LEARNING
I’m planning to spend the next 3 – 4 weeks learning the Adobe Creative Suite CS2 (having hunted around Penang to see what I could find). I’ve subscribed to Lynda.com for a month to access the video tutorials having failed miserably in the past relying on books and lack of certainty. I have already covered a good chunk of the tutorials and am really, really enjoying learning something new. The learning buzz is not only great but I can clearly see the potential in setting aside this time to do this both for myself and my ‘digital’ working outcomes.
I have to say I am very impressed with the tutorials so far. I am following them systematically and am learning loads of cool stuff. I recommend it.
ASSESSMENT FEEDBACK
I am very happy and encouraged by the feedback I received for MADA 1. I was actually a little surprised considering recent fluctuations in thinking and productivity.
Two things mentioned in the feedback were Martin Parr and elitism, which I have rambled on about below, and, keeping final outcome options open.
I am more than happy to keep my outcomes open and part of the reason I am trying to improve my skill set is to allow for many more creative solutions. So we’ll wait and see.
COULD ART BE ELITIST?
Andy and Jonathon suggested I look at Martin Parr having read my description of my “mother-in –law’s house” in my project proposal. Which I actually debated including. They also raised the question therein of elitism in art.
As an artist I have often wanted to document society (ies) as I have lived in a few and yet have never been quite comfortable with my standpoint. During my time in the UK, Greece and Malaysia I have seen the potential in so many scenarios that I have been privileged enough to be accepted into and yet I have chosen not to take out my camera for the very reason that I am not sure whether I would be crossing the ‘trust’ line and exploiting differences and individuality. I was interested therefore when I looked up Martin Parr to read the description of his photographic reasoning.
“…In the process he examines national characteristics and international phenomena to find out how valid they are as symbols that will help future generations to understand our cultural peculiarities. Parr enables us to see things that have seemed familiar to us in a completely new way. In this way he creates his own image of society, which allows us to combine an analysis of the visible signs of globalization with unusual visual experiences. In his photographs, Parr juxtaposes specific images with universal ones without resolving the contradictions. Individual characteristics are accepted and eccentricities are treasured.”
Thomas Weski on Martin Parr
http://www.martinparr.com/index1.html
So, is Art elitist?
I think it depends; first here are a few definitions.
e·lit·ism n
1. The belief that some people or things are inherently superior to others and deserve preeminence, preferential treatment, or higher rewards because of their superiority
Encarta® World English Dictionary © 1999 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
Developed for Microsoft by Bloomsbury Publishing Plc.
Elitist adj
1. If you describe systems, practices, or ideas as elitist. You believe that they favour only the most powerful, rich or talented people within a group, [place or society: used showing disapproval.Collins Cobuild, English Dictionary.
Three things from the above evaluation of Parr’s work that may be or not be elitist;
“Parr juxtaposes specific images with universal ones without resolving the contradictions”
Perhaps it’s the academicism of art that is elite in that it is the ‘resolving of issues’ that creates notions of elitism.
“Parr enables us to see things that have seemed familiar to us in a completely new way”
The suggestion that the artist has something to teach society rather than something interesting to share with people.
“Individual characteristics are accepted and eccentricities are treasured.”
Where is the line between celebrating differences and turning them into a ‘freak show’?
I do know some artists who believe themselves to have a superior outlook to life and that their work is “beyond the understanding of most people”. However `I think this is a trait in human nature not necessarily restricted to (or should I say privileged to) Art. The same could be said of any specialist professional groups or ‘subcultures’ doctors, musicians, and teachers. Perhaps the question is who decides it is elite and as a term used to show disapproval what would the reasoning behind using it be. Surely the user of the language feels something more than just wanting to be accepted by a group (Chip on the shoulder). If I want to be on equal conversation grounds with a Neuro Surgeon I accept I have a lot to learn and that’s my choice.
Perhaps it’s simply narcissism and the art world likes to think of itself as elitist. Last week in our chat there was a discussion about “the masses” and “the others”. I think this is very interesting as the notion of otherness is inherent everywhere. In cultures, religion, ethnic diversity in select groups of interest. Is it just a way of gaining self-identity and feeling valuable or is it actually grandiose thinking which lets not forget, is on the tick list of emotional disorders.
So, to conclude my brief (un researched) outburst about elitism.
I think some people like to consider art elite for personal reasons. I believe that most people probably don’t give it a second thought. And I’m not sure that it is either changeable or that it really matters. I believe that western art practice really does celebrate diversity in individual thinking and that this is a very positive part of our culture. To turn that into a negative is a shame, however I also think that, as in free speech and journalism, there is a responsibility to produce work which does not harm. But that is subjective too.
Perhaps this topic might be fun for the PGPD essay.