Has formalism become acceptable to the general public? Are the public works of Kapoor and Eichelman popular because of their gimmickry or do people really respond to the abstract forms in ways that would have pleased the likes of Clive Bell and Clement Greenberg?
I think formalism is acceptable to the public as we have seen it for 60+ years. However, I don't think that means that formalism is liked or appreciated by the general public. I think there still exists some of that snobbery that was mentioned in the lecturette in relationship to Clive Bell. Even in the video of Ellsworth Kelly's exhibition, there was a starkness in the gallery and with the paintings that was somewhat uncomfortable, even from the comfort of my own couch behind a screen. In contrast, Kapoor, and Eichelman's works are in the context of everyday places which creates a level of accessibility that the Kelly exhibition lacks. I think Kapoors metallic sculptures and the fabric sculptures of Eichelman do trigger that aesthetic emotion because they respond to natural and organic forms similarly to Frankenthaler's work. In this way, I think most people can see the forms as objectively beautiful. I can imagine friends and family members saying "Whoahhhhh" when viewing these sculptures in person. I think part of this is the way that the sculptures invite interaction, as with the reflections in The Bean, and the way Eichelman's pieces transform a space. Both invite an experience rather than just an object. I had this aesthetic experience with a piece of Gabriel Dawe's work in person. I had seen his pieces in photos, but nothing compared to the way that piece glittered in the light and created optical illusions as you looked through it. It is still the most beautiful piece of art I have ever seen. I do think that Bell and Greenburg would turn up their noses at these works, although for different reasons. I think the sheer amount of selfie taking around these sculptures would immediately turn off Bell. I think Greenburg would appreciate Kapoor's work in the gallery, because it is very minimalist. I think he would consider Eichelman's works to not be self-critical, because as installation sculptures, they require that particular space to work, and therefore don't work as aesthetic pieces on their own because they are dependent on their environment.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorMorgan Singleton is a secondary art educator with a Master's degree in art education. Archives
April 2017
Categories
All
|