Visit the Musée d'Orsay: I meet a girl wearing one of these T-shirts bearing the image of Kurt Cobain who are so poorly made that Kundera in cover pages and pages on the kitsch. Meet the beginnings of abstraction and figurative that horror is almost a work of art in itself. Of course, I immediately think the controversy surrounding Murakami and Versailles. And the fact that a piece of fabric could also help us see more clearly: a Scottish kilt to be precise. In other words, the "invention of tradition".
Contemporary art has great sociological virtues. Firstly, because breaking radically with the most common designs of what the Art, perpetually playing with these definitions and putting them in every way possible to the test, he reminds us they have arbitrary, fragile, and historical. He shows us, in fact, how the aesthetic sense, trial, is no quality personal, but remains a social skill, learned and internalized. After all, if we find a classical picture more "beautiful" a urinal, is it really related to a quality of objects or the way we react? The art lies more in the look in the thing, that's how sociology can take it.
That's why the contemporary art tends to annoy. While he dedicates a week of its issuance The new paths of knowledge there some time, Raphael Enthoven could not hide his irritation over an art which, he said, needed to be understood and explained it possible to feel "spontaneously" an aesthetic emotion. That is precisely the virtue of sociological contemporary art: to feel moved by a work of art must be, to paraphrase Howard Becker , participate in the "art world" correspondent. Each world of art is characterized by certain conventions that allow different actors to coordinate their activities for a symphony is possible, it is necessary that the composers and performers share the same codes for music notation and playing instruments, it is also that there is an audience willing to stay sat quietly all the time of the performance - if he wants to try a pogo, things will simply no longer possible. Similarly, to be touched by an object, must still have the codes to enter it. In terms of contemporary art, these conventions have learned mostly in adulthood. For more conventional arts, there is also a learning experience, but it is more discreet: it begins, for example, all reproductions of painting in our history books that make us understand, from an early age, it is art and it is beautiful ...
Therefore, we can better illuminate the battle fought around Murakami (and before him Koons Veilhan) at Versailles. As always, this is a battle of paper, where different opponents to compete Loved text justification and criticism (see for example the different forums in the World). This is neither the first nor the last battles of contemporary art, much less art in general. With an eye Becker, one can see through these clashes reflected a fundamental aspect of artistic activity, taken as that of all the players in a world of art and not the only artists. The prior art is all a matter of discourse, discourse which is justified by works. At certain periods, these justifications were taken for granted just because they were enrolled in the same operating principles of the Academy. Contemporary art plays here once again unveiling its role in bringing sociological rationale of this activity in the foreground.
Third unveiling contemporary art exhibitions and more specifically to Versailles to uncover the building traditions. Today, it seems clear that wearing a kilt is a very ancient and respectable tradition in Scotland, and many Scots themselves convinced that this piece of cloth has been worn by their ancestors since time immemorial. It is however known to anyone who has a little rubbing to contemporary social sciences it is a fairly recent invention when a Scottish merchant would sell a large inventory of fabric. The classic representation of the origin of traditions must be revised: it is not necessarily old practices that are perpetuated in the present, but more recent practices often that you invent as ancient.
Today, with Murakami and Jean-Jacques Aillagon is invoked seniority Versailles and tradition. Contemporary art is here we can see that there is not a reference to a pre-existing tradition, but inventing it as a defense of a world of art against another. One might as well remember that the castle of Versailles had long intended to accommodate what was the contemporary art of the time and be a showcase for European elites who flocked. In this perspective, giving the cream of contemporary art, he would only continue this "tradition". As discussed in Weber, the tradition is primarily here as a form of legitimacy mobilize actors including Murakami in the text published by the World. Opposite the charismatic legitimacy of exceptionality of works and artists, she is one of two positions that compete in any artistic activity. If contemporary art does, by these exposures, to gain the force of tradition, he will probably finally won the battle.
Enlightened sociological in that light, the "controversy" going around Versailles and contemporary artists is therefore one day very special: the last battle before the victory of contemporary art. It is indeed reached at least by then to enter a much larger number of actors in his own world: institutional players such as administration of the famous castle, but also public works will be on site or on television in many reports devoted to "the affair", and especially opponents who, on entering the game, give it a publicity. These are at last behind an agenda set by those against whom they fight. An art that relies on continual transgression of the rules requires such guardians of the temple to live. The current protests are part of the world of contemporary art, helping to give gestures to the works and their subversive and innovative qualities. We know from Simmel: the conflict is a positive social relationship to the extent that it creates links. That's what that feeds the world of contemporary art.
Contemporary art has great sociological virtues. Firstly, because breaking radically with the most common designs of what the Art, perpetually playing with these definitions and putting them in every way possible to the test, he reminds us they have arbitrary, fragile, and historical. He shows us, in fact, how the aesthetic sense, trial, is no quality personal, but remains a social skill, learned and internalized. After all, if we find a classical picture more "beautiful" a urinal, is it really related to a quality of objects or the way we react? The art lies more in the look in the thing, that's how sociology can take it.
That's why the contemporary art tends to annoy. While he dedicates a week of its issuance The new paths of knowledge there some time, Raphael Enthoven could not hide his irritation over an art which, he said, needed to be understood and explained it possible to feel "spontaneously" an aesthetic emotion. That is precisely the virtue of sociological contemporary art: to feel moved by a work of art must be, to paraphrase Howard Becker , participate in the "art world" correspondent. Each world of art is characterized by certain conventions that allow different actors to coordinate their activities for a symphony is possible, it is necessary that the composers and performers share the same codes for music notation and playing instruments, it is also that there is an audience willing to stay sat quietly all the time of the performance - if he wants to try a pogo, things will simply no longer possible. Similarly, to be touched by an object, must still have the codes to enter it. In terms of contemporary art, these conventions have learned mostly in adulthood. For more conventional arts, there is also a learning experience, but it is more discreet: it begins, for example, all reproductions of painting in our history books that make us understand, from an early age, it is art and it is beautiful ...
Therefore, we can better illuminate the battle fought around Murakami (and before him Koons Veilhan) at Versailles. As always, this is a battle of paper, where different opponents to compete Loved text justification and criticism (see for example the different forums in the World). This is neither the first nor the last battles of contemporary art, much less art in general. With an eye Becker, one can see through these clashes reflected a fundamental aspect of artistic activity, taken as that of all the players in a world of art and not the only artists. The prior art is all a matter of discourse, discourse which is justified by works. At certain periods, these justifications were taken for granted just because they were enrolled in the same operating principles of the Academy. Contemporary art plays here once again unveiling its role in bringing sociological rationale of this activity in the foreground.
Third unveiling contemporary art exhibitions and more specifically to Versailles to uncover the building traditions. Today, it seems clear that wearing a kilt is a very ancient and respectable tradition in Scotland, and many Scots themselves convinced that this piece of cloth has been worn by their ancestors since time immemorial. It is however known to anyone who has a little rubbing to contemporary social sciences it is a fairly recent invention when a Scottish merchant would sell a large inventory of fabric. The classic representation of the origin of traditions must be revised: it is not necessarily old practices that are perpetuated in the present, but more recent practices often that you invent as ancient.
Today, with Murakami and Jean-Jacques Aillagon is invoked seniority Versailles and tradition. Contemporary art is here we can see that there is not a reference to a pre-existing tradition, but inventing it as a defense of a world of art against another. One might as well remember that the castle of Versailles had long intended to accommodate what was the contemporary art of the time and be a showcase for European elites who flocked. In this perspective, giving the cream of contemporary art, he would only continue this "tradition". As discussed in Weber, the tradition is primarily here as a form of legitimacy mobilize actors including Murakami in the text published by the World. Opposite the charismatic legitimacy of exceptionality of works and artists, she is one of two positions that compete in any artistic activity. If contemporary art does, by these exposures, to gain the force of tradition, he will probably finally won the battle.
Enlightened sociological in that light, the "controversy" going around Versailles and contemporary artists is therefore one day very special: the last battle before the victory of contemporary art. It is indeed reached at least by then to enter a much larger number of actors in his own world: institutional players such as administration of the famous castle, but also public works will be on site or on television in many reports devoted to "the affair", and especially opponents who, on entering the game, give it a publicity. These are at last behind an agenda set by those against whom they fight. An art that relies on continual transgression of the rules requires such guardians of the temple to live. The current protests are part of the world of contemporary art, helping to give gestures to the works and their subversive and innovative qualities. We know from Simmel: the conflict is a positive social relationship to the extent that it creates links. That's what that feeds the world of contemporary art.
0 comments:
Post a Comment