Thoughts on art. Page | 2 I agree (to an extent) with Bourdieu that taste is culturally and historically conditioned. art is not and never could be 'apolitical' which is akin to saying art could be context less. The creation, production, consumption and production of art interacts with the existing capitalist system and cannot be truly revolutionary in breaking with the system no matter how radical it's message.as Pierre Bourdieu argues, what is considered art and what is considered good/bad art cannot be separated from class/ power relations. Previous essentialist theories of art failed to consider this. Art is institutionalised, funded and worshipped by people with ridiculous amounts of money while if anyone was creating art in the street they'd need a license or be arrested. What's wrong with Art galleries? (may not apply to all art galleries and museums)
Often present and represent art in a commodified often sanitized way which is not challenging for the establishment.
They promote the institutional theory of art which says that what is in an art gallery must be art or 'good art' while whatever is not and is by implication not art or not good art. That ends up being elitist, selective, conservative and pretentious. What is then considered art ends up being defined by small elite group of likely wealthy white western men.
Following on from that, art by the working class/women/people of colour/ political art tends to get ignored. There's a bias towards older white western middle class men.
•Promotes a very limited set of styles and schools and excludes/neglects others(though
sometimes I wonder if it's for the best)
•Promotes the idea of a High vs. low art distinction which I don't like much.
I don't much accept the distinction between 'high' and 'low' art. Seems politically motivated.
The money which surrounds the art establishment is obscene. Paying to view art is bizarre. It should be open to all.
Promotion of art which feels removed in relevance to most people's modern everyday
. art belongs to it's creators I.e. to everyone, to all of humanity. I oppose copyright(while understanding it's a well intentioned attempt to prevent plagiarism) and prefer creative commons, open source or anti-copyright. I think everyone has the potential to be creative but it is repressed in current society or channelled to suit it's needs. Therefore I feel unsure about whether I should call myself a poet or artist since I do not think I have any monopoly on creativity nor do I think I am a specialist in creativity. For practical uses as shorthand though it is useful. It quickly becomes clear that because of the instability of meaning, because of Polysemy("the capacity for a sign (e.g., a word, phrase, etc.) or signs to have multiple related meanings ") , it's almost impossible to actually express something meaningless. So nothing is absolutely surrealist. The project of surrealism can never completely succeed.