Miklos Legrady ArtBlog 2019
<-- back to January - February - March - April - May
JULY
64-Whose expectations is that?
Miklkos Legrady, 24" x 36" - 60.96cm x 91.44cm, acrylic on canvas, May 19, 2018
“If one places the artwork outside of its historical context, whether in its origin, or its effect,” Hannah Deinhardt wrote in Meaning and Expression Toward a Sociology of Art, “one can give no explanation of the facts of the various arts, the many-sidedness of artworks.”
Deinhardt sees visual art as a social phenomenal aimed at making a statement to others, which is not quite true for visual artists. That a writer would think artists paint for others to read their work is because... writers.
It's different for painters. The painting's first audience is the artist themselves, who is engaged in understanding the directions emerging from the unconscious and intuitive aspects of the mind, that direct the act of painting. Painting is a non-verbal language as opposed to writing, it uses a different skill set and is much less conscious, even in photo-representational painting, which is still non-verbal, using a visual language. There is an explanation in this conversation between the artist and their inner self.
It's different with people like Jeff Koons or Damian Hirst, whose assistants do all the work. Their product is not painting but illustration, just like commercial art. It is less than art even when very beautiful, it is less than it could have been.
In 1617, Sir Dudley Carleton protested to Rubens that paintings offered to him as by the artist himself were in fact largely the work of his studio. Rubens was quick to replace them with works he could vouch for as being entirely his own — it would not do to acquire a reputation for passing off inferior work as original.
July 7, 2019
comments: legrady@me.com
65- The Difference
Miklos Legrady,16" x 20" - 40.64cm x 50.8cm, acrylic on canvas, July, 2019.
One thing that Walter Benjamin got right in The work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction was that photography would play havoc with the status of drawing and painting, since these media had utilitarian uses. For example, British officers were taught drawing so they could produce accurate spatial description of the conflict zone. A wide range of products from maps to portraits to technical drawings were superseded by a photographic medium that did the job cheaper and faster. Ah, the age of science.
Of course painting and drawing fascinate us for their non-verbal description of the artist’s individuality, the artist’s hand, the body language of the work. For many drawn by the siren song of technology such a subjective experience as found in painting is obviously not enough. The work is expected to have a conceptual grounding or a political theory, a postmodern view that comes dangerously close to degrading art into an illustration of ideas.
Blake Gopnik tells us that “We cherish everything in American art that is difficult, conceptual, anti-aesthetic, tough, and unsparing. Those were the neo-Dada values that began to win out in the early 1960s”. (1) This might be a matter of pride to some and yet the underlying masochism cannot be ignored. When neo-Dada values such as the anti-aesthetic, tough, and unsparing became dominant, we realized that anti-aesthetic is that is in bad taste, whereas tough and unsparing about what and to whom? Tough and unsparing means unpleasant, lacking tolerance for your antiquated desire for beauty, there is no longer place for aesthetics, that entire school of non-verbal languages on which art has been based since time immemorial. Instead art’s going to be tough, hard to understand.
The idea that art should difficult and conceptual evolves from Duchamp’s experiments with making art intellectual, which killed his interest in making art thereafter. It was like a broken leg he said. Blake Gopnik’s description of an art “that is that is difficult, conceptual, anti-aesthetic, tough, and unsparing” describes an art that is unpleasant and undesirable.
Walter Benjamin promoted an art that dispensed with aesthetics in favor of revolutionary propaganda made by a committee of the working class. Duchamp aimed for an art without personal taste, Dadaists proposed dispensing with art altogether, and photography dispensed with the personal touch in favor of a machine documenting scenes with a political message.
As a painter I often find myself influenced by an anti-aesthetic mindset pioneered over a hundred years ago. As an artist with a lifelong commitment to painting I came to the conclusion that Dada and our subsequent postmodern neo-Dadaism, the beliefs of our time, are terribly wrong, badly mistaken, and have nothing to do with the subject since they aim at the denial of art. Postmodernism was then the failed academic intellectual take over of art. I have always been interested in visual language, the grammar and syntax of images, their function. But even then I often felt insecure at abandoning the current trend and striking off on my own. It’s always a struggle.
(1) http://blakegopnik.com, July 25, 2016
July 14, 2019
comments: legrady@me.com
66- Artist brain
Miklos Legrady,20" x 48" - 50.8cm x 121.92cm, acrylic on canvas, 2007
Often the past weights heavily against any effort at something new. Meanwhile, the struggle for a new idea to survive and achieve dominance, also means that it will eventually grow old and feel threatened by something newer.Tthe best must always make way for the better.
You can’t stuff that cat back in the bag, but conceptual art was abused. There is a place for intellect in art, but for many the idea replaced doing valuable work, Malcolm Gladwell’s 10,000 hours, because an idea is faster and easier. Benjamin Buchloh says you don’t need skill in art, but the fact that he hires skillful assistants contradicts him.
We’ve learned that the act of studying creates new folds in the brain in areas dedicated to that function, for example the visual cortex or language areas. A small brain thinks small thoughts, so the more effort the more brain cells. Complex thoughts become possible; a bigger brain thinks bigger thoughts.
July 17, 2019
comments: legrady@me.com
67- Elizabeth Murray
Miklos Legrady,16" x 20" - 40.64cm x 50.8cm, acrylic on canvas, 2005.
Elizabeth Murray once said in an interview, "Deep down, most artists are on the edge of feeling what they do is absolutely meaningless - and that's the fun of it."
That really sounds wrong. It might be the case for anyone after recognition and approval, since the instability therein would have that effect. My own work is driven by a concern for visual language, and the difficulties require such effort that the work is literally its own reward. I've experienced the strongest sense of self-confidence and meaning from pushing past my own fears and overcoming technical limitations, that feeling says there's no question but that your work is meaningful. First, it's meaningful to you. That's the most important. Second, past recognition and earlier successes are a reality check that your work meant something to others.
July 19, 2019
comments: legrady@me.com
68- Art Train Wreck
The idea is clever of course but there's an unintended by-product. In the long run, it's depressing to live in a broken down environment. Now I'm thinking they could have used the same antique trolley in a positive way, but current trends are counter-aesthetic. That means counter to what we'd like. We laugh, but laughter is our defence against the unbearable. It's as though art was announcing the end of civilization, and by announcing it they're enabling that process. Science says aesthetic developed as an evolutionary advantage and thus we have art therapy. That also means negativity has negative consequences. Could we save the world by being positive instead of a train wreck? Just sayin...
July 21, 2019
comments: legrady@me.com
69- Making art history
Back in Dec. 2018 when New Art Examiner’s Daniel Nanavati and Derek Guthrie came to Toronto, we went gallery hopping and stopped by the Korper Gallery. It’s a large two story brick factory with a connecting building that’s office, kitchen and such. The gallery is cathedral, open space up to the roof, the office itself is full of art. Olga looked up and invited us to espresso in her personal space, her kitchen to the right of the office.
Then came one of those moments just perfect for art history; things happened, Olga, Derek, and Daniel are an interesting mix. Olga pointed out that when you’re into art for the love of it you see the larger patterns and trajectories. Looks like both Derek and Olga have a gift for motivating others and stirring the art soup. Olga’s Speakeasy and my NAE blog came out of that meeting, so did the idea of a Toronto art writer’s group that will meet at the gallery.
Physics says the expansion of the universe constantly creates new forms that counter the laws of entropy. An expanding art network likewise creates new ideas that shake up the same old - same old. And it’s fun to be part of history. One thing though… there’s a reason why Duchamp rose to fame while Elsa von Freytag-Loringhoven is barely known. Duchamp documented everything he did, Elsa not so much.
July 23, 2019
comments: legrady@me.com