Teens/adults - Lesson 5: History anew
Once upon a time, back in 1835, the French writer Théophile Gautier wrote the phrase, “L’art pour l’art,” which was translated into English as “art for art’s sake.”[1] This was a notable creed of the 19th century, in particular, and a reaction to Victorian, sentimental, and Marxist philosophies. It represented artistic ideas that demanded respect for their existence without being connected to moral justifications—simply to be. The idea crossed continents. Edgar Allan Poe wrote, “…this poem which is a poem and nothing more, this poem written solely for the poem’s sake.”[2] Art for art’s sake was a battle cry for much of the 20th century, as well.
The impulse toward a pure expression in art uninterested in social discourse or political messaging seems almost quaint today, where visual art exhibitions are increasingly centered upon thematic explorations of identity, social positioning, political commentary, and reordering history to make right previous wrongs. As a consequence, the battle to define Art History is tumultuous, at present. It is up for grabs.
A Seismic Shift
In the world of museums, the pendulum has swung so far toward thematic exhibitions that it is almost unthinkable to imagine a major museum exhibition of an art historical -ism. It is hard to picture a museum mounting a major show of Impressionists, for example, Abstract Expressionists, or Pop Artists, now. Or to have retrospectives of Picasso, Matisse, Van Gogh, Warhol or Monet—the previous bread and butter blockbusters of our largest institutions. The art historical survey exhibition has largely disappeared. In its place, art exhibitions have seized upon the opportunity for top-to-bottom reevaluation of what happened in art and what is happening.
Scholars are trained very differently at current academic institutions, and as they move into professions, this impact of inclusion and reevaluation is being felt everywhere. No art history narrative is acceptable today without an investigation about inclusion, fairness, and representation of voices previously overlooked. That is, the way we look at the history of art today is dramatically different than even a generation before.
For proof of this seismic shift, look no farther than the Museum of Modern Art in New York City. One of the most widely-respected fine arts institutions in the world—and one of the most tightly-focused narratives about its art collection—MoMA completely transformed its own story in 2019. Everything in the museum was taken down. The prescriptive path of art history in the 20th century was largely discarded. New voices were sought to give a more complete version of history, which included not only new voices living contemporarily to known artists, but artists from different decades and centuries all shown as commenting on each other. Further, entirely new kinds of objects are now often shown in contrast or in dialogue to previous “masterpieces.”
There are excellent reasons for all the above. Recommended reading is the Art at Home lesson for children (Study - Lesson E: Rethinking History) that tries to explain the issues of bias that have hampered the telling of a complete history of visual art.
The issues at play shake the foundations of art: What is it for? How do we interact with it? Who decides what is included/excluded in a study of its history?
You, the Exhibition Curator
Image that you are an art historian, and you are curating an exhibition. You are selecting art works for the show, and in each case you have two viable options in front of you, although each is quite different. In this exercise, which would you choose?
A work that is by a well-known artist or one that is by an under-known artist?
A work that is more innovative or one that is more technically accomplished?
A painting or a drawing?
A work by a man or a woman?
A work that has a social message or one that does not?
A work whose creator is connected to a group of artists or one that is not?
A work of an artist with extensive training or one who is self-taught?
A work that is representative of the artist or one that is an outlier, stylistically?
A work by a European or African artist?
A work by a younger or older artist?
A work that many people have already seen or one that few have seen?
A photograph or a film?
A sculpture or a commercial object?
A work whose goal is to uplift or to affect change?
A work that has a higher market value or a lower market value?
A work that reads as an autobiographical artifact or does not?
A bigger work or a smaller work?
Each of these issues arises every day in the writing of art history and in its public display. These are hypothetical choices, but the tension between them is entirely real. It is a storm of change that is providing everyone—not just “experts” an opportunity to look at art with new eyes.
[1] See “Art for art’s sake,” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_for_art%27s_sake, accessed November 11, 2019.
[2] “The Poetic Principle,” Edgar Allan Poe, 1850.