What Happened to Art?

I went for a stroll in a few high-end art galleries in Dubai and the contrast between my expectations and reality could have not been any stronger.

Donald Duck; posted by Cheryl on Pinterest

I was expecting some truly unique (and perhaps inspiring) works of fine art, but instead I was hit by a multitude of cartoon figures printed on extra-large canvases, prints of credit cards sold for thousands of dollars, literally any luxury brand logo printed in a large format (again priced at thousands of dollars) and I could not stop asking myself how on earth did Donald Duck overtake Mona Lisa (or any other iconic painting) on the art stage. After browsing through so-called pop-art creations I came across images that raised even more questions in my mind: massive installations resembling balloon animals, pink glittery gorillas and other works specifically made as an ode to NFTs.

What went through my mind are questions that have most likely haunted the artistic world for as long as humans could hold a brush in their hands or draw a stick figure. What is art? What makes an object qualify as art? Because art is so subjective and so difficult to encompass by one definition you will find a pissoir exhibited as a work of art and in another art gallery the most brilliant painting that required years of studies and more years to be accomplished. Two items that could not be more different in their essence, one label.

M. Duchamp, “Fountain”

Pop-art initially appeared out of irony and as a continuation of dadaism. In a postwar era, inspired by objects of mass consumerism and everything linked to it, from movie stars to everyday objects like soup cans, pop artists brutally attacked the label of “fine arts” and blurred out the distance between elite/ unique and mass-produced. Their works were as ironic as they could be: see Duchamp painting a moustache on Da Vinci’s Mona Lisa or the urinal he called “Fountain” and exhibited as a work of art or Warhol’s soup cans.

M. Duchamp, “L.H.O.O.Q”

From a current that was initially innovative through its sarcasm and message to having extra large prints of American Express cards, with a graffiti scribbled on top or prints of Donald Duck holding some dollars in his hands, there is a long way. I have encountered galleries that refuse to exhibit fine art and seek to exclusively exhibit such prints. Kitsch trumps fine art. If it is mass consumerism that dictates what is art and what isn’t, then no wonder that whatever is easy to produce and understand will get favor. Mona Lisa, Louvre’s most visited painting, became truly famous after it got stolen! Da Vinci’s extraordinary talent and the painting’s undoubted beauty brought it a certain fame before but what got the crowd pathologically obsessed with it was the theft. Mona Lisa is so famous that it has its own PO Box at the Louvre, where people can send her (it?) letters.

The reason why I am so against certain contemporary art trends is because they have simply removed the art from art. When Duchamp exhibited the urinal and was questioned about it, he answered that the urinal is art simply because he says it is. Period. While I understand his stand at that point of time and the message he was trying to send, his action has been adopted and perpetuated by many and ultimately killed the very essence of what art is supposed to be. There is absolutely no act of creation behind it (Duchamp did not create the urinal – and even if he did, a simple manufacture does not qualify as art), the way none of the prints I have seen in galleries are manually created – and even if they were painted, they would rather qualify as kitsch and not art.

Rembrandt, Self-Portrait

If traditionally being an artist meant being talented and educated, nowadays literally anyone with zero talent, zero skills and zero knowledge about anything art related can call him- or herself an artist just like that. If I really scroll down the history line and think of great masters like Rembrandt or Da Vinci or Titian and think of the years and years of relentless creation, of studying, of the hours spent analyzing how light reflects on a person’s face, remembering that Da Vinci did, in fact, study anatomy on cadavers, to ensure his artwork was anatomically correct, thinking of all the work they had to put into creating the pigments they used, of the complex techniques which we comprehend nowadays by using ultra-sophisticated equipment… and then comparing the art they created with a print of Donald Duck and claiming that both works carry the same label and are of equal value. Besides the fact that there is no act of creation, no talent or skill required to produce certain types of modern artwork, these creations leave absolutely no space for reflection. It is impossible to stand in front of an Aivazovsky and not get carried away, to look at a Rembrandt and not reflect on the contrasts, not to have a moment of pure silence and admiration. A cartoon or any conceptual art will never trigger that feeling and to me that is the very essence that justifies art and differentiates it from kitsch or literally any mundane object.

Titian – St. John The Evangelist on Patmos

To end on a less sarcastic note, while in my humble opinion, modern era has damaged to a certain extent the perception of art (again, this is my opinion), there is an upside to it as well. If art was reserved to a limited few in the past, nowadays, thanks to the internet and the unlimited access to information, there are so many phenomenal contemporary artists who have maybe never stepped foot in an arts school but who have sharpened their talent thanks to the endless information and tutorials available online. If back in the day someone had to dedicate good years of their lives to watch and learn from a known artist, nowadays anyone can learn about Titian’s technique at the press of a button.