Thursday 11th December

I studied Art for an A level I never took, deciding that running away from home and school in 1968 might be a better idea.  But I can remember a discussion we sixth-formers had about the nature of Art.  This was against a backdrop of liberation from the conventional straight-jacket in which Art had been considered before.  Our Art teacher, old Jack Trodd insisted that Art had to have an intention, and that intention must be to render a view of the World in a different medium; he had nothing against Modern or Abstract Art but insisted that a lot of it was Accidentally Found Images rather than Art.  I disagreed at the time, being entranced by Yoko Ono, Jackson Pollock, ‘happenings’ and the Pop-Art of Litchenstein etc:

But as I have got older I am not so sure.  It seems nowadays that anything is Art if the Artist declares it as such – and we, like those looking at ‘The Emperor’s New Clothes’ in bewilderment, go along with it because we don’t want to appear fools who cannot appreciate this wonderful new ‘Art’.  But the definition of an Artist is someone who creates Art, and as any of us can declare that our spilt milk on the kitchen worktop is Art therefore we are Artists.  Maybe we all are, hahaha.  My wife recently framed a ‘painting’ by our 3yr old Granddaughter, and it certainly looks better in the frame than before –but is it Art?   It is just a few daubs of three or four primary colours on a piece of paper; it is anyone’s guess if there was any attempt to represent anything at all, but I cannot see it.  It is a pleasant enough thing, but like a lot of Abstract Art I question if a combination of pretty colours can be considered as Art.   I would rather call it, as per Jack Trodd, an Accidentally Found Image.  Another friend of ours makes ‘Art’ too, by mixing glue and ink and paint and rollering it she produces quite pleasant images and they certainly look good in a frame, but are they Art?  You could say they are simply one step beyond the old childhood game of making ‘Butterflies’ by folding a piece of paper in half over some paint and squelching it to see what emerges.  But there is I must admit quite a bit of work involved and decisions are taken as to the quantity and colours used, although I still contend that the resulting Images are Accidentally Found.  Maybe that is Art after all, who am I to judge?

I too consider myself an Artist.  I used to draw and paint for years, and continually promise myself that on retirement I will start again.  I attempt to capture something of Beauty or Emotion in my Art, some distillation of the Essence of what it is to be Human.  I reject and destroy far more than I ever consider good; my frustration being that my intention and my vision are so rarely actually attained.  I have a handful of what I consider to be good enough from half a lifetime of effort.  But in my own way I consider these far more important and are actually Art rather than pretty splashes of colour which may or may not represent something or may in fact just be Accidentally Found Images.