![\"\"](\"https:\/\/ringsidereport.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/10\/Art-as-object-300x225.jpg\")
<\/a>By Radical Rhymes<\/strong><\/p>\nToo frequently I hear people say things like: \u2018That\u2019s not very good.\u2019 Or, something far worse when confronted by a piece of art. This usually means that it doesn\u2019t look exactly like it\u2019s subject, or maybe it doesn\u2019t resemble anything recognisable at all.<\/p>\n
But such judgements imply that there us an objective measure by which to assess art and artwork. If you are drawing or painting or sculpting, then the outcome should absolutely represent the thing at hand. If it doesn\u2019t, then it isn\u2019t very good is it?<\/p>\n
When I was a young lad desperate to be an artist I was obsessed with realism, and mostly impressed by hyper-realism. If I was drawing an owl then I aimed to replicate what I was seeing in its entirety. Anything less was inferior, inadequate, or quite simply, wrong. I use the example of an owl because this was a piece that had enormous meaning for me.<\/p>\n
And I still love realism, I still admire hyper-realism. It takes great skill, dexterity and commitment. Who couldn\u2019t appreciate the attainment of such results?<\/p>\n
But I now recognise in my own behaviour that I was hiding behind details. There was little or no passion in what I was producing, it was an attempt to silence the inner critic and appeal to the external ones. If what I was doing was so obviously \u2018something\u2019 or \u2018someone\u2019, then how could anyone object to it? How could anyone dismiss it? I was trying to create a bullet-proof vest for myself, not art.<\/p>\n
These days I am led more by my emotions, or by something in the subject itself. More often than not, I do expressionist work now. Although, as I said, there are times when the work demands to manifest in a way that I didn\u2019t foresee or intend. Two examples come to mind. The first was a drawing of a black Labrador I was a commissioned to do. I saw a conventional piece at the start, yet it came out as an art deco drawing. How? Why? I\u2019m not sure and to be honest, I don\u2019t really care.<\/p>\n
The second instance was the product of a competition I ran on Twitter. The lady who won, who is a dear friend now and a patron, wanted a picture of her daughter. I started it with realism in mind, and yet it came out as pop art. That caused me great anxiety until I showed her. \u2018Oh, that makes sense,\u2019 she told me, \u2018my favourite artist is Andy Warhol!\u2019<\/p>\n
Art is NOT objective. It is not (just) about mirroring or exact replication. It is varied. Textured. Layered. It is as much about emotions, about passions, as it is anything else. Not just those that belong to the artist, but also the audience. Art is a towering, evocative, boundless and limitless activity.<\/p>\n
It is one of the things what makes us human, that supplements and feeds our souls. Without it, life would be less sharp, less fresh, and less challenging. So, when idiots like Boris Johnson and his gaggle of elite morons tell artists to stop creating and retrain as whatever is most useful to their economy, we have to defy him and them. They are, in my opinion, soulless cretins that wouldn\u2019t understand beauty if it smacked them in the face with a wet fish.<\/p>\n
However, for my own part, I will stop saying something isn\u2019t very good and embrace the advice of James Whistler instead. He argued that we should say we don\u2019t like a piece of art and withhold falsely objective value judgements.<\/p>\n
Why?<\/p>\n
Because even if we don\u2019t like an artwork, someone else probably will. And thank the stars for that.<\/p>\n
Radical Rhymes is a professional artist working with a range of media – predominantly animal\/human portraits and landscapes – including, most recently, hand painted furniture. You can see his work on Instagram Radicalrhymes1969 or on Twitter @RhymesRadical.<\/a><\/strong><\/em><\/span><\/p>\n