Fakin’ it

Victoria Ward
Victoria Ward

“We look back at past ages and see how things people deeply believed in at the time were actually a rigid conformity that prevented them from seeing important changes that were happening elsewhere. And I sometimes wonder whether the very idea of self-expression might be the rigid conformity of our age. It might be preventing us from seeing really radical and different ideas that are sitting out on the margins—different ideas about what real freedom is, that have little to do with our present day fetishization of the self. The problem with today’s art is that far from revealing those new ideas to us, it may be actually stopping us from seeing them.”

Adam Curtis in conversation w Arspace Magazine

I have been a fairly devoted social media user for quite some time now. I have spent much time engaging with my local arts community on issues regarding fair payment for artists, maddening obfuscation by the Canada Council, wondering when any mainstream arts media was going to begin to discuss things like… how digital was taking over culture and how no one wants to pay for things anymore and also how using platforms like Instagram and Facebook were changing how we speak and relate to each other.

Social media has helped me connect and retool my profile and practice of being an artist. I had my own guidelines (always choose dignity, never share anything suspect, and never denigrate) and used Twitter et al to build a little world of interesting and thoughtful people who just wanted to make art or support art.

With the election of Donald Trump to the US Presidency I have now felt bereft of once believing I was building something positive for my career and mostly my life. His use of Twitter has turned my gentle turns of sharing and supporting into a gutter. Some would argue it already was but not for me. Being on social media was a positive, forward reaching endeavour that introduced me to a whole world of potential. Now I must contend with endless Facebook posts and Twitter feeds about Donald Trump and everything he touches. Why so many of my friends share news about him to the point of obsession is really bizarre. I’ve always been told be the change you want to see. Or, if you don’t like the way something is do something about it. Endless posting on Facebook isn’t going to change reality… or is it.

What if all the ranting against Trump and all the sharing about how awful he is has in fact led to him being in power? If you follow documentary film maker/art/philosopher Adam Curtis’ way of thinking, particularly in such works as Hypernormalisation, you would see a very strong line between heightened reality or ‘fake’ –ness being consumed and its manifestation in life. What I think he may mean (and I am still figuring this all out) is the more we share things we didn’t really make or didn’t really experience the more we create a world that isn’t really ours. The more we opt for replacing action with ‘media’ or ‘culture’ or even ‘art’ the more we allow this lack of reality to dominate our social and political space. Everyone calls for Trump to be honest, not lie and be transparent but that isn’t what he is; in fact he is exactly the chimera or mythological figure that we have summoned.

Courbet saw the Vendome Column as an expression of war, conquest & imperial dynasty. His destruction of it cost him his career.
Courbet saw the Vendome Column as an expression of war, conquest & imperial dynasty. His destruction of it cost him his career.

Unfortunately his presidency will have very real consequences for many people who are not buffeted by money or privilege. Not all Gods are going to dole out salvation; many of them can be vengeful and bring great havoc to the worshippers. Not that I think the president is a God but if you listen to some Americans they might as well be. The US is a deeply religious place.

As a Canadian I am luckily removed from the worst of this coming epoch. But as an artist and someone who works in the world of interpretation and illumination I feel somewhat involved. I make my living creating things, objects, but my work is also about the space, or relationship between my object and the viewer. I try my best to make that space a unique experience, an intimate voyage of emotional presence and context. However when Curtis makes the claim that perhaps self expression and the need for individualism in art has backfired in our culture, making our lives vulnerable to the machinations of dark money and inhumane power brokers and that we’ve kind of taken our hands off the wheel of civil society negating common good for celebrity status I have to admit to feeling a bit of shame.

I was raised Catholic so my go to feeling will always be shame. I feel shame when something I am eating tastes amazing, so, you know, it’s just how I am.

But then I think about Gustave Courbet and Dimitri Shostakovich. Both artists who lived and died in violent political eras. Both were subject to the whim of oppressive political forces, Courbet in 1870s France, specifically the Paris Commune and Shostakovich in Stalin’s Russia and both made their outstanding contributions regardless of what these forces were taking from them. Courbet’s life ruined by protest, Shostakovich’s ruined by obedience. But then, they didn’t have Facebook. If they did they might have given up their fight and gotten stuck on endless threads debating the very merits of what they were doing in the first place. Instead they took action, some of it effective, some of it not. At least they DID something. They seemed to know why they were artists and able to take such risks.

If we do now live in what Curtis calls Hypernormalisation, where there is no reality just ongoing facades that allude to it, then you would think artists might be the perfect people to hit the refresh button. But that would entail us grappling with the question of what we really want from our art careers. If we are to put our objects on display then what are we doing exactly? Do we want to change the world? If you do, sometimes it might make sense to leave the studio and go and do just that.

Image from Wikipedia

Art or artists? When does one become the other?

The following is a guest post by Bill Roseberry an artist in Washington, D.C. He, Noah Fischer and I administrate the Facebook page Artist as Debtor. The page addresses the issue of debt and how artists get into and out of it.

“Every artist’s work changes when he dies…  Finally no one remembers what his work was like when he was alive … [His work] will have become evidence from the past, instead of being … a possible preparation for something to come.”  John Berger’s essay on Alberto Giacometti

Last summer I had the opportunity to meet with the director and young associates of a well-known University Art Museum about a proposal I intended to make.  Unlike other museums in the area this museum has an extremely good track record for representing local artists both in its regular schedule of shows and events as well as maintaining prominent area devoted to that purpose.  My proposal  seemed perfect and I was optimistic when the director personally made an appointment to meet with me.

The project I outlined was to compile an active history or database of local artists from the present to as far back as information was available. Besides being a participatory and widely inclusive undertaking, it would not impact the museum’s regular schedule, would require no actual space, no curatorial responsibilities, and very little funding beyond what the artists themselves would contribute for the purpose of their own posterity.

Then, as they say, it all went south.  The museum, the director said, was about art, not about artists; “I don’t see the difference between art and artists”, he said, “they’re the same as far as I’m concerned”.

Was he really asking me to explain the difference between a human being  and their representation as an item in his gallery? Was he being sincere or simply testing my sincerity? Then it dawned on me…

le-vite
Giorgio Vasari, Renaissance painter & architect dedicated the book to Cosimo I de Medici. It remains one of the most comprehensive encyclopedias on artists anywhere.

It isn’t that he cannot see the difference, but that he and others have made it possible to disregard the artist over their fascination with our produce… picking flowers with the belief they are cultivating a plant.  If there is no distinction between the artist and their work how is it that so many institutions of culture and learning are predicated on the basis of nothing but the search and attainment of just such distinctions?

The difference between art and artists is something that is never taught, at least formally.  To some extent and in that respect we are even inclined to take ourselves for granted – our work and our identity are one and the same. Or are they?  We are all taught the history of art but where do we go to learn the history of artists. Giorgio Vasari compiled his “Lives of the Most Excellent Painters, Sculptors, and Architects ” in 1550. There are various individual biographies but few modern compendiums.  Where is the Museum of Artists?  The question what is the difference between art and artists may appear rhetorical, but is it?

The difference between myself and my work is something I’ve learned in the process of becoming an artist.  And mostly how much more difficult it is to live as an artist than it is to simply produce another work.  Even my failures stand for something. That is what non-artists do not understand.  Art is not an object that can be displayed, offered for sale, compared to objects like it, but lived on a daily basis for the entirety of our lives.

My latest project will be far less ambitious. That is whenever someone mentions art, wants  to talk about art, I will simply ask, “where does the artist enter in this discussion”, and refuse to be taken for granted or disregarded.

#art #digital #social media #Ontario #ruralness