Why is it so important that art be criticized? If it is a practice of integrity why is should it not be as important as something conceptually strong. I don’t know why I am doing this, no, wait I do, I am doing this because it brings me joy, and I love the aesthetic of what I’m doing. Unfortunately what I am doing or the way I am doing it tied up in discourse, but should that concern me? I acknowledge it is there and that is that. This practice of mine is intuitive and experimental and playful. I dispute the need for conceptual grounding. I feel that the beauty in the end result is conceptual grounding in itself. Why the subject matter of the flower? Because it is beautiful to me. Aesthetics is the first point for me, and I am using natural aesthetics as a starting point to capture in whatever medium. I am referencing something beautiful to make something totally different, and beautiful that has never been seen before.
So I am also thinking about is there merit in doing something because that is the intuitive choice I have made and I am running with it. I have been trained as an artist to think about all the choices I make in my art making and to make them with deliberation and a clear sense of intention. But sometimes intuition can get you to a point that if far beyond what might be intended.
All these points I have bring to question other points. There might be a distinction between criticising and critiquing art. What is meant by integrity in art practice, and am I simply making judgements on work that is all theory and no practice. What is the point of making art? And the list can go on…
Pingback: Janet Wolff’s Social Production of Art Critique « Fifth room in the Fourth floor
Pingback: David Davies’ Art as Performance Critique « Fifth room in the Fourth floor