Formalism, Abstraction, Materiality
christopherschreck answered you:
Here’s a really broad question for you. It seems to me that lot of the most exciting new work today in pretty much all mediums (ie. most of what you cover on this blog) is driven by a combination of formalism, abstraction, and materiality. A) Would you agree? B) Why do you think this is?
lets figure it out together!
there’s probably a lot of different reasons. i’ll throw out the first one that comes to mind. which is that it has a lot to do with the current predominance of the digital (as means of creating work, of presenting work, of disseminating work, of viewing work, of intervening with/altering work).
in terms of formalism/materiality, my sense is that the non-physicality of the digital world has to lead to the reassessment of all media rooted in the physical world. it’s about redefining and reframing, but also, maybe, about reminding/reassuring ourselves that things - and we - do actually physically exist??
a) painting’s been perpetually “dead” or “in crisis” or whatever for decades, but with the rise of the digital, painters finally have a legitimate cause/purpose, an idea to work off of. it’s true not only for the frame and canvas painters, but also the increasing number of artists creating paintings using programs on computers and phones. i think it can be viewed as a reaction against or interaction with the current circumstances. could be both.
b) same with sculpture - also interesting to think about the implications of the jpeg as primary means of presenting/viewing sculptures - the framing/backdrops/alterations done in post… it not only gives artists complete control over how the work is presented (at least initially, before it’s fair game for anyone to alter/recontextualize), but id argue actually creates a weird blended genre of painting and photography. (then, if you get someone like ben schumacher or artie vierkant, who leave obvious digital alterations to the documentation shots, you get another nice layer going.)
c) photo’s the same thing - photo as a medium was always defined not by its equipment, not even the process, but ultimately the print itself. with digital cameras, processes, and presentations, it’s all up for reassessment. some people embrace the digital - use DSLRs, alter their work in post, etc. - others emphasize the physical - people like letha wilson making sculptures out of the prints themselves, etc. you also get people working with their hands more, shooting still-lifes and sculptural elements to then be shot.
d) net art/digital art is also all about materiality - it’s more about assessment than re-assessment for them, but it’s still about exploring the territory
as far as abstraction goes… i’d say three things:
a) its a little safer, less self-conscious, less specific so there’s less to own up to
b) when everything you put on line can and will be altered/recontextualized, there’s something maybe more comfortable about putting out work that doesnt have much in the way of explicit content to be altered
c) abstract work is fun to make and fun to look at. we’re so post-everything that people dont get hung up on the metaphysical implications of abstract expressionism, the conceptual framework of minimalism, etc. - it’s a lot more about appearance, which sounds superficial but which i actually completely embrace because in all honesty i think its more important that a work be visually exciting than intellectually compelling. obviously, id like it to be both if possible, but personally i’d rather feel, then ponder… if given the ultimatum, i’d rather feel THAN ponder! maybe some people feel the same way.
origamiaround
titsay
2087
romaincrisis
ellievsbear
stormborns
germansingergirl
