The future. Where is it and why do only a handful of early adopters have the foresight to glean the direction that is happening in modern fine art.
Every other medium has become well digitized except for art. Music in the 80’s, along with the telephony industry. Banking, finance and commerce in the 90’s.
In 2000 the dawn of the 21st century I started to look at the world of art. Nothing was comfortable about it. There was no innovation and it was more of who you knew and paid in public relations than the art itself.
Quibbling abounded as the old way of doing things with paint brush and canvas clung for dear life to the walls of commercially viable museums and galleries. Art was seen as a big ticket item solely for the elite, no Blacks need apply.
What were we creating? No average person displayed art in their homes any longer. If they did, it would be commercial art meant to match furniture and decor, mass manufactured on the cheap.
Disrupting the current modern fine art model is what we are about. This has nothing to do with past historical works, or works currently being offered in galleries and by art dealers, but that system is broken.
Artificial valuation of works and artists that are more brands and products than they are works of art. They will stand in a historical perspective as the post modern commercial period.
A period in the history of art, when art stopped being art and turned into a high priced commodity, with falsely inflated valuation. No basis in creativity or innovation, but rather what is projected by public relations teams to be a want rather than a need for value (“…big so and so has one in their home, I have to have one to be validated”).
Now not all fine art is in this realm, take for example the periodical “Art In America” one I have personally read since 1967. But even here the magazine holds with the past, doing retrospects and projecting artists that come to the attention of mainstream media.
Gone are the days of artists blazing the path of a creative daring future and breaking the norm rather than regurgitating the past. This is why since 2006 I took to a crusade and realized I was an avant-garde artist all along, but the term was considered dead in the era of post-modernism.
It is not dead it had just been sleeping. None dared to break the norm of the past. This alone gave us works with sad puppy dog eyes, flowery fields abounded all in the sake of sell, sell, sell. Meanwhile more than 90% of artists earn $0.00 US dollars from our craft.
Why? The value system was shifted away from any living artists like in the days of Pollack or Rauschenberg, who dared to be different or activists to the commercially viable, or older art where the artist has since died and the work can be valued by rarity.
On to today. Why can there not be a new disruptive way of collecting and valuing art in a secure fashion, but yet available to the working class people also that have the ability to appreciate art? Why was real art kept out of the hands of working class people in the first place?
Putting works of art out of the reach of common people is not a healthy sociological outlook for the 21st century.
We as avant-garde artists will hold fast to that principle just as we held fast to the resurgence of the Avant-garde. As with any disruptive technology the choice is not ours, but rather yours.
Whether or not you adopt a forward thinking new way of valuing and collecting art does not mean it does not stand on it’s own. Just the fact that it is here and as an artist I say it is art. It is.