Comments on: About abstract art: These week´s best discoveries and inspirations (III)

By: Abstract art inspirations | Japanese architecture, rothko paintings | yasoypintor | Contemporary and abstract art

Sun, 17 Feb 2013 21:47:00 +0000

[…] my previous about abstract art article, I started talking about the concept “space occupancy”. This is the name I´ve given to […]

By: Space Occupancies | Antonio Basso´s new conceptual abstract paintings | yasoypintor

Thu, 26 Jul 2012 10:38:06 +0000

[…] of the past four articles called “About Abstract art: this week´s best inspirations” (I, II, III, IV), or join Antonio Basso (yasoypintor) at Pinterest Antonio Basso. Space Occypancy 3. Drawing. […]

By: About abstract art: this weeks greatests discoveries (IV) | yasoypintor

About abstract art: this weeks greatests discoveries (IV) | yasoypintor — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 23:35:39 +0000

[…] my previous about abstract art article, I started talking about “space occupancy“. This is the name I´ve given to my new […]

By: yasoypintor

yasoypintor — Mon, 16 Jul 2012 14:10:03 +0000

Hi Glennie, again thanks for developing this matter a big further. I believe you are right. I think there are and there will always be committed and not committed galerists as well as artists and/or profesionals in any field (I may exclude bankers …). I agree with you that galerists need to pay their bills, but as with any business, there are many ways to do it. At the end the ones that go ahead are the professional, transparent, serious and able to adapt to changing society. It´s been always the same.

Thanks and hope others join this interesting conversation.

Rgds

Antonio Basso

By: Glennie Bee

Glennie Bee — Mon, 16 Jul 2012 13:00:55 +0000

Good point, Antonio. I’d say that the art establishment – galleries, critics, academics – is far less influential than it used to be, and this is because of the internet which allows us, the public, to comment freely and immediately and engage in debate with ‘opinion-makers’ and ‘trend-setters’, and, more importantly, disagree with them. The consumer is king nowadays, not the ‘expert’.
As for local independent galleries, they know this, because they have to survive. There was a bit of a thing on Twitter yesterday with people complaining about galleries not knowing what ‘art’ is and selling ‘rubbish'; I thought this was unfair and snobby. Galleries are shops, and shops stock what sells. They sell the crap, if that’s what people want to call it, to be able to promote the good stuff; they can only do this if they can eat and pay the bills. I’ve never met a gallerist yet who did not know what constitutes ‘art’. I’m not at all promoting a dumbing-down of ‘art’ – far from it; the good stuff, if it really is good, will always survive democratisation and lowest-common-denominator marketing, like a trained opera-singer in a TV talent show, and for anyone, not just ‘experts’, with the eye to see it, it will stick out like a sore thumb, as it always has.
People are not stupid, and the days of treating them as if they are may well be over. The art establishment, like the bankers, will have to get used to it.

By: yasoypintor

yasoypintor — Mon, 16 Jul 2012 10:30:44 +0000

Hello Glennie, great thoughts. But what about the gallerists? Do you think they´re still trend setters (or art setters). I guess their influence, probably due to the enormous amount of gallerists in the world, is not as important as it used to be, though there are still some who decide (or at least try to) what is and what is not true art or even the name of a new art movement.

What ever it is, thanks for sharing your ideas.

Rgds

Antonio Basso

By: Glennie Bee

Glennie Bee — Mon, 16 Jul 2012 07:33:50 +0000

I do agree with ‘everything going on/nothing going on’. I have said much the same – if everything is art, nothing is art – it’s just people making stuff. Consequently, more and more, in the absence of an over-riding contemporary ‘style’ and modern art being essentially ‘pluralist’, it is the market, the consumers of ‘art’, who will increasingly determine what constitutes ‘art’, rather than the artists. Until very recently a so-called ‘artist’ could take something – any old thing (remember the yacht?) – describe it as ‘art’ and then have it viewed as such. That seems to me to be less and less the case; maybe it’s a sign of the economic times: people are tired of being conned and hoodwinked, and in art as in everything else they are looking for value for money, evidence of skill and technique, something ‘meaningful’. This is a good thing: the only ‘artists’ who should be worried are those who were never artists, in the true sense of the word, in the first place. There are a lot of them about.