I recently gave a speech in the form of a review of Tom Wolfe’s The Painted Word. I am scheduled to present another speech about what has happened in the world of art in the fifty years since.
There are manifestoes, letters, etc. from the horse's mouth so to speak. Beginning in the late 19th century with Symbolism, Expressionism, Fauvism, Cubism, Dada, Surrealism, and more.
Basically, modern art is a rejection of ancient Greek culture, Christian religion and story-telling. A kind of anti-western spiritual development. It has parallels in architecture, poetry, literature, dance, and so forth. Concerning visual art, people considered traditional Western art mere illustration. Abstraction would lead us into a new world of Freudian, or Marxist, or Darwinian truth about human nature. Something like that anyway.
Thanks. As a book reviewer, I like to see what I'm getting into before investing in reading a whole book. Here is a fairly good review of Chipp's book.
If you're not intereted in the details you don't need to buy the book, just read that summary. It's pretty good in my opinion. But, if you are really interested in learning how the artists and a few patrons and critics felt it's indespensible.
One thing it doesn't cover is the rise of the bohemian culture in the 19th century. It's why modernism exists in the first place. A good book, again from the horse's mouth, is Henri Murger's, Scenes de la vie de Boheme. You can get it for free and in French or English at Project Gutenburg, https://cdn.bookey.app/files/pdf/book/en/theories-of-modern-art.pdf.
Having known a few artists - and kids with expensive art school degrees, one of whom went on to a career in HVAC, where he has made ten times as much as others in his class, who did not go the skilled trades route - most of the money goes to the gallery owners - they take a 50% cut of what they sell - at a minimum. Art school kids - 95% of whom have no talent whatsoever, according to their teachers and professors (and I've known a few of those, too) - tend to be sons and daughters of rich people, if they're successful - so they already know their market. The few who aren't end up doing unskilled labor in a life of debt slavery. And they tend to have addiction problems and die off pretty quickly, unless the can find something more lucrative than art.
And I know a relatively famous sculptor, Harry Weber:
"Harry Weber was born in St. Louis, Missouri in 1942 where he attended St. Louis Country Day School. He was educated at Princeton University where he studied art history.[1] Following his education, Weber served six years in the United States Navy. This included a year on river patrol boats in Vietnam where he compiled a compelling series of drawings chronicling his experiences there.During his service, he was awarded the Bronze Star Medal with V for valor, the Presidential Unit Commendation and the Navy and Marine Corps Combat Ribbon. ... " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Weber_(sculptor) I've got one of two copies of his first piece - he has the other - which makes that pretty rare, and another early piece - my Aunt Jane was an early supporter of his. He's got a web page - https://harryweber.com/. I don't know how much these pieces are worth, never had them appraised, don't need to, I like them as art, not stacks of dollar bills.
My grandparents on my father's side did a tour of France on their honeymoon in 1914 and bought back a bunch of French art - mostly prints, a few paintings. And none appraised, I remember them from my childhood, so they're not for sale. I don't see art as an investment - actually I should sell some of it off, there's not enough wall space to hang it. My French art from 1914 is beautiful to look at, it wouldn't be worth much in today's market which specializes in ugly junk and - recently - AI slop. And I think that the rich use art for money laundering/tax avoidance more than anything else. And there's a ton of fraud and counterfeit stuff out there, a rich relative (second cousin, once removed) lost something like $5 million when two or three paintings he'd bought turned out to be fakes.
What's driving the current real estate bubble is private equity snapping up single family residential real estate and converting it into rental properties - the Klaus Schwab/WEF thing of "you will own nothing, rent everything, and be happy" - and they buy planning commissions and city governments - for a billionaire, a million dollars is chump change, and the return on the bribes is just huge... It will wind up being a choice between a revolution or slavery, governments have become far too corrupted and bought off.
"Have our tastes become that degenerate?" - yes, and by design. Pollock was a CIA psyop, used as part of the purposeful dismantling of our culture. He is one of the lies that "crap" is beautiful.
Thank you. That is consistent with my view of the CIA's self-conceived mission and morality, but imagining that they were smart enough to pull it off is a stretch. Maybe.
Reader Reid Stuart has given me permission to post a couple of his very useful emails:
As an artist I enjoyed your post about art. The careers of Jackson Pollack and other Abstract Impressionists were given a big boost by being covertly funded by the CIA for a tour of Europe to present an original style of American art that lacked any content that was likely to offend anybody. Also, you might research how Kamila Harris invited a reporter to her residence to show off her art collection by pointing out the ethnic background of each artist but not mentioning their names or any characteristic of the artwork, in other words valuing only the DEI baggage attached to the artist. The Art Renewal Center, an online organization, promotes the viewpoint that your picture of a ship at sea is indeed more valuable than Jackson Pollack's splatter paintings. Dwight D. Murphy once wrote an informative essay that stated that modern art values the transgression of social norms more than any other quality such as craftsmanship, talent, or creative vision. Good luck.
Graham, you might want to read Theories of Modern Art, by Herschel B. Chipp.
https://www.amazon.com/s?k=herschel+b+chipp+theories+of+modern+art&i=stripbooks&crid=1FT08RKPGUUYB&sprefix=herschel+b+chipp+theories+of+modern+art%2Cstripbooks%2C141&ref=nb_sb_noss
There are manifestoes, letters, etc. from the horse's mouth so to speak. Beginning in the late 19th century with Symbolism, Expressionism, Fauvism, Cubism, Dada, Surrealism, and more.
Basically, modern art is a rejection of ancient Greek culture, Christian religion and story-telling. A kind of anti-western spiritual development. It has parallels in architecture, poetry, literature, dance, and so forth. Concerning visual art, people considered traditional Western art mere illustration. Abstraction would lead us into a new world of Freudian, or Marxist, or Darwinian truth about human nature. Something like that anyway.
Thanks. As a book reviewer, I like to see what I'm getting into before investing in reading a whole book. Here is a fairly good review of Chipp's book.
https://cdn.bookey.app/files/pdf/book/en/theories-of-modern-art.pdf
If you're not intereted in the details you don't need to buy the book, just read that summary. It's pretty good in my opinion. But, if you are really interested in learning how the artists and a few patrons and critics felt it's indespensible.
One thing it doesn't cover is the rise of the bohemian culture in the 19th century. It's why modernism exists in the first place. A good book, again from the horse's mouth, is Henri Murger's, Scenes de la vie de Boheme. You can get it for free and in French or English at Project Gutenburg, https://cdn.bookey.app/files/pdf/book/en/theories-of-modern-art.pdf.
Having known a few artists - and kids with expensive art school degrees, one of whom went on to a career in HVAC, where he has made ten times as much as others in his class, who did not go the skilled trades route - most of the money goes to the gallery owners - they take a 50% cut of what they sell - at a minimum. Art school kids - 95% of whom have no talent whatsoever, according to their teachers and professors (and I've known a few of those, too) - tend to be sons and daughters of rich people, if they're successful - so they already know their market. The few who aren't end up doing unskilled labor in a life of debt slavery. And they tend to have addiction problems and die off pretty quickly, unless the can find something more lucrative than art.
And I know a relatively famous sculptor, Harry Weber:
"Harry Weber was born in St. Louis, Missouri in 1942 where he attended St. Louis Country Day School. He was educated at Princeton University where he studied art history.[1] Following his education, Weber served six years in the United States Navy. This included a year on river patrol boats in Vietnam where he compiled a compelling series of drawings chronicling his experiences there.During his service, he was awarded the Bronze Star Medal with V for valor, the Presidential Unit Commendation and the Navy and Marine Corps Combat Ribbon. ... " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Weber_(sculptor) I've got one of two copies of his first piece - he has the other - which makes that pretty rare, and another early piece - my Aunt Jane was an early supporter of his. He's got a web page - https://harryweber.com/. I don't know how much these pieces are worth, never had them appraised, don't need to, I like them as art, not stacks of dollar bills.
My grandparents on my father's side did a tour of France on their honeymoon in 1914 and bought back a bunch of French art - mostly prints, a few paintings. And none appraised, I remember them from my childhood, so they're not for sale. I don't see art as an investment - actually I should sell some of it off, there's not enough wall space to hang it. My French art from 1914 is beautiful to look at, it wouldn't be worth much in today's market which specializes in ugly junk and - recently - AI slop. And I think that the rich use art for money laundering/tax avoidance more than anything else. And there's a ton of fraud and counterfeit stuff out there, a rich relative (second cousin, once removed) lost something like $5 million when two or three paintings he'd bought turned out to be fakes.
What's driving the current real estate bubble is private equity snapping up single family residential real estate and converting it into rental properties - the Klaus Schwab/WEF thing of "you will own nothing, rent everything, and be happy" - and they buy planning commissions and city governments - for a billionaire, a million dollars is chump change, and the return on the bribes is just huge... It will wind up being a choice between a revolution or slavery, governments have become far too corrupted and bought off.
"Have our tastes become that degenerate?"
Absolutely. Even a brief troll through some parts of the Internet will leave you wondering if maybe we shouldn't give the cockroaches a chance.
"Have our tastes become that degenerate?" - yes, and by design. Pollock was a CIA psyop, used as part of the purposeful dismantling of our culture. He is one of the lies that "crap" is beautiful.
Thank you. That is consistent with my view of the CIA's self-conceived mission and morality, but imagining that they were smart enough to pull it off is a stretch. Maybe.
Reader Reid Stuart has given me permission to post a couple of his very useful emails:
As an artist I enjoyed your post about art. The careers of Jackson Pollack and other Abstract Impressionists were given a big boost by being covertly funded by the CIA for a tour of Europe to present an original style of American art that lacked any content that was likely to offend anybody. Also, you might research how Kamila Harris invited a reporter to her residence to show off her art collection by pointing out the ethnic background of each artist but not mentioning their names or any characteristic of the artwork, in other words valuing only the DEI baggage attached to the artist. The Art Renewal Center, an online organization, promotes the viewpoint that your picture of a ship at sea is indeed more valuable than Jackson Pollack's splatter paintings. Dwight D. Murphy once wrote an informative essay that stated that modern art values the transgression of social norms more than any other quality such as craftsmanship, talent, or creative vision. Good luck.
Sincerely,
Reid
and also:
There is a lot of material on the CIA and art:
https://www.guggenheim-bilbao.eus/en/did-you-know/la-cia-y-el-expresionismo-abstracto
https://www.desertsun.com/story/life/entertainment/arts/2025/02/06/palm-springs-ca-event-palm-springs-art-museum-hours-exhibit-things-to-do-palm-springs-howard-smith/77175351007/
Also CIA funded Gloria Steinem
Kamila Harris and art: My original source was in a popular magazine, but I cannot find it offhand.