#237 22 february 2016
Yüklə 289,86 Kb. Pdf görüntüsü
|
| How do we assess contemporary art? Mesk-ellil (2015) Hicham Berrada Courtesy of Kamel Mennour and Biennale de Lyon 2015 © Blaise Adilon
table of contents How do we assess contemporary art? P.17 P.13 P.21 top stories museums gaLLe- ries artists tHomas bernard data Léon spiLLiaert P.14 P.22 P.28 P.3 P.10 P.29 P.18 fondation Hippocrène auctions fairs and festivaLs 2 This document is for the exclusive use of Art Media Agency’s clients. Do not distribute. Subscribe for free.
237 • 22 february 2016
Museo Soumaya Carlos Slim's private museum Courtesy of Museo Soumaya
I n a novel retracing the life of Van Gogh’s post- man Joseph Roulin ( La vie de Jospeh Roulin), writer Pierre Michon raises a question that has probably crossed the minds of all art lo- vers: “Who decides what’s beautiful and, on this basis, what’s expensive or worth nothing among humans?” The question of a work’s va- lue is continually raised, and may sometimes be accompanied by bafflement — a feeling to which even experts may be prone. So then: how is it that contemporary art is assessed? Who are the players who take part in this game of meaning, that sometimes resembles a game of fools? Eva- luating an artwork means placing a value upon it. An aesthetic value, implicitly, but values are a porous field where different horizons mix, in a monumental and plural edifice that we custo- marily call “culture”. So who is responsible for us scrutinising a Jeff Koons sculpture or Henri Dar- ger drawings? For American sociologist Howard Becker, the art world is a "collective action" ( Art Worlds, 1982). Evaluation is based on several criteria — not merely formal ones — and can be divided into various temporalities at which different players intervene. And yet, the process is not so transparent in the eyes of the public in a broad sense. Perhaps this is because the evaluation process is not as rigid as one might think, but based instead on a fragile balance, subject to ongoing reconfigurations. It seems quite obvious that the reality is somewhere between two extremes: the relativism of taste-based judgments that amounts to implying that a work’s value is strictly subjective, and the idea that the work innately carries objective value. In the end, who should we hold responsible? Between the illusion of a whim underlying a judgment and the illusion of a work’s objective value, what is there left for us to understand how we evaluate contemporary art? aesthetic evaluation What criteria do we use to evaluate the art of our time? There is one crucial criterion in assessing a work, and that is the question of form and formal analysis. What we ask an artist to do is to invent new forms and new creative procedures. Since the imitation of what already exists lacks interest, invention — of new forms and new procedures — is a basic element by which to consider art history. Inventing a new form comes from feeling the necessity to express a new situation in a form that corresponds to it. This new situation is that of our contemporary era; it may be personal as well as collective, with both often joining up if they are not inextricably linked. This is also the reason why it is necessary to renew the forms by which our world expresses, considers and represents itself. Aotw •
How do we assess cont. art? As ingenious or inspiring as the works of the past may be, they belong to a world that is no longer ours. It is up to artists to continue to create new forms for our present time. In L’Atelier d’Alberto Giacometti, Jean Genet writes that an artwork is not aimed at future generations, but rather, “it is offered up to the countless people of the dead”. When an artist invents a new form, it is almost always a homage to the past that manifests the necessity to update the way we perceive and think about the world. For example, when Kader Attia explored the theme of repair at the last Biennale de Lyon, in Traditional Repair, Immaterial Injury (2015), we encountered a form that translates, into matter and signs, certain elements in our societies where the issue of repair is backed up by a nostalgic feeling of loss. Many observers agree to say that we are in the midst of a crisis, in other words, a period of mutation, deep and violent questioning of our societies. A break with the past, especially when the past is close, is the object of grief — a loss that must at all costs be compensated and repaired. The work of Kader Attia is in line with this perspective and gives us, through what can be perceived, keys for deepening our understanding of our situation as Europeans and Westerners. There is something necessary about this form and it speaks to “us” even when we turn our backs on it.
During a conference held at the Collège de France, “Évaluer l'art contemporain”, Philippe Dagen suggested distinguishing between three stages in the process under analysis. Before an artist becomes an artist, many players are deployed in a relatively long temporality, beyond the very short time occupied by the market. Biwat Flute Stopper Yuat River Papua New-Guinea © Sotheby's Art Digital Studio
Kader Attia Courtesy of the artist, Biennale de Lyon, Nagel Draxler and Lehmann Maupin Gallery
237 • 22 february 2016
Yüklə 289,86 Kb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|