Art Perversion: The Expression of Social Sickness
While society always hopes that progress and innovation will create a better quality of life for humanity, it can inadvertently result in some socially harmful side-effects. The art world has experienced a number of such side-effects as a result of even the best of innovations, beginning with the introduction of photography in 1839, and ending with current creations of dubious psychological value.
When photography debuted in the mid 1800's, it was readily apparent that the realism artist of the day would no longer be needed to capture the outside world on canvas. With the threat of artist extinction on the horizon, the entire industry began to grope for a new purpose of artistic existence. It was for no other reason than sheer survival that artists began to market what the camera could not capture: inward inspiration.
It sounded ideal at the time, yet it wasn't long before this exploration of uncharted territory from within exposed the depravity harbored in some artistic minds. The ugliness was so radical that the stir alone turned artistic perversion into high-fashion vogue.
Each new daring level of depravity had the same effect, and only served to fuel the lust for career attention and fame. Today we are at the next inner exposure level of perversion and "kitsch" expression.
Kitsch perversion seeks to separate soul from body, offering empty, sometimes morbid displays of the human form, body parts, or bodily functions. Today's kitsch unapologetically devalues the human body, and despises all together the emotional, spiritual and conscientious side of who we are as human beings.
Which is an interesting paradox: kitsch despises the very part of us that modern art seeks to explore and express.
Dark as it is, it's not surprising that kitsch perversion is being hailed by the avant-guard as the future of art, and applauded as progressive "genius."
Donald Kuspit, art history professor at Cornell University, speaks to the devaluation and degradation of "human potentialities" through "every work of kitsch art" in the following article (warning: contains extremely graphic visuals and commentary): www.artnet.com/Magazine/features/kuspit/kuspit6-10-02.asp.
As kitsch perversion has its share of critics, supporters naturally found it imperative to proclaim some manner of social justification. The prevailing consensus has become that kitsch has the power to liberate people from their shackles of guilt brought on by the constraints of "out-dated" morality.
So sure are they of this benefit to humanity at large, that public force-feeding is a responsibility and noble cause which they feel compelled to achieve.
If you *must* see to believe, the following link is one example, as reported by the BBC, of a public kitsch force- feeding which graphically depicts a woman's crotch and single breast.(Warning: Content is indecent): www.bbc.co.uk/liverpool/content/articles/2004/09/16/biennial_breasts_feature.shtml.
This recent multiple-banner display down a public street in Liverpool, England, was actually approved by that city's governing counsel. The artist, by the way, is Yoko Ono.
While no one would argue that humanity needs freedom from associating nudity with sex, and sex with shame, the cure is not in creating detachment of emotions, or devaluation of the human body and /or soul.
Doctors of psychology confirm that emotional detachment and victim devaluation are the stage upon which psychopathic deviants like rapists, murderers, and those involved in genocide, enact. For three supporting articles out of the psychology and criminology fields, follow the link in the article credits above, that leads to the html version.
This being the case, it stands to reason that kitsch perversion cannot be rationalized and justified as socially healthy art. In truth, it promotes a socially dangerous mindset.
As a realism artist who both enjoys some Classical nude art, and also espouses the "constraints of traditional sexual morality," I have often been asked my opinion about nudity in art. My answer is simple:
Nothing in and of itself is evil, but the heart of a person can use it for evil if they so choose. Sex and nudity are no exceptions.
Now, even though I am not personally fettered by sexual guilt and can view nudes with appreciation of the human body as the pinnacle of this creation; and even though I "feel free" to share my tasteful nude art with fellow art collectors, I do not "feel free" to proudly display fully nude art in plain view, even within my own home entertainment areas.
I am motivated by compassion to exercise restraint.
Just as it is inhumane to force alcohol on someone you know has problems with it, and who feels guilt and shame over their weakness, it is inhumane to force-feed kitsch art, or even other beautiful nude art, on people who may have guilt associations with nudity. That's not love, and it definitely will not help to liberate that person from their shackles of guilt.
As Yoko Ono has shown herself in times past to be a person of humanitarian compassion, I would call upon her, the avant- guard, and the city counsel of Liverpool to search their hearts, and refrain from public force-feedings of kitsch art. It's not "good medicine" for humanity at large, and it won't liberate emotionally normal people suffering from the nudity= sex=guilt connection.
In reality it does more harm than good by devaluing the human body and soul.
First in a series of related topics refuting the avant- guard "intelligencia." Request new releases, or "Art Alerts" at: Encore1900Puzzles.com.
Carrie Charley-Franzwa is an avid collector of antique, realism art prints. Her designer-cut miniature wooden Classical puzzles are available to view online at: www.PuzletGems.com/.
Comments
Add comment