It was soon obvious to my fellow students that I was not quite with the programme. In a class discussion early in my first semester, I made the mistake of mentioning that I believed in objective standards in art. Some art is great, some isn’t, I said; not all artists are equally talented. This was deemed an undemocratic opinion and I was given a nickname: the cultural fascist. I’ve tried to take it affectionately.
Madeleine Kearns, a young Scottish woman, on a bewildering year at a ‘progressive’ New York university. One of these.
If all art is equal, why go to school?
Mon Ami … all art is NOT equal … there is hardly any market $ value in “realism” any more. Just look around you. If it isn’t abstractly fuzzy … it won’t sell.
And I might add to your comment that “Outsider Art” is an offensive, non-inclusive term meant to divide the “Artist” community
What market value do any of the works of the modern progressive art movement have?
The old Masters works are still valuable hundreds of years after they were done, and can rightly be considered a good investment. What of the art geniuses of the past fifty years,which has imo produced a great deal of utter dreck,and very little of note.
What will “Piss Christ”,for instance, fetch at Sotheby’s in 50 years?
You can lead a horse to art, but. . .
Highest price ever paid for a painting … $ 300 mil. …
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interchange_(de_Kooning)
Not quite one of the old masters. A bunch of random paint splotches that represents … well … whatever you want it to. Personally … I believe it is a graphic representation of the mind of a PROG.
The NEA paid real $$$$ for “Piss Christ” … just TRY selling them on your still life of flowers
Don’t you know the proper attitude is:
“I don’t know much about art but I know what I like.”
http://izquotes.com/quote/395715
There’s a lot of “art” that is, quite simply, rubbish. (I guess that makes me a Philistine, doesn’t it?)
The late Tony Hancock poked fun at all of that in his movie The Rebel, also known as Call Me Genius.