I have often in the past made
comparative and competitive claims for an individual artist, saying for example
that X is the most important European artist since Y. It is a not entirely
meaningless formula and it offers a tempting short-cut to the reader’s mind.
But I now believe it to be profoundly mistaken: not because there is the danger
of the judgement being a wrong one - there are no absolute and eternally right
judgements: but because the notion of competition has become alien to the
spirit of art.
When the social position of an
artist was that of an artisan or a super-craftsman, the spirit of competition
acted as a stimulus. Today the position of the artist has changed. He is no
longer valued as the producer of his work, but for the quality of his vision
and imagination as expressed in his work. He is no longer primarily a maker of
art: he is an example of a man and it is his art which exemplifies him. This is
true at an appreciative and philosophical level even under capitalism, where
works of art are treated on the market like any other commodity. In the artist’s
new role there is no place for comparative competition. One cannot properly
compete to be a representative of Man. It is the contradiction between this
truth and the dominance of the art market over all production which destroys so
much talent and creates so much confused desperation among artists in the
capitalist countries.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.