Humor Art and everything in between

   This week we read a conversation with a gallery owner, Leo Castelli, which was refreshing and new because we haven't heard from one before.  I had trouble connecting the speaker, Donald Morgan, with the readings.  I had done the readings before class and when I listened to the lecture my blog ideas sort of began to change.  First I'd like to talk about Leo Castelli when he made the comment, "most of them had absolutely no aesthetic qualities--which a work of art must, after all, have" (458).  I find this sentenced to be the most controversial sentence Leo said during the conversation with Suzi.  I think Leo is extremely frustrated that he is living through yet another art revolution and doesn't really like where its going but is going to accept it none the less.  He values what he believes to be a 'true artist' (which we all have our own definitions) but since he is a gallery owner, a celebrity in the art world, and known for his merit and talents in discovering new artist his definition of what a true artist is, is probably pretty spot on... for his generation. The thing that he doesn't want to understand is that art is always evolving and even though some of us like other decades trends more than others we can't fight the tidal wave taking us into the future.  


I wonder what he would say if he wondered into the gallery in New York that Morgan and Reeder put on entitled Drunk vs Stoned.  It really had no deep concerning content relevant to the times of today nor did it scream at you with talented aesthetics so I am guessing Leo Castelli would be indifferent to the pieces.  There are all kinds of artist out there some like The Whitney Biennial who address certain social issues and interact with society, some who long for the paintings to be hung in prestigious galleries like Leo's, others who channel humor through their art, and others who just do what ever their hands lead them to do.  Everyone has a personal preference and I don't think that everything that is art has to have aesthetic merit, I think it's creativity and thought inspiring merit out weighs any others.


Leo isn't all that opposed though to this new era of art, he actually in a way is trying not to fight it but be a part of it and embrace it, he doesn't want to be like other dealers, museum directors, or art historians who fight to reject this post modernism way of art.  That characteristic I like about Leo he seems like he knows whats going on in the art world and to a point I do agree that some merit and talent has seemed to of vanished since the times he remembers and true awe inspiring artist such as Andy Warhol cease to stand out as they once did before.  Becoming an artist is more accessible then its ever been but its sad because now theres this sense of a path, a set of rules, a person must follow in order to become a professional artist but I think that is bullshit... there should be no path, no rules, and no one telling you how to create your art.  That right there is what is ruining the merit and talent of aesthetics in art these days we've managed to create a system through institutions that takes away all aspects of self thought and creativity.  You think the great mind of Andy Warhol followed a path, a set of rules?  No way and that's why his name means what it means today.  True creativity, true thought, true talent, true conversation, true art genius.


It was a nice change of pace to talk about how the gallery does really effect the artist to a certain extent, it can create a name for an artist so that they can create pieces that are more like installations and interactive work outside the gallery and get recognized for it.  Galleries offer a great starting places for artist to give definition to their name.  I believe the Morgan's work would both prosper in the gallery as well as in the streets.  It would be so awesome to see his Drunk vs Stoned pieces randomly placed in busy city streets, kneeling near trash cans, falling onto trees.  I think that would escalate the humor of it quite a bit!  It would be the perfect pieces to place in Portland!  Leo ends by saying attitudes of the artists about the world have changed and I completely agree.  In premodern times it would be ridiculous to create humor driven art to be seen in institutions like galleries in that sense yes we've allowed the artist to look at the world differently but we've also began to look at the artist differently as well... how it's changed I'm not quite sure of yet.