What Can't Art Just Shock?

You are right about that , cztheday , intimidation . I had almost forgotten about it . Some insecure artists lack a certain , generosity . Some business people encourage this . I suspect , it is used to wrangle sales . It's wrong . Personally . I do not want to tell someone what it means , not because it is a riddle only the clever can solve , but , because , to have any meaning to the viewer , it must be a personal one . For instance , my interpretation of your dreams might not give much insight . However discussing them with me , might . Ultimately you must meet them on your own terms though . It is the same with art . Art is a conversation the culture has with itself , one individual at a time . It is actually important to have dialogue about it . No conclusion needs to be made , nor is any final . Not your cup of tea ? Maybe later . Maybe , never . My definition of an artist is , one who's job it is to express the nature of the culture in which they live . Both the conscious and unconscious . We create public myths . Expose nightmares . So , whatever you see when you look at art , whatever you feel , ( hey , it has taken me decades to sus the levels meaning of some things , and I made 'em ! ) is right . In fact it is an absolute travesty to buy someone else's interpretation unless , it rings true for you . Art comes natural to humans . Children know it . The only thing that separates artists from other people is that ( in most cases ) we practice what we do to a level no regular person would . No different that any other professional . Well , okay , a little different . Thanks for the compliment . Your insight and perspective is a delight , as always .

Great article! Great thread! I admire all of you for commenting on this article because in my view it takes a certain amount of courage to discuss one's responses to Art -- especially "controversial" Art (it is pretty easy, for example, to line up in support of Ansel Adams' gorgeous, often jaw-dropping photography. It is not so easy to express one's thoughts about a performance Art piece when you are afraid you may be the only member of the audience who doesn't "get" the point of the performance.)

Artemis, your counterpoint to the prevailing wisdom of the others is exceptionally thoughtful, and your prose is so well constructed, it feels more like telepathy than the written word - inspiring.

The reason I mentioned the foregoing is that I think one of the greatest tragedies in modern America is that so many people have come to be so INTIMIDATED by Art. There is this sense that the inability to appreciate certain pieces or art forms reflects badly on the intelligence or taste of the observer.

Such feelings are often encouraged by the artists themselves who, understandably I suppose, can't accept the possibility that after dropping fifty grand on art school and ten years of barely making rent in The Village they still can't produce work that moves people.

In fact, there is great Art and terrible art and everything in between. And even great Artists are quite capable of laying the proverbial smelly egg on occasion. The most important thing, it seems to me, is to come to each piece with a mind that is as open as possible. There is nothing at all wrong with being in the minority (even a minority consisting of one person) who thinks a given piece is awful or wonderful -- so long as you are sufficiently generous to grant that others' tastes and perceptions differ from your own. I cringe when I hear the phrase, "That's not Art!" not because I would deny the speaker's right to judge the merits of the piece but because the speaker might unduly influence or prejudice the minds of those who might take something meaningful from the piece that the speaker simply may be incapable of appreciating.

War is the ultimate performance shock art . Where do you go from there ? I do not think you can justly separate art from the times and the culture it was made . It is an expression of these things . Art is not created in a vacuum . Context gives it meaning . Even the famous statue of David , however magnificent , is also a statement about the power of the church . And a great bit of marketing it was too . An artist friend of mine was criticized because her art was too "political " . That is a good sign of its relevance . I fear that people have been robbed of the fun of thinking deeply in our superficial fast paced , push of a button , automatic world . Life , like art , is change . Life shocks . Truth shocks . Art shocks . No compromise .

art created for shock value is immediately time stamped to the date created, as shock is a one time happening, and progressive. Past art that has shocked us will not do so anymore, because it is no longer shocking. Shock has a limited capacity to hold out attention for the small moments that it is shocking

There are so many different genres coming under the umbrella, called "Art"!!!!! For me, a Turner, Rembrandt, and a Van Gogh, take my breath away...as in theatre...etc etc...(too many excellent examples to mention)...however, when does "shock" just become rubbish...apropos...regurgitating milk, human faeces, rotting meat...this whole subject is a Pandora's Box, and I have not the artistic wherewithal to elaborate, but from my point of view...bodily crap is not art...sorry, Eden...

Started living on the street at the age of 13? No wonder he was so screwd up! It is surprising he lasted as long as he did- before overdosing. Truly a lost soul. Art is not art if its sole pupose is to offend, and apparently, he used art as a vehicle to offend.

From the same perspective why didn't the TV show/film Jackass win high acclaim for artistic value.... It didn't have any.

I have a harder time accepting art that is made seemingly without any technical skill that accepting art that was created simply for its shock value. Either way I'm not paying for it.