Quotes: The Essence of Academicism

“It is a widely accepted notion among painters that it does not matter what one paints as long as it is well painted. This is the essence of academicism. There is no such thing as good painting about nothing. We assert that the subject is crucial and only that subject matter is valid which is tragic and timeless. That is why we profess spiritual kinship with primitive and archaic art.”

-Mark Rothko and Adolph Gottlieb

It’s ironic that Rothko, the painter of rectangles, railed against a lack of subject matter in art early in his career. At the time, in the early 1940s, he was exploring fragmented mythological themes, blunt figures like broken chunks of classical statuary. The zones of color he later became famous for were already present-but only as backdrops.

Rothko ended up claiming that the removal of imagery liberated his art. The validity of that idea is challenged by Rothko’s ultimate fate: suicide. He slit his wrists in his art studio.

To lose the image was the great mistake of Modernism. The Remodernist artist commits to imagery. It’s a gesture of faith-the acceptance of the actual.

 

Commentary: Cultural Geography vs The Hegemony

These days, why does so much art look the same, no matter where it was created?

The adaption of Postmodernism as an international style has largely erased local cultural influences in institutional art making. When art largely consists of assembling appropriated images from globally available electronic mediums, then it’s hard to identify origins.

Non-objective and abstract art is similarly generic. Smeared paint looks pretty much the same no matter where it comes from.

Rejection of the anonymous, slick styles favored by establishment artists is a characteristic of Remodernism. The art is personal, reflecting the unique quirks and experiences of the artist.

A truly personal art will inevitably communicate the intimacies involved in where an artist lives, works, the environment they experience, the terrain they navigate. Remodernism is a home grown and diverse expression, glowing with  local color.

Commentary: PoMo No Mo

They’re finally declaring Postmodernism dead.

Was it ever alive to begin with?

This is from 2011, but the art world is still in the denial phase of grief.
What the author of this piece discusses as the dawning Age of Authenticism has already begun.  The destruction of the Leftist monopoly of culture that Post Modernism represents is well underway.

The NeoMarxist Narrativephiles  ran out of resources and credibility before their goal of domination was complete. The rollback of their entrenched influence will be a long process but their defeat is inevitable, based on the massive failure of their ideas.
No more Narrative and Deconstruction. Time to get real again.

The Stuckist Manifesto

Long but worthwhile-the original statement about the Stuckism by Billy Childish and Charles Thomson. They later decided Stuckism was just a facet of the larger art world reformation of Remodernism. These two principled men were able to critique the folly the art world has become, while at the same time launching not one but two open source art movements that are destined to finally bury the rotting corpse of Post Modernism. I am grateful for their wisdom and generosity. -Richard Bledsoe

THE STUCKISTS

(est. 1999)

“Your paintings are stuck,

you are stuck!

Stuck! Stuck! Stuck!”

Tracey Emin

Against conceptualism, hedonism and the cult of the ego–artist.

 

1.      Stuckism is the quest for authenticity.  By removing the mask of cleverness and admitting where we are, the Stuckist allows him/herself uncensored expression.

2.      Painting is the medium of self–discovery.  It engages the person fully with a process of action, emotion, thought and vision, revealing all of these with intimate and unforgiving breadth and detail.

3.      Stuckism proposes a model of art which is holistic.  It is a meeting of the conscious and unconscious, thought and emotion, spiritual and material, private and public.  Modernism is a school of fragmentation — one aspect of art is isolated and exaggerated to detriment of the whole.  This is a fundamental distortion of the human experience and perpetrates an egocentric lie.

4.      Artists who don’t paint aren’t artists.

5.      Art that has to be in a gallery to be art isn’t art.

6.      The Stuckist paints pictures because painting pictures is what matters.

7.      The Stuckist is not mesmerised by the glittering prizes, but is wholeheartedly engaged in the process of painting. Success to the Stuckist is to get out of bed in the morning and paint.

8.      It is the Stuckist’s duty to explore his/her neurosis and innocence through the making of paintings and displaying them in public, thereby enriching society by giving shared form to individual experience and an individual form to shared experience.

9.      The Stuckist is not a career artist but rather an amateur (amare, Latin, to love) who takes risks on the canvas rather than hiding behind ready–made objects (e.g. a dead sheep).  The amateur, far from being second to the professional, is at the forefront of experimentation, unencumbered by the need to be seen as infallible.  Leaps of human endeavour are made by the intrepid individual, because he/she does not have to protect their status.  Unlike the professional, the Stuckist is not afraid to fail.

10.  Painting is mysterious.  It creates worlds within worlds, giving access to the unseen psychological realities that we inhabit.  The results are radically different from the materials employed.  An existing object (e.g. a dead sheep) blocks access to the inner world and can only remain part of the physical world it inhabits, be it moorland or gallery.  Ready–made art is a polemic of materialism.

11.  Post Modernism, in its adolescent attempt to ape the clever and witty in modern art, has shown itself to be lost in a cul–de–sac of idiocy.  What was once a searching and provocative process (as Dadaism) has given way to trite cleverness for commercial exploitation.  The Stuckist calls for an art that is alive with all aspects of human experience; dares to communicate its ideas in primeval pigment; and possibly experiences itself as not at all clever!

12.  Against the jingoism of Brit Art and the ego–artist.  Stuckism is an international non–movement.

13.  Stuckism is anti ‘ism’.  Stuckism doesn’t become an ‘ism’ because Stuckism is not Stuckism, it is stuck!

14.  Brit Art, in being sponsored by Saachis, main stream conservatism and the Labour government, makes a mockery of its claim to be subversive or avant–garde.

15.  The ego–artist’s constant striving for public recognition results in a constant fear of failure.  The Stuckist risks failure wilfully and mindfully by daring to transmute his/her ideas through the realms of painting.  Whereas the ego–artist’s fear of failure inevitably brings about an underlying self–loathing, the failures that the Stuckist encounters engage him/her in a deepening process which leads to the understanding of the futility of all striving.  The Stuckist doesn’t strive — which is to avoid who and where you are — the Stuckist engages with the moment.

16.  The Stuckist gives up the laborious task of playing games of novelty, shock and gimmick.  The Stuckist neither looks backwards nor forwards but is engaged with the study of the human condition.  The Stuckists champion process over cleverness, realism over abstraction, content over void, humour over wittiness and painting over smugness.

17.  If it is the conceptualist’s wish to always be clever, then it is the Stuckist’s duty to always be wrong.

18.  The Stuckist is opposed to the sterility of the white wall gallery system and calls for exhibitions to be held in homes and musty museums, with access to sofas, tables, chairs and cups of tea.  The surroundings in which art is experienced (rather than viewed) should not be artificial and vacuous.

19.  Crimes of education: instead of promoting the advancement of personal expression through appropriate art processes and thereby enriching society, the art school system has become a slick bureaucracy, whose primary motivation is financial.  The Stuckists call for an open policy of admission to all art schools based on the individual’s work regardless of his/her academic record, or so–called lack of it.

We further call for the policy of entrapping rich and untalented students from at home and abroad to be halted forthwith.

We also demand that all college buildings be available for adult education and recreational use of the indigenous population of the respective catchment area.  If a school or college is unable to offer benefits to the community it is guesting in, then it has no right to be tolerated.

20.  Stuckism embraces all that it denounces.  We only denounce that which stops at the starting point — Stuckism starts at the stopping point!

Billy Childish

Charles Thomson

4.8.99

The following have been proposed to the Bureau of Inquiry for possible inclusion as Honorary Stuckists:

Katsushika Hokusai

Utagawa Hiroshige

Vincent van Gogh

Edvard Munch

Karl Schmidt–Rotluff

Max Beckman

Kurt Schwitters

Commentary: Defining the Disaster

Ed Driscoll: Starting to Peel Away the Layers

I have been very gratified about the increasing coverage of the state of the visual arts in the various conservative blogs I follow. Any political victories  that can be won will be only temporary if the overwhelming toxic direction of our culture is not challenged. Art is at the core of the struggle for the type of future we will have.

It helps that establishment exhibitionist Camille Paglia is hyping a new book on the topic. An elitist insider is acknowledging that there are problems in the arts, serious issues of relevance and quality. It’s an important  first step, a chink in the armor of the cultural leftist hegemony.

From what I gather from the initial presentations, Paglia has identified the breakdown of tangible technical skills on the one hand, and the creeping dominance of ideology on the other, on why art has lost its ability to connect with a broad audience. She admits that hostility towards capitalism has isolated agenda-driven artists from participating in the genuine dynamics of our culture.
And she rightly places blame on the institutional elements that perpetuate this sick environment.

But as a participant and beneficiary of the the same system she is critiquing, she does not go far enough in her analysis.  The results she describes-acceptance of impermanence, rigid conformity, rejection of religion, the great disconnect of art from life-are all goals of the Marxist-driven long march through the institutions. The horrible state of the arts is no accident, but the outcome of the determined efforts of the those who are looking to destroy our society and install themselves as rulers over a mythical egalitarian paradise. It has been a covert war of conquest.

In his post Ed Driscoll sees through Paglia’s positioning, and examines the underlying assumptions of the Modernist era-art as a force of social deconstruction. This mode was not so much about art as it was about fulfilling the agenda. Modern Art was an early victim of Marxist infiltration. An exciting era of new possibilities was mutated into a tool of destruction, a weapon of the glorious revolution.

Remodernism is the chance to get art back on track. It rejects the corruption of art by leftist establishment rules, and releases the artist to express individual vision. Remodernism is the optimistic art of the future.