From: Jack Fulton (jefulton1@attbi.com)
Date: 01/08/03-12:22:36 PM Z
> Where did the term "Outsider Art" or "Artists" come from? Or the analysis?
> It feels like supposed "Insiders" trying to domesticate for Art History
> purposes things or people that are or were inherently undomesticated. Wild
> flower can't be let be. Has to be part of the Grand Garden. -jb
It stems from the Salon de Refuse in Paris. Manet and others were not
included and put together an exhibit which, simply, was an exhibition of
those refused by the Academy.
in the recent past, post Greenberg, post AE, Post Warhol, it was agreed upon
that galleries were selling commodities. These were generally socially
popular and to a degree driven by drugs, politics and money. Sell schlock,
tell the client the price will rise, have that select clientele then be a
portion of "in" society, put that schlock up @ auctions, gain money, buy
more schlock. It still goes on and in due course, via the Academy which
trains young people for the arts life, there rises a protest. The
cognoscenti scream back, "I fear thee doth protesteth too much" and much
schlock persists. There is little 'agenbite of inwit' (Joyce's words for
remorse of conscience) and the 'outsider' grows in numbers. The unfortunate
element is there appears to be little out there that distinguishes between
true and schlock. The PM theorists recognized this but the art created via
that philosophy has exemplified photography as the primal source. yes, there
is a lot complaining to do . . witness our present government . . but,
hidden neath all the mire lurks beauty and it's great potential.
Jack
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 02/21/03-10:44:16 AM Z CST