THE VALUE OF ART
ESSAYS BY JOHANNA SCHNEIDER
Version 1, Published, June 2020, Germany All rights served. This thesis or any portion of it may not be copied without permission of the artist. Essays about The Value of Art Copyright © Johanna Schneider
2
The Value of Art
3
4
Introduction Art plays an enormous role in the past, present and future. Never have humans been able to communicate or develop without the help of visuals and art. However, the value and also the perception of art in our modern society is highly different to the impact of art in history. We nowadays experience a time in which uniqueness and effort of artworks deteriorate. Nevertheless, the relevance of art in a tolerant, democratic and innovative society is indispensable. State and society have to participate in the distribution of art to sustain values, cultures and new perspectives. This thesis displays the various contexts in which we perceive art and in which art plays a major role. I want to proof how important it is to protect art in our globalized and accelerated society, even if we can detect a negative threat, posed by our accelerating lifestyles.
5
Table of Contents Perception and Learning to Perceive
7
The Apprehension of Art
13
2.1 Definition of “Art”
13
2.2 Art as communication in various contexts
18
2.3 Art as proof of conscience
19
Value and Price of Art
21
Counterfeiting and the Value of Art
27
Photography – Threat or Chance for Fine Arts? 33 Personal Reflection
39
Sources
41
6
Perception and Learning to Perceive To perceive and to consciously observe is one aspect of art, that is essential for a conscious and aware life. Seeing, proven by neuroscientists, affects special regions of the human brain and connects segments of our brain parts as soon as many events occur. But the individual extent of seeing determines how those connections develop: Only by creating a context between the perceptions, our brain forms durable connections. Nowadays, people see various personalities, knowledge, information, work and much more in a very short time, so perceiving becomes an element of quantity more than one of quality. The time for building connections gets shorter because we perceive more instead of first perceiving and then converting content. We see more but recognize less. While humanity strives for knowing and studying without any end point, the amount of how much one human brain actually knows deteriorates. Art in a cultural context is an important instance of society to educate a conscious perception. When seeing art, it is not about watching, it is about
7
converting and observing. When we remain in front of an artwork (music, drawing, etc.) for a certain time, our brain automatically creates connections to what we already have in our memories and the object relates to familiar or personal events. Art critics like John Berger or Walter Benjamin acknowledged this important attribute of art and refer to it as “Memory working radially […, creating] enormous number of associations” (cf. J. Berger, “About Looking, 1989, p. 64) or as “Process of Associations” (cf. W. Benjamin, “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction”, p.48). Statistic observing becomes a dynamic perceiving when we are confronted with art (music/ drawings/ theatre/ …) in an appropriate surrounding. Have the courage to make use of your own reason is what E. Kant said in times of the enlightenment in the 18st century. This motif is today as relevant as it was contemporarily. Considering, how comfortable and naïve society grows in an era of control-providing governments, we should start to implement an independent process of creative and especially independent thinking in education. Museums, theatres or operas can help to establish
8
a new acknowledgement more this way of perceiving. Taking a museum as an example and disregarding the quality of an artwork, the relevant factor is the quality of what happens in the observers’ brain. Several processes in the brain are initiated and those deductions lead to the creation of contexts and connections between neurons, called synapses. We are confronted with familiar or new perspectives and can discover how we perceive, what we notice and what we prioritize. This conscious and reflective behavior is then unconsciously transferred into practical use: We can use a reflective and aware attitude towards society, politics or individual objectives to remain independent and evolving as individual. Constructivism is a collective result we can achieve and thereby move towards and active, functioning society. When the slightest appearance of hate, racism and intolerance occurs, it becomes indispensable to educate people who are aware of both, individual and collective constructivism. It is necessary that an awareness for a meta perspective, including our fellows as much as our person, is present. A collective perception of the world can be achieved through the discovery of diversity, of cultural
9
pluralism and several perspectives on life. The stimulation of our perception can open doors to such a pluralism and ambiguity. When people leave the empiric level that often demands an absolute way of perception, they discover the ambiguous reality of societies’ and humans’ behavior. Our society grew to a rational thinking and acting collective. This becomes evident when considering ruling systems, governments, time tracking or economic structures. People tend to seek structure and neglect the emotional sphere that never is definite, that changes and is unique for every person. We lose the instinct for interhuman experiences. Observing art can help to train, first an individual and then a collective, to appreciate diversity and to take individual perspective as guideline, but never as absolute reality. Today, however, we face visual content in smaller sequences than before the digital revolution due to the globalized exchange of data and imagery. Never before was it as easy as today to create images, to share and to observe visuals. Despite the basic feature of art, to bring tolerance, this evolvement has not changed our society into and open-minded one and our demand for structure
10
and control is still worshipped as the most comfortable. That makes it important to support a conscious and non-overwhelming perception of visuals. The term “Art� and its’ definition will be analyzed in the next chapter, however, it is obvious that it makes a huge difference if we consume art in a museum or in a social media post. How much we recognize what we see differs within those experiences. When we see a displayed artwork, standing on its own, we are confronted and forced to look at and think about it. In contrast, we are aware of the possibility to oversee and skip content, we see online. We are not confronted with an artwork in a forced situation, we can easily escape. That is not the purpose of art, formerly meant to expand our ability to perceive and criticize. Especially in the age of digitalization and automatization we need to leave the offered comfort and work towards an evolving state of mind. The gradual aspect of evolution was not comfort but the urge to innovate, change and to proceed. Digitalization might be the result of our urge to innovate but it needs to remain an element that we keep innovating. Instead of human evolution, humans develop technologies more
11
than themselves currently. We are participant of a system that works without our own individuum and our action. This works as long as we live in a stable democracy (e.g. some European countries or Canada or Australia). But as soon as the system is running out of democratic structures, society must relearn how to act and think with the use of ones’ own reason. The necessity to support and demand the interest in arts and culture is important for both, governments and society. The deficit of critical and reflective thinking can be decreased through “Association sequences” (cf. W. Benjamin), training our observation and reflection. The interest in politics and public structures can then be increased. A democracy in which ideas and inspiration prospers and spreads makes each citizen accepting fellows while having a unique and independent mind.
12
The Apprehension of Art 2.1 Definition of “Art” What does the term “Art” mean? What makes Art and who makes Art? Those question are highly depending on time, culture and place and never are to define universally. For each generation and place, the term “Art” includes different attributes and has to be analyzed from other perspectives. Nevertheless, some features are applying for all artworks in every generation and at any place. Art is medium of Artists to communicate. Communication cannot be eliminated from an artwork. “One cannot not communicate” said Paul Watzlawick and the phrase is also applicable for art: Storytelling, expression of emotions, attitudes or transferring facts are goal of images, symbols or sculptures is accessible in all human creations. While we can discuss the extent of how efficient this communication functions from artist to artist, alone the attempt to communicate through alternative ways than through the use spoken
13
language, can already be accounted as art. It then is the experiment of gaining access to an audience and a future. The addressed topics of artists vary in time and place. Nowadays, almost every element of the globe is represented in art somewhere. The dimension in which we see art today is more subjective and individual than ever, not at least relative to the highest ever population. We live in the most diverse and still connected population on earth ever. The quality and widely accepted appreciation of art has limits. Joseph Beuys, a German Artist, defined in 1973: “Kunst kommt von Kunde, man muss etwas zu sagen haben, auf der anderen Seite aber auch von Können, man muss es auch sagen können.“. [Translated into English: “Art comes from Studies, one must know about something to talk about, but on the other side it comes from Capability, one must be able to talk about something.”] Initially, this quote provokes a paradoxical effect, but the pure message of it reveals the definition of art in a very decisive way: Art is communication of and by someone/ -thing. Art is only such when the artist refers to a relevant topic, he knows about. One who does not have any knowledge is not able to communicate something with the world. The
14
word “Kunde” [which is hardly translatable into English; most likely with “Study objective”/ “Case”], describes the intellectual necessity of an artists’ creation. The content and function of an artwork is making art relevant, not its’ aesthetics. This means that content must be expressed and simultaneously a context must be generated. A successful artwork communicates content and makes communication education, entertainment or distribution of perspectives, theory or knowledge. In addition, Joseph Beuys’ quote also considers another aspect of art that is not as easy to achieve. Everyone might know something to talk about but not everyone is capable to express it. This condition, the capability of saying something, refers to the medium the artist uses to communicate. “Art” is then such, when a medium presents successful communication. The artists’ background and his ability correlate and together define the requirements of art: Content and medium. Neither aspects can be excluded, however, both have to be of quality and of cohesiveness. The medium must represent the content and the content must represent the artists ability to use a medium. In addition to the quotes’ explicit meaning, there is another feature, in context with Joseph Beuys’ life:
15
He was a German artist who experienced the Second World War and who lived in Germany when the art scene suffered a time of censorship, surveillance and limitation. He was serving the army and had not had the chance to express his artistic devotion until the wars’ end. As part of the main population, he knew about their experience of art: Naivety and uncritical thinking dominated the notice of artworks. Art was not able to fulfil its’ main purpose: It always I equally the audience and the artist who are involved in an artwork. Creator and recipient need to interact through any medium. Spoken language and Art are rarely understood by every human. But any observer must sense an emotion or get a message. If someone understands the content and context, determined by the artist, the communication is successful. If a medium never reaches an aware audience, it cannot be art in J. Beuys’ understanding: The interactive feature misses. The communicators around the artwork; artist and audience, are behaving similar as in a spoken conversation. The German psychologist Friedmann Schulz von Thun created a model of communication that explains language as the transferral of emotions, facts or theories. As those elements are part of art, the model can be applied
16
on art equally. Language in spoken word has four levels: Content, appeal, relation and self-revelation are features of communication (model by F. Schulz von Thun, 1981). Those levels, existing in art, are as the following shows: The artist must have to have relevant content (cf. Joseph Beuys’ quote) and must be able to generate an appealing character by finding a suitable medium for him and audience. In addition, what we find in the quotes’ implicit message, the artist should define the relation between him and world: It can be an educational, questioning, inspiring or exchanging character, this message has. And lately, the artist communicates something about himself when speaking through art. When J. Beuys says: “being capable of saying something”, he assumes that the creator is aware of himself and thus incorporates self-revelation. The term “Art”, today as much as in the stone age, is based on communication. While depth, intellect and quality are not to define generally, the main focus of art lays in the transferral of messages.
17
2.2 Art as communication in various contexts The understanding of art as communication is fundamental. However, there are art movements that seem to question this thesis. It is obvious that the demonstration of power in Ancient Greek Art or the provoking features of Dadaism are created to communicate. But looking at a movement like Bauhaus, the thesis can come to its’ limits. Some involved designers might have not wanted their creations to serve as communication: Design in furniture or architecture should be practical, timeless and sleek, not containing a message. Efficiency, rationality and quality dominated over aesthetic or meaning. John Berger, referring to the Red-Blue Chair by Rietveld, explains that “Mathematical proportions are exactly calculated and its implications attack in a logical manner a whole series of established attitudes and preoccupations [of art]” (About Looking, 1968, p.127). The critic questions this movement, however, concludes that there are interconnection aspects, that make rational and seemingly only functional works being artworks. Not in the first instance, but as soon as we recognize that “the aesthetic of the hand-made, the notion that ownership bestows power and weight, the virtues 18
of permanence and indestructability, […or] the fear that technology threatens culture […]”, designs like Rietveld’s chair gain a character of communication (J. Berger, About Looking, 1968, p.127). The value of seemingly more practical and efficient artworks can grow even higher because of its’ wider range of use and interpretation. This example demonstrates how diverse and deep the aspect of communication goes and that it always depends on who creates and who observes with which intention a medium.
2.3 Art as proof of conscience When we assume that art is communication of two or more people, we take a consciousness of our communication partner for granted. The artist assumes that while he creates something about the world he experiences, that people who share this consciousness about the same world are going to observe. Neurologically and physically, no one is able to prove a conscious mind. A radically theory is that only our own brain can be defined as conscious and we never can prove that our fellows observe something, not to mind the same reality. What others see, feel or think might not resemble our own impressions at all. However, when we consider 19
art as medium, connecting several people, we could recognize a similar apprehension of the world, accounting for several people. Connected emotions to a medium and to a covered topic, make creator and audience realizing that certain elements strike, move or have relevance in the world. “The individuality of the thinker and the artist cannot be brushed aside or undone” (cf. J.Berger, About Looking) and every individual generates unique emotions and associations. “Yet if he [artist] accepts such a view of the world (the world as unquestionable scheme) […], he makes his own harmonious visual schemes out of it.” (cf. J.Berger, About Looking). The artist invents new depictions of the world which are relating but never identical to reality. And yet, an audience is able to receive a message, a radial sequence of thoughts and connects it to the world he observes. This bilateral apprehension can guarantee that the other side of an artwork (Audience or artist) is connected to and aware of the world equally. I am not alone, having a conscience view that can be translated into more than spoken words and superficial evidence. The artist is able, as the observer is, to understand, to convert ideologies into another sphere. It might be to say that language can also prove the consciousness of
20
several people. This is true, however, to translate a message into visuals that everyone speaks and can relates to, creates a new layer of experiencing. If one is open to observe and to develop individual sequences of thoughts, it means that someone has the same ability of being conscious and critical as his opposite.
Value and Price of Art Next to the cultural and functional value of art, constantly having played a role in history, the artmarket has developed in a modern era. This new phenomenon of art as a selling product reached a dimension that forms an important part of modern economy nowadays. Already in the medieval ages, an artist sold his artworks, always to state or church. However, art always had a practical and factual value, defined through technique, quality and material of production. Buying art was connected to a rational and non-speculative purpose: Buyers searched for a medium that demonstrated (financial) power, propaganda or (religious) storytelling. Nowadays, buying art is related to aesthetics or investing in speculative forecasted high value. The artists’ popularity counts today, while earlier, the artist had 21
not to be famous but had to have professional skills. It often was the buyer of a work who enjoyed popularity. When the art-market is part of the stock market nowadays, it was incorporated in the normal bargaining trade in history. Capitalism allows art to serve as much more than communication. While the communicative, aesthetic aspect is accessible for a huge audience, only a small elite is able to experience the art market. The differences in the perception of art between this elite and the general population becomes vivid in the unequal growth of value. A subjective, individual value of art cannot grow gradually as the economic value can. Appropriate to capitalism, art becomes a good such as existential, luxury or healthcare goods. I will refer to a price of art in economic terms, distinguished from the cultural value in society. In the following, I will analyze how the financial price of art corresponds to, adds to or takes away from its’ value. Therefore, I will consider the impact of an art market for the general population, for museums or institutions, for an upper/lower social group and for the artist. The groups “main population and institutions� strongly belong together because the middle class participates in public offers, provided by private or
22
statutory institutions. The middle class is experiencing art in museums, theatres or other cultural events. For those people, the art market does not explicitly pose a major role. The prospect of the middle class to buy and act in the market is very small. There is no demand for sales in this social group because the price for original artworks for private purpose is too high. Moreover, this class does not strive towards the demonstration of power or exclusivity. However, the middle class is affected by the art market through the institutions who display the art. Especially statutory offers are highly dependent on the art market, putting a burden on public curations. Displaying art on a platform that connects the population to culture, history and new perspectives is the goal of state and government of democracies. A market that has highs, lows and speculations puts a threat on this offer because public institutions cannot afford to participate in trading communities. Even if they sometimes receive funds or loans, the chance of attaining and displaying an artwork grows harder due to auctions that a small elite participates in. Artists who can choose to rent a work to a museum or to sell to a private investor can determine, in which extent their art reaches an audience.
23
When the market increases further, the danger of empty museums raises. Art, becoming a trading good could undermine its’ cultural value: As soon as the sales and costs avoid the contact between audience and artwork, the most relevant feature, communication, is lost. In most cases, economy and state in a capitalist system work strongly corresponsive. Here we see, that this phenomenon does not account for the art market in which state and economy pursue opposite goals. The state wants to make art perceivable for the population and not focus on making money through trading art. In a functionally working democracy, the relation between art, culture, tolerance and well-being is evident. If a strong middle class remains who uses the given offer, we can increase the cultural value and deteriorate the price. Nevertheless, the offer to experience art also needs to affect a lower class, who so far lacks on witnessing it. In a democracy, education for all is a high goal that the state pursues to increase social and economic life. Observing new perspectives, time periods and cultures is crucial to create a stable and peaceful population. Tolerance, acceptance and the ability to form an own point of view is important.
24
However, public offers do not appeal to everyone. The lower classes all over the globe strongly lack on this field and need to be involved to improve our democracies. The art market, as little as the cultural offers, play no role for a lower class. For an upper and wealthy elite of our society, art often is important as market. Art as a trade good has a business activity and a price, depending on aesthetics, artist or medium. Many, of course, strive towards the cultural aspect of art. People, interested in stock deals and exclusive properties, often participate in the art market to enhance their power, personal fulfillment or to increase their invested capital. In some cases, this elite is personally connected to the artist. The aesthetic aspect of art sometimes plays a role when buying goods for private purposes. For artists it might be interesting to create/ “produce” for those clients since it is the easiest way to make living as a creative. When an artist is attracted by this prospect, he starts to provoke a perception of art that we already saw in medieval ages. The artist is “manufacturer”, creating for buyers. Characteristics of an artwork can then be strongly influenced by demands of costumers. The phrase “artist” might then have to be translated into “manufacturer”, especially when the final creations are not reaching
25
an audience, outside of the buyers’ surrounding. This development, again, poses a contradictive situation of value and price. When the artist prefers earning money instead of communicating values, a point of view or a story, the work is no longer art but product. Artists are endangered to lose their qualification as artists when they stop implementing a personal value. Mainly the artist is influencing if the art market, public or private people see and experience art. Most artists are consciously interested in reaching many people instead of selling to a few. Nevertheless, they then often have to accept less income because statutory institutions do not buy and pay for exhibiting. As long as the art market and prices grow, it becomes even harder for artist and institutions. The price of art is contradicting its’ value. The art market can enrich some parts of society in short term. The artists’, the audiences’ and the states’ goal must be to protect the cultural characteristics of art. This can contribute to enlightenment and education, exchange, equality and diversity in our society.
26
Counterfeiting and the Value of Art That art is duplicatable and public simultaneously at different places is a very modern phenomenon since the industrialisation. We can experience any art at any place and in our hands: Devices allow us to retrieve art from various places, artists and times. We can now look up the artworks from the early Greeks, can dive into the Renaissance and Leonardo da Vinci’s famous creations or we can scroll through social media to see what contemporary people create and publish as “art�. Having this opportunity, art and cultures are spreading much faster. We can be inspired and communicate with artists from all over the globe. But do we actually experience those mediums as we experience the art we see as an original? Do we observe art like we did in the ages before the digital revolution? In our age, in which art can be mechanically reproduced, real art is being tested. It is questioned what the value of buying an artwork is, when you can easily download and print it on a canvas yourself. This development of public into a private experience of art decreases the effort we need to spend to consume art. We do not further need to go to a museum if we want to enjoy the aesthetic appearances. And yet, people still visit exhibitions and leave their houses to see a unique and original artwork. That demonstrates that there is a value behind art that is not a copy. The originality of an artwork is not endangered, even if
27
reproduction is possible: Because the medium that the artist uses is never alone content of an artwork. What we can translate into a photograph, copy or recreation is visible, but the message of the initial artist remains in his unique work. For example, a digital design of an artist can be displayed everywhere, making just a small gap between being the original and being a copy. It is not to divide visually because computers and devices can replicate exactly identical. It is then a copy, when it is arranged by someone who is not the artist and has not the intention, the original artist had. Without knowing the background behind a digital artwork, it is not to say if it is the original or a copy. And so is the value of a digital artwork harder to discover and to create than with analogue mediums. Various features of art, such as communication, aesthetics, uniqueness or freedom of expression react differently to the possibility of reproduction. If the background and the original of an artwork is accessible, we are involved in the artists life and in his way to step into conversation. He opens himself up towards his, intentionally addressed audience. Communication through art is created when the artist willingly communicates with the audience and when the audience knows the partner of communication. The medium transports the relation between artist and world and also between world and audience. But the medium never stands on its own. A copied artwork
28
disregards the artists’ choice and his idea to attract an audience. Only the initial and primitive artist can incorporate value, personal experiences, storytelling or criticism (J. Berger, About Looking, 1980, p. 75). When facing a copied work, the replicator of the artwork is the one who communicates. His message differs from the artists’ intention. No matter if the copy is legitimated or fraud, the artists’ intention is gone. An example for this relation is given by Walter Benjamin who explained the movie to be a threat and antagonist of art. He shows the importance of direct confrontation between artist and audience by demonstrating the not existing relationship between actor and audience (cf. W. Benjamin, The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction, 1989, p. 28). The actor poses a third instance, aligning with the counterfeiters’ position. The actor never has the freedom to express his own message, instead, he is bound to the regisseurs’ message that is appropriate to the artists’ position. The actor has no individual intention and communicates through the given script, being caught in instructions. In theatres, we can discover how artists have the freedom to directly interact with the audience: they can adapt the audience, they can spontaneously create gesture and mimic and actors have a free range of variety to implement. This makes a movie enormously different from a theatre, as such as we distinguish an artwork from a copy. W. Benjamin’s thesis can be dissented when we account the regisseur as artist after having created and transported his message through a script
29
and a final movie. But that the actor in a movie needs to be interrogated as being artist, is obvious. Reproduction of art declines communication, as elaborated now. Additionally, there are other aspects that may dissent the unique value of original art. What the opportunities of reproduction changed in the past century and what still is a flourishing development, is the aesthetic reproduction. Digital art is easily to replicate. Further, it is nowadays not hard to reproduce analogue creations in exactly the same appearance again. 3-D technologies, calculating programs and highly advanced printers can make copies to look completely identical to the original. The aesthetic of the artworks’ superficial appearance can exist several times. The only missing instance, again, is an unseen element of the work. The execution of each step, the chronological order of making, misses. The strength of a stroke, the direction of a line or the colour mixture of a small place might have had a meaning to the creator in the primitive production. Not so, the copied sample: It is not enhancing the execution method nor the emotion while creating. It enhances simply the aesthetic. An artist would change his concept while making something, because of emotions, ideas or intuition. His freedom allows him spontaneous alterations and he experiences a unique situation in a process. He would always prefer message over aesthetic, meaning that he could neglect aesthetics when his intention becomes
30
visual. This freedom is not given to someone, copying. A replicator is bound to the template. Reproduction cannot be compared to creation of art. The most important value of art is communication and it is appearing in art not only through background information of the artist. It also reappears in the use of medium, colour, shape and chronology. The aesthetics of a copied artwork would never be accounted as curatable (if the fact of being a copy is public). Neither curator, visitor nor artist would be satisfied to see a copied artwork in a museum, even if it would look identical. Uniqueness and a magical character are then stolen from the artwork. This character emerges through a “Here and Now” that the artist lived through and transports in his work (W. Benjamin, The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction, 1989, p.13). Artist and Audience get into a unique moment of confrontation. The audience feels that the artist wants to convey a message. If the work knowingly is a copy, this impression is lost. Further, the spectators’ knowledge that only one sample of the work exists, allows him to experience a certain amazement. The locative exclusivity is nowadays proven by the huge exchange and transport between museums and curators, exhibiting original artworks in globally distributed places. The realization of ones’ individuality becomes perceptible. As unique art exists in its’ complete version only one time, so does every person. The purpose, background and circumstance of a certain moment
31
when entering and discovering an exhibition is only present one time. Knowing this fact, we have the feeling that as individual, we are only present in this very short moment once. The “Here and Now” of art makes it unreproducible. A counterfeiter never has the chance to see how his own message would influence the spectator. He might not even be interested in the spectators’ reaction, while a primitive artist is. Reproducing and distributing art can enrich the perception of various cultures, people and constructivism. The interest in new perspectives or the consciousness about our globalized structures can support diversity and tolerance, we (need to) have. Nevertheless, the value and intention of art is endangered by reproduction. The challenge is to remain an artists’ function by enhancing his work as unique, valuable and irreplaceable. We need to be aware of the fast and unfiltered visuals we see every day and are asked to approach them differently than originals.
32
Photography – Threat or Chance for Fine Arts? Photographs are posing a totally new challenge for visual arts and its’ value since the impactful invention of the camera in 1839. The eye of a camera suddenly not only copied what an artist was able to create but could copy what the human eye does. Competing to the human ability, photography starts to interrogate the way we see the world, visuals and ourselves. Visuals achieve a new value during the development of photography. The formerly enormous effort of an artist is suddenly a simple and for everyone attainable action. Fine arts so far have only been accessible for the elite. Photography brings visuals to the daily life in newspapers, advertisement and households. The division between photography as art and photography as daily mean to simply show something is separating the technique into two segments: Primitive (art) and professional photography. Initially, photography was more often used as a technique, as a method to report and document the happenings in the world or to demonstrate power (e.g. in portraits of elitist people). In this use, the value of photography is not competing with art. Photography had a rational and empiric function first, and only later, it started to be used as a mean for communication in a metaphoric and
33
comprehensive way (cf. J. Berger, About Looking, p. 53 ff.). While photography was feared as threat to art, its’ development demonstrates that art can never be supplemented, but things can be added to it. This is because arts’ development can’t be undone or changed in its’ quality. In the first stages of photography, it was just a technique and had not had a value that resembled the arts’ value. People legitimately were afraid of this “superficial” and technological medium to take away effort and detail of art. However, a later development makes clear that photography can be used as a medium just as a canvas and paint can. It takes as much talent and background of the artist when he photographs, such as painting does. The background of a photographer defines if he is a primitive or a professional artist, if he has an experience or an ability behind what he does. As an example: A primitive photographer is drawn to create after experiencing, feeling and urging to express his associations by using his device. Observer and artist step into conversation when a situation, the creator experienced, is transported into a relevant “Here and Now” of the audience. A message and its’ transferral into a visual need to work: Communication between artist and observer is inevitable when a value is present. In contrast, a professional learns how to shoot a flower in the perfect light, the perfect acuity and misses out on human and communicative features. As soon as a
34
photograph explains something without allowing space for individual interaction, it neglects the approach to the observers’ own associations (J. Berger, “About Looking”, 1980, p.54). Explicit use of a technique explains clearly and has no deeper meaning: A reportative and explanatory effect dominates over an experimental and personal observation. In those very different approaches of photography, we can sense how the value of photography is created, just as it is created for art. It needs not alone the skill to create but it needs a message, knowledge and an audience (cf. J. Berger, “About Looking”, 1980, Chapter 2). The separation in reality was not as obviously divided. Especially fine arts of naturalistic and realistic character suffered after the invention of the camera: Pictures have been created cheaper and faster. Nevertheless, we also need to question if the portrait-art in history had an artequal value or if it just was the skill and patience of the artist who made professional, not primitive art. J. Berger introduces the widely used terms “private” and “public” which distinguish two “quite distinct uses of photography” (cf. J. Berger, About Looking, p. 55 ff.). The purpose of a photograph defines if it is an artwork (primitive photography) or just a property of an individual (professional photography). But we see that this theory, applied on art, accounts equally for analogue, traditional creations:
35
In all segments of Fine Arts, in Painting as much as in Photography, the context and content of a visual need to affect and influence the audiences’ conscience. The connection between creator and observer has to function when the displayed artwork projects the observer into the sphere of a “Here and Now”. He acknowledges the originality of what he sees and puts it into relation to what he knows as an individual. If the process of associations happens radially, the higher a value can grow. A sequence of thoughts happens and builds a long connection between the artwork, individual ideas, experiences and association. “In general the better the photograph, the fuller the context which can be created.” (J. Berger, About Looking, p.65). An unilinear thought chain is not allowing interpretation and room for personal participation in the artwork (cf. J. Berger, About Looking, p. 64). Considering that private portraits never met an audience but only were accessible to the client, the essential communicative value is absent. Even if nowadays, we can retrieve a value when seeing old portraits in museums (because we are able to perceive a part of history) the contemporary attributes of art has not been fulfilled. We can nowadays enter a new perspective and our conscious horizon is enlarged when facing an old work. However, it remains to be questionable how intense the contemporary impact of those artworks has been. If the theory that realistic and naturalistic drawings were more professional (skill-
36
orientated) than primitive (purpose-orientated), we also need to differentiate between various stylistic eras in which art was maybe not what it is at its’ core. It then can be said that primitive photography is more equal to art than a very depictive, private painting is to art. Comparing works of the expressionism to 18th century art, the effect of the dissimilarity becomes vivid: Depending on the emotional, story-telling and associative character of the stylistic eras, the value varies. Analysing this huge gap between paintings, etchings or even sculptures in their closed segment, the gap between analogue and photographic art deteriorates. That some traditional creations lack of value more than primitive photography, is evident. Having elaborated this thesis, we can look at another result, the invented camera provoked: It made the essence and mission of socially important art stronger and separates it from professional drawings, only serving as depictive mean. Realism was initiated through the industrialisation, which also introduced the camera as a new medium. Those two art movements might seem to contradict each other, but in reality, they supported and added to each other, making art relevant for a bigger group of people. The appreciation of story-telling and impactful artists grew due to the camera, that suddenly showed that
37
photography, as much as fine arts have a primitive and a professional character. The value for art, approached by the elite - only purchased and created within their group- deteriorated when people discovered the only depictive and less communicative features of it. Art grows into a discipline of meaning and intention, less than one of knowledge. New perspectives, new approaches and educative elements suddenly become a feature of art as it only has been before the medieval ages. As result of the industrialization, Realism introduces a new target group of artists. Firstly ever, the lower class is object, audience and communication partner in the time of realism. Photography changed the experience and appreciation of visuals enormously. It never touched or altered the core of what art is: Communication, intention and association. In some periods of time until today, the camera posed a threat to job sectors and supplement them. However, the artist – today as much as ever – is free in the choice of his medium. Technology can never supplement the essence of arts’ personal and interhuman character which alone artist and audience can implement into it.
38
Personal Reflection My interest in analytic writing exists since high school and I missed this in my time at AMFI. That is why, next to small projects within the labs, I wrote this thesis during period in which I watched, interrogated and investigated the art scene. The gathered information, my passion for philosophy, literature, society and my interest in politics, sociology and culture made me choose a thesis as one of my deliverables. Stepping away from visual content is a convenient part for me, as I can imagine to be working in the journalism or research segment. I learned about my own and a general approach and observation of art in this study. Visiting and acknowledging museums and cultural offers is now different to before. My interest in the “Value of Art” started in January 2019, when I visited a theater and was guided through the Stadtstheater Koblenz. Being informed about the huge amount of money, theatres and other public institutions receive from the state, made me question why and which interest the government has, when supporting cultural events. An application for a scholarship in February 2020 influenced me to prepare a discussion for “Value of Art in Democracies”. I read documents by the state and analyzed expenses of democracies to create a cultural offer. My writings and ideas for this pitch came along by
39
a book recommendation of my Coach from the Amsterdam Fashion Institute: The book “About Looking” by John Berger improved my knowledge and funded my theory that art is an essential element of society and stable democracy, peace and social interactions alive. My research for the pitch started to reach an extend in which I chose to work more on this topic: I quickly made it an Experiment for my AMFI 1st year Assessment and started to formally write my thesis. In addition to “About Looking”, I read “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction” by Walter Benjamin and dived deeper into the historical and contemporary impact of art and culture. Analyzing the books was a very fun and also insightful activity I did after schoolwork of the second semester. The professional perspective of both art critics enlarged my horizon of thinking and brought me further in my thesis, such as various Podcasts1 about art did. In this project, my interest in politics, sociology and art were united and I discovered impactful findings for how I will be able to work in, perceive and judge the art segment in the future. To become a writer for a magazine or a museum is a job I can imagine for after my studies!
1
https://www1.wdr.de/mediathek/audio/wdr5/wdr5-das-philosophische-radio/index.html#
40
Sources Book: Benjamin, W., 2011. Das Kunstwerk Im Zeitalter Seiner Technischen Reproduzierbarkeit. Stuttgart: Reclam. Book: Berger, J., 2009. About Looking. Bloomsbury. Book: Dietrich Grünewald, D., 2016. Kunst entdecken Oberstufe. Cornelsen. Edition 2. Berlin wdr.de. 2020. WDR 5 Das Philosophische Radio. [online] Available at: <https://www1.wdr.de/mediathek/audio/wdr5/wdr5-dasphilosophische-radio/index.html#> [Accessed 12 April 2020]. Statistische Ämter Deutschland, 2020. Kulturfinanzbericht. [online] Available at: <https://www.destatis.de/GPStatistik/servlets/MCRFileNode Servlet/DEHeft_derivate_00003630/B509_200051.pdf;jsessi onid=CC78DA833C56488262C6AB987E16280F> [Accessed 3 March 2020].
Statistisches Bundesamt. 2020. Kultur. [online] Available at: <https://www.destatis.de/DE/Themen/GesellschaftUmwelt/Bildung-Forschung-Kultur/Kultur/_inhalt.html> [Accessed 22 Februar 2020].
41
42
