are new and very effective means: the major media, cinema, advertising, commercial art, election campaigns .... It is also possible to let develop a wall art more spontaneous and really popular. And as in addition, the enlightened ones watch very carefully to the fact that it is possible to make money with this art reserved, it is blessed bread. Contemporary Art is an extremely serious business, ideologically, politically and economically. In short, he is serious in everything except in Art. Luc Ferry rightly points out the absence of "reference to an order of the world" that characterizes institutional contemporary art. "The order of the world" has withdrawn from Western artistic productions because this reference is totally absent from the thinking of the governing, ideological, political and economic elites of the Western world today. After the communist failure, the foreseeable collapse of the totally unrealistic dream of a world without profit, the triumphant Western elites, capitalists, are too busy making money. Who will teach them to measure in the profit and respect of peoples, the simple respect of the Living, of which man is only a part? The Jewish morality of the Old Testament, that of Job, triumphed over the morality of the New Testament, that of Lazarus. Beyond the mandatory demagogic rhetoric on democracy and solidarity, the reality is the celebration of material wealth and contempt for the poor. Poor people assisted of course by "good works", but who will still benefit to the rich in the Beyond. "Humanity advances like a drunk man," wrote Victor Hugo. This is not encouraging for the future of mankind. Morality and politics are absolute and inseparable keys to the future of humanity. Now this is precisely the area in which it is possible to observe a sad but obvious reality: No progress in these areas since Pericles and Augustus. The 20th century European flies by plane, explores space, but governs himself morally and politically as in the days of Darius, Charlemagne and Otto the Great. The political and social morality of humanity is absolutely the same as it was in the days of the rivalries of the Carolingians and Capetians or the "Warring Kingdoms". It may even be much worse, because the rulers of these times, despite their natural and cultural violence, believed in a Natural or Supernatural Order, divine or not, whereas those of our time no longer believe in anything, only in themselves, and sometimes even not. It is clearly not the latest fashionable invention in the field of "modern" political thought, a so-called world government, a super UN machine, an instrument of levelling and domination on a world scale, which can fill the sidereal void of the thinking of Western political and ideological elites. Modernity? Against the Tradition and Experience of a multitude of past generations? Dead, of course, but maybe not outdated. Modernity? A change of mentality, a cultural rupture, which is proclaimed to be a progress of Reason, but which could be a spiritual and moral regression, a tragic rupture as Jean Louis Harrouel writes. A regression that would have consequences for peoples, despite all the progress of science and technology. When the governing and ideological elite is no longer exemplary, morally and spiritually, it is the end of a society. A governing elite is only exemplary if it respects a " Order of the World" that exceeds it, to admits that it is outdated and that it must submit to it, and if it is able to share this modest message with the most diverse peoples. The current Western ruling elite, which claims to be Illuminated, is at the opposite of this approach of modesty. This is what his reserved, exclusive art clearly shows, enemy of beauty, meaning and sharing. Art without title, art without thought, anti-thinking art, uniform globalist art, is a relentless revealer of the lack of reference of the Western ruling elite. This official art, this institutional anti-art, ugly, absurd, provocative and imposed, is a sinister message for the peoples.

Technology Definition,
Technology Definition For Kids,
Technology Definition Business,
Technology Definition Economics,
Technology Definition Geography,
Technology Definition Oxford Dictionary,
Technology Definition Ks1,
Technology Definition For Kindergarten,
Technology Definition Science,

on topic

License and Use

This Technology Definition - img_3957-art-without-title-or-art-without-reference- on image has 787x1024 pixels (original) and is uploaded to . The image size is 262551 byte. If you have a problem about intellectual property, child pornography or immature images with any of these pictures, please send report email to a webmaster at , to remove it from web.

Any questions about us or this searchengine simply use our contact form

  • Published 11.29.22
  • Resolution 787x1024
  • Image type jpg
  • File Size 262551 byte.

Related Photos


comments powered by Disqus