The Future of Figurative Art and Painting ( Full Version) - June 22nd, 2016
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 6 ต.ค. 2024
- Recorded on June 22, 2016 at Booth Gallery NYC. www.paulboothgallery.com and organised by Casey Gleghorn, Director of Booth Gallery.
Artist and writer David Molesky moderated a conversation with world-renowned art critic Donald Kuspit and master figurative artists Vincent Desiderio, Julie Heffernan, and Adam Miller. With the Odd Nerdrum exhibition Crime and Refuge as backdrop, the conversation examined today’s Renaissance of figurative art, as well as discuss the responsibilities and collective opportunities to shape the evolution of human culture. The panel discussed figurative representations of irony, beauty, gender, race, and morality while tapping into the core of shared humanity.
“In previous decades, humanist figurative art was relegated to fringe relevance, demoted by modernist critics as ‘kitsch sentimentality’. But now the voice and opinion of the masses is having greater sway in both art markets and museums. The Internet allows anyone to easily research and form his or her own opinion. And social media platforms allow people to cast its popular vote. In addition, support has come from publications which have risen in parallel with the Internet. For example, Juxtapoz magazine was founded with the intention to support art formerly excluded from the canon of the Avant-guard, and is today the #1 international art magazine. Just as we can no longer ignore these new measures of relevance, we can no longer ignore the popularity and rising status of figurative art.
With this greater visibility and influence comes greater responsibility. This is a moment of great opportunity to adjust the misdirected myths of the past and sculpt a new vision for humanity. Using the past as our springboard, we can launch humanity into a future that is informed by greater global consciousness and elevated empathy.” - David Molesky
Vincent Desiderio is a New York based painter represented by Marlborough Gallery. His rich figurative narrative work is part of museum collections worldwide, including the Hirshhorn, the Met, the Denver Art Museum, and many others.
Julie Heffernan is a New York based painter represented by PPOW in Chelsea. She is Professor of Fine Arts at Montclair State University. Her illustrious paintings have been exhibited internationally and are included in Brooklyn museum collection and other museums.
Donald Kuspit is a world-renowned curator, art critic, and author of numerous publications including The End of Art. A distinguished professor emeritus of art history and philosophy at State University at Stony Brook, Kuspit holds degrees from many top institutions and he is regarded as the foremost practitioner of psychoanalytic art criticism.
Adam Miller is a New York based painter represented by Richard Demato Gallery. His dense complex figurative narrative paintings are held in major private collections across the United States and Europe.
David Molesky is a New York based painter, curator, and frequent contributor to Juxtapoz magazine and other publications.
Casey Gleghorn at paulboothgallery@gmail.com for questions.
![ตีสิบเดย์ [FULL] | อาจารย์โอเล่ ญาณสัมผัส ผ่าดวงคนดัง ประเทศไทยจะเป็นยังไงหลังจากนี้!](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/gszT2O76fL4/mqdefault.jpg)
This is a great panel on an important topic. I found Donald Kuspit's remarks to be riveting and refreshing, and this is the first time I have seen him and heard him talk. That is why it is especially frustrating that the person running the sound at this event did such a bad job. The background noise makes Kuspit virtually inaudible. Seems rather symbolic to me, of how the art world has suppressed his voice, and others like him.
Donald always has great insights...a delight to hear a true intellectual at work...
I think that people will continue to like Art that speaks to them. People are drawn to faces because it releases Dopamine, I don't think you get that with abstract modern Art.
I really enjoy these types of discussions, thank you, Booth Gallery!
niteowl365 ooo interesting fact!! 😁 I didn't know that.
Thanks Booth Gallery for posting this. Had me spell bound...and almost hopeful, that painting may re-surge, as a major medium of intelligent expression and communication. Enjoyed this immensely.
Very enlightening , I really liked what Donald had to say . And Vincent's frankness was very refreshing , as were the rest of the panel. Discussions like this open the doors for serious thought into how we see art , make art , and the process of realizing what the artist set out to achieve or what happened in the process that can be learned from. As art is not static but moving painters bring they're work into the world knowing it's a moving table that's made up of the historical truths about art as well as what goes against how we view good art today. It makes me happy to hear and learn from people like this who are passionate about art as they are artist in their own right. I came away with alot , as well as things I already knew , like how galleries do a disservice to art by focusing on hanging artist who are safe so to speak. Someone who will make them money . I think the panel was just getting warmed up when they ran out of time. I really enjoyed it.
Vincent nailed it,creat an environment out of a void,kuspit nailed it does the environment engage and sustain .
The future of painting is in the hands of painters who LEARN from the best OLD MASTERS and then DRAW and PAINT REALITY. All the "isms" and endless verbosity from critics and dealers amounts to nothing. They can't stop painters who know what they are about.
I'm almost halfway through. I super wish that this can be rereleased with the audio adjusted to compensate for the audio issues.
I have looked at many art exhibitions over the years and yes there were some good paintings....but I have never seen a picture that looked magical and made me gasp like some of the old masters including the impressionists....
Good artists are still rare.
Even back in those days good artists were rare. It's just that history has gotten rid of the bad ones and made us remember the legendary artists such as William Bougeraue.
very interesting discussion giving an insight into how a group of people in America at this moment view figurative art and its relationship to the contemporary art world.
loved this discussion. I love all the painters - including Nerdrum. I hope to make wonderful art in that caliber some day :)
Painting is not dead. it has just learned to walk. It is traveling globally and is no longer centralized by a few movements figuring out the same question. This is very confusing to critics and viewers. As our society becomes more digitized, we will long for the imperfect line of our own subconscious and Art will be more important than ever.
I also think of an eternal purpose of contemporary painting as a kind of cantillation of the wonder of Life - as a sacred act of sharing the joy and curiosity of experience of beauty, love and mystery of presence 🎵💜🎶
Thank you all🖤
I love this talk! I also love your gallery! Keep up the great work!!!!!!!
I love the question “ what is painting now” ? And the reflections on cultural meaning, art meaning and aesthetic meaning and another interesting very Old question is the western separation of reason and sensation … the body - the surroundings ……………the static - the vibrational ….. stillness - movement. I like the focus on beingness even if I Will use the word ‘aliveness’ with pulse, rhythm and the multidimensional sensuality - the sybkinaesthetiv of rhe entanglement of body-heart-mind-life The Danish philosopher Ole Fogh Kirkeby has written great trilogy of modern phenomelogy that discusses these ideas and concepts in telation to Life and Art ( Eventum Tantum, Skønheden Sker , Selvet Sker) - all highlighting that its all about experience and the mystery of Human experience as a kind of perception of significance. 🎶💜🎵
So good
Great guys!
My question concerning this discussion: Why does everyone's work need to propel art in some unknown direction? To call renowned artist's work "cliched" or stagnant because they stick to their guns goes what is generally taught... one's own vision supersedes some general direction.
I currently have the same question as you stated.
Photography made with ONE EYE, we paint with TWO EYES....PERCEPTION!!!
Was someone in charge of sound? wtf!
a profissional did carefully recorded to the academic standards: badly
Everyone should read (from the French) Nicole Esterolle's "la bouffonerie de l'art contemporain" and Aude de Keros' "l'imposture de l'art contemporain". They expose the arrogant posturing and scheme of the, now dying, "contemporary art", or Financial Art.
Thanks for posting. You might really like Suzi Gablik's books (The Reenchantment of Art), or Bram Dijkstra's books, or Tom Wolfe (The Painted Word), The Use and Abuse of Art by Jacques Barzun, Culture Gulch by John Canaday, and I can't remember others off hand.
There is lots of figurative art that is totally accepted. Lichtenstein, Warhol ,Basqia , What seems to be discussed here is academic painting. Academic painting is what you learn in classical training at art school and then you need to take it further. Not get stuck in it. Academic art is basically a 18 th and 19 th century art. It is the past. It has no future except learning it at academy. Great art is not academic painting. It is interpreting the reality and then making that interpretation of reality your own, is what makes great art.
The reason we know history is because artists and writers record it and interpret their reality. They are speaking to others in their time, not ours. And the art they produced was not done as progressive, like how science improves upon their discoveries over time. Your thinking is called Line-of-Progress thinking. And it's related specifically to aesthetics. Modernism is an ideology produces art where the subject matter says almost nothing about our times because there is so often no subject matter. Contemporary art is self expression, or pure aestheticism, or the history of ideas (art about art). Great art of the past was considered High Art. Popular art was Low Art, and Fine Art was aesthetic and subjective - enjoyed by the rich, the elite and the wannabes. Today's high art is found in movies and television because they perform all the perennial functions of art that can be found historically in all societies for thousands of years. Contemporary art performs very few of art's social functions. I'll admit that today's realism is not terribly exciting, but that's because they have little to say. Much of the Academic work you are likely referring too was terrible. Bouguereau is used by realists today as an example of a great artist. YUCK! So tacky. But think of Géricault, Goya, Delacroix. Brilliant! These artists better captured their time and challenged viewers. I don't see anything nearly as good produced by the artists you mentioned. But if you're thinking Academic=Bouguereau, yes I agree, that is definitely, the past.
This is really interesting the only annoying thing at the beginning is the bloke constantly chewing really irritating coz I had to keep looking at him while the old boy was talking.
So much tak about how important they are for "painting the darkness, and not being afraid to show the darkness".. you gotta be kidding me right? nearly all figurative art for the last 10 years is all about showing the homeless or mentally ill, or holocaust survivors.. it's become a parody of itself and it's directly responsible for so much redundancy in art. I challenge these people up here to start painting the light of the world or of the human form/ They choose the darkness because it's the only thing the modern art galleries will allow in that is representational. If you dont paint something with a dark social message you wont get in those galleries. THat's the definition of entertainment. The new David Kassan holocaust survivor show in LA, dont fool yourself, that's literally saving private ryan in paint. It's still entertainment because it's using a certain amount of shock to attract people to the show.
Gustave Moreau what this lady said, that his art was schizophrenic, this is a reason why painters choose popular directions. And not brave historic ones. Lady, you are wrong. Gustave Moreau was amazing artist.
Education can only provide tools. Artists then live life, they love & hate, fail & suffer.....
Most of all they learn. They learn about life & what it really means to b an adult living on life’s terms. Its absolutely necessary. If painting (or sculpture or music or....etc) is the vocabulary that an artist learns to speak through, then life is what provides the experiences to respond to. The action & reaction. If an artist creates only to store pieces in a closet, they r only talking to themselves. If artists create stylistically only, they r telling lies or at the very least saying what they think people want to hear. The discussion may center around the future of figurative art & at times it seemed to slip more into a lecture that criticized abstract & conceptual work, but I think both sides will gain or suffer depending on the art market returning to work with soul carrying more value than stylistic conversation pieces.
My art subject is the Japanese female nude, especially in sketches, drawings and paintings. I can also do portraits within the subject. I am a Black woman artist from Portland, Oregon. ❤️💜🌹💚😍🥰🕊
Terrible background noise, no CC but otherwise an interesting talk.
These people are so stuck in Western art history. Vermeer, Rembrandt, Caravaggio,... why does everything have to be framed by them and referenced back to them? I studied from the old masters but I have moved on since. Listening to this discussion is interesting, but also depressing. I can't imagine always carrying so much intellectual baggage and trying to impose it onto the work I produce, - it would completely take all the spontaneity and joy out of it. I don't give a rats ass about how my art fits or doesn't fit into the historical linear narrative. I don't have to ask permission from anyone, least of all art critics and historians to produce what I want.
MAYBE TO BE TAKEN MORE SERIOUSLY!
..... YOU SHOULD CONSIDER NOT USING SUCH A STUPID TH-cam POSTING PROFILE NAME!
WE GET IT!
YOU'RE TRYING TO GET ATTENTION!
.... OH WOW.
HOW 1985 OF YOU!
😅😅😅 LAUGHABLE!
Those who can't/don't paint have made it their mission, for decades, to destroy figurative art. It begins in "Art" colleges where unknown artists go to lick their wounds and become "art" teachers. Mediocrity is what has been developed and just as the "Emperor with no clothes" people are finally shouting it out loud.
I have to point out that Julie tried on a number of occasions in this debate to express her opinion and the rest of you guys did not see that . Gentlemen you missed several opportunities to show your respect towards her. I was longing to hear what she had to say!
I would like to see the painting in question that they are talking about...
I'm referring to Odd's painting.
It was a painting called Aurora . For the record, we disagree with the comments. d32dm0rphc51dk.cloudfront.net/Al9ht9ANPIR11hkIzimKjg/large.jpg
Comparing realist painting to contemporary painting is the same as comparing classical music to contemporary. Realist painting takes a long time to produce, making it less profitable.
It's ALL TRUE. But does it matter?
there is a condensed version of this if you don't want to watch for 2 hours. I think the changes in art instruction they call for are taking place, but that isn't the point goal of this panel . I've been painting for 2 years and am able to get foundationally sound instrucion so I can learn to make images that will last 500 years and will be relevant to the people that see them then. My instruction is better than the old masters, my materials are better, if I don't paint at least as well as them then shame on me. All this talk about we can never reach their acheivements, what's wrong with us? are we lazy or stupid? they were painting as though their life depended on it, because it did. What does your life depend on? All people in the world know the same things, if you paint those things, people will agree with you. It's not about style. Will you make money? Art isn't money, the reward is someone connecting with the image you made. But, if you connect through your art, someone may pay for it!
Not moderated very well in my opinion.
Best part of the discussion: 1:56:46 - when Kuspit, the ol’ boy, calls out Vincent on his patronizing statement(s)
I didnt find it patronizing at all and I really do think Donald misunderstood.
WHAT is that guy chewing?
souls and young painters dreams
Who will be the new Avant Gaarde Gods?
I found this panel audacious and a bit obnoxious. Especially Julie and Adam . I looked up the work and was surprised that they could criticize someone else’s technique and intent.
Boring egomaniacs ,Julia's paintings are the most interesting .Munch was a great artist ,he would have hated this chocolate box lot .
Munch had everything that great artist needs.
a profissional did carefully recorded the sound to the academic standards: badly
what is that dude chewing
Seeing that guy constantly chewing was pretty distracting. Why was the cameraman trying to keep him in the frame, so we could watch him eat? I suppose it's irrelevant now.
not for deaf?
Adam Miller awesome, clearly loves painting and painters, the video is worth watching in entirety just to listen to the passion within him … the rest was of no interest to me for the most part. The Q&A was highly informative and cut through the crap, the questioners were terrific.
I think it would have been most gracious if Vincent Desiderio had finished his breakfast before joining the panel. I found his gnawing rude and extremely distracting.
Narcissistic behavior for sure...like Einsteins hair and the like. This fake is faker than many.
The great artist Vincent Desiderio has had cancer twice. Listen to all his talks on TH-cam and his interview at the SuggestedDonation podcast and have a look online at his most recent work at Marlborough Gallery last month (also there's a marvelous new book called Theseus by Daniel Maidman). You'll be hard pressed to find a better mind than his.
Defending figurative art by attacking other forms of art is weak. It's unnecessary. This video makes me cringe and I'm very much figurative artist.
But you have to remember that it's the modern art that started it. They attacked figurative art first, and now pretty much every public school only advocates for abstract art. So, it shouldn't be a surprise that they're aggresive towards it.
@@Thesamurai1999 Beginning at the end of the 1970s, Modernism had painted itself into a corner. It was the start of a great breaking-out, if you will, by artists and a defiance of the Modernist New York School critics who had become a Papacy, lead by Clement Greenberg as it's Pope. Figurative painting has since made a strong resurgence, often with many of the Modernist concepts intermingled. What this video's discussion is defending is academic figurative painting. And though it isn't seen as ground breaking, it certainly has reestablished itself in contemporary painting. This video is chafing at anything outside of 19th Century academic figure painting. It's pointless.
@@Thesamurai1999 I don't know where you are getting your information on public school policies. Public school art programs focus on art history introduction and are very rudimentary in their projects, focusing on exploration of different genres. University fine art programs began pivoting away from Modernist theory as the prime theory over thirty years ago. Life drawing is a staple in university programs.
Thank god for the young women’s statement near the end that revisited the Odd’s work and the critiques, largely pompous arrogance on display from the panel otherwise, I don’t even disagree with very much of the critique but just obnoxious.. and then this audience guy has the balls to say keifers work has nothing to do with people or reality or something??? Gtfoh
Desidario chewing making me feel sick,and he likes the sound of is own voice way to much,had to turn it off after a while.
His chewing is not voluntary, you rude little nobody! In fact YOU are the problem with art today. A fixation on having your senses pleased without thinking. Dumbfuck!
Scheming of those who appropriate avant-garde. Great this use of "young."
It's a shame that the two arrogant gentleman had so much to say that the others could barely get a word in. Better moderation would have been helpful. Even when Heffernan and Miller were able to speak. Desidario spoke to Kuspit instead of hearing them. Rude.
agree. if we spoke w such an arrogant, even angry tone, we would be disregarded entirely. they relish being academic entertainers.
Desidario is a great painter, and like most great painters of the past, he is not necessarily a great speaker or even an admirable person. It is unfair to expect that of him, or any other painters. He was invited to give his opinion, and he did .Imagine if Francis Bacon or Picasso or Caravaggio had been up there! No one else would have been allowed to speak at all, but it would have been entertaining.
I agree - I love the topic but after a while I couldn't listen to Desiderio talk anymore, very offputting tone.
just ego , every human is born with that
I find Desiderio one of the few painters talking about "art" I can listen to , but I'm just a painter , never quite summoned the arrogance to self proclaim myself an Artist........@@DavidPuckArtist
Hac taking typed,
WHY IS VINCENT DESIDERIO!
BEHAVING LIKE A COW CHEWING CUD OUT IN THE FIELD!
SERIOUSLY!
..... IT'S SO CLASSLESS!
JustMeGeorgie ! Too much turpentine fumes
for real!!! hahaha
Oh fuck off.
This second person on the left, is so irritating, sitting there, chewing as he does, and extremely thirsty too, I wonder if he should not be in the kitchen instead!
Since Marcel Duchamps unlocked the door for rubbish!! ... there is a lot of funny painting going on by amateurs-painters .. just a few have the talent and the historian knowledge to make Art as an artist. When an artist gives lessons...the talent is small. Does Picasso explains his art or did he gives lessons.... These people at the tabel don't understand what is going about ! Close all academics !!!
Odd himself said it isn't art...that he is/was a KITSCH painter....and he's right...painting, as art, is dead...the camera killed painting just when the peasants learned to venerate "art" as the new religion, and pablo's pandering drove the nail in...why SHOULD i care ??
...nothing wrong with painting for the fun of it...but art is dead....just business ,acedemics ,and "critics ...puffed up with self importance.....move along ,there's nothing here...
People paint, it's a human activity. At varying degrees of course. To say that any media is no longer linguistically relevant is at the extreme end of ludicrous. Basic mark making is a human trait that will exist for as long as we do as a species. The "art industry" tried to hijack it of course but that's like hijacking fat and salt!
I am a painter.. I made a (low standard) living from painting for 40 years and ALWAYS insisted that it wasn't ART...at least as defined in the 20th century.....I paint....but given the "advances" in visual"language",it's difficult to support painting as an ART form...comes down to the definition of art of course....but as an archaic pursuit ,like bulding harpsichords , or hand binding books ,it can be venerated and/or enjoyed ,it's a relatively harmless pursuit ,and there are FEW of those.............................but it is not relevant to the overall culture.....ludicrous assertion? could be ,painters are usually not known for their intellectual capacity...and I've always been a fool....
As much as I hate to accept it, you are correct. Painting is dead. Its been dead for a minute. My primary love is traditional painting but I have only managed to make a living from caricatures, anime stylized "fan art" , and straight up pornography. Services like patreon have allowed art to survive in the new century. But at what cost? Just look at the artist making over 5k per month on patreon. Their art is PURE commercial pandering. Can it still be called art?
Pretentious
Interestingly enough, these speakers ended up partially defending the case for abstraction. A question was asked "color of what?". How about color of sun shining through my eyelids? Problem with a lot of modern art is that it is generated by people without uncompromising seriousness about life, most artists are plenty serious about themselves and it comes through their work . Whether it is realism or abstract makes no difference to me personally. I saw both abstract and figurative art with transformative power. Prevalence of mediocrity is the real problem! BTW, the guy in the background was very interesting in his own right.
Why not try to make it audible, seems what they're saying is educational.