University of South Carolina Libraries
c^Esthetic oymi Pluralisn _f consider* The following thoughts were initially triggered by a panel discussion by four prominent art critics at the 11th International Sculpture Conference in Washington. The panel consisted of Rosalind Krauss, Donald Kuspit, Robert PincusWitten and English critic Hugh Adams. Adams began the discussion rather somberly with an outline of critical "types" in England, but by the time Kuspit had finished, and Pincus-Witten was in full oratory form, the panel had reduced its proceedings to a yelling match. Yet sometime between | tranquil Hugh and nasty Donald, Rosalind Krauss had said something. The idea Krauss presented was one of those basic truths that so often gets lost in the excesses of intellectual jargon. Quite simply, she said she felt the variety of styles and materials in contemporary art were being misinterpreted as a pluralism of intentions. Yet how rnnld this hf> fnr all art no matter how diverse it may appear, is still a ? fTWi I ^ on 6u { We6 nickle 1 M I M thi i * r * pRI * * & ft I I Questior i'l IS I I Answers II with I P/AfilrlA Jame Wed. 0< Russ< .. ||||)||1|(-- |: ,, | a 2 rk^ cheva lier i in art A if za myin reflection of the culture ths produced it. Krauss call this "the myth o pluralism." Upon returning t Columbia, I visited the Nint Annual Dutch Fork Exhibi and was struck by a coupl of lines juror Nina Parr had inscribed in th catalogue. Parris' bri< statement led to tli following essay, which rur through pluralisn progressive and regressi\ art, and their implicatioi on a regional level. What juror Nina Parr describes as a "mixture and to which she add "People are willing to ti different things," seems me to be a rather e comDassine notion which tl work in the Ninth Annu Dutch Fork Associatit Exhibition does not suppoi Rather than so mar "different things," the woi basically divides itself, < most regional shows do, in two primary groups: tho I A. 1 A. 1 A. it. _ worxs inai lesi me medium, and those th accept or strive to identi with a past, establish' mode or tradition. n fu i (T ULTUUr mBAR Road West C . - CaROlma seeR fRee with iRS. - Ladies' . - fRee a6n zee 6Rinks i IS I s 6. Holi :t 1 sllHouse The former group is usually identified as the avant-garde, for it is the new, the different, and the very act of expanding the way art appears that spurs them on. This is, of course, the direction of main-stream "serious" art, and has been since the Renaissance. Popular and regional critical response to such "new" art has not fared well outside the academic community. 1 do not believe this is due to the "ignoranoe ls of the masses.' * The notion of f elitism is simply an antagonist to the situation. It is 0 more the result of a failure to h accept change. 1 have often felt that both j? the artist and his audience is suffer from the simple lack of clarity that surrounds this -f notion of change. Simply ie stated, artistic styles change *s in relation to the social, 1 , nnlitinal anH pnlhiral nnrmc ^ TTVXIJLIIO re ! - VH?gflSSlIi :-~^-7?- ^ y TT?f^ is MT.Ti HIM11 ?j ?Tf 1 A Jp s, -r r 1 I T l ! to n- HHHHHBHH ie ^VJ I a ?M >1*1 k K t. HHHIHIIBh ?y mvHIl rAYtll i ;M rk HMiAMMnR;; as to se Epflha^lHMH^M&j ir Krf*\d II "J ?7* VA t HnnMtfwftan fy uJSjLliIi3? ed ILL .oinmRiA j . night student 16 ' niqht ussion nl j 1/1L 7.^v 1 derman 4:30 pm Patio of which they are undeniably a product. This is not to negate the personal nature of the artists' expression, but even this is but a thread in the overall fabric of a given cultural condition. It should also be noted that artists do not consciously make "culturally reflectivc" images. The joy, the mystery, the enduring Qualitv of art comes not from the conscious or contrived, but from the sublime infiltration and manifestation of "cultural truths," when [ In* up ^ si | will b: on Fric in th Doors opei Admissioi I HhH m i ftT3 c HbI ( f?r r I ftf": If dffimm ICEORC SUZANNE PLEi MUSK ftr CHARLES FOX Li A I 14 A V! I AMD ll.^VL ViULL^IAl>(, [PGl PARENTAL GUIDANCE Sift *0*1 HUTtltlAl MAT nor It tUITAlU OPEN ATATH pushed to the point of intuitive response by the artists' need to express. In light of this, our latter group, art which strives to identify with an established mode or tradition, is quickly cast into a rather dingy light. Yet this is indeed its fate, for although such art is "culturally reflective," it is not our current culture which it reflects. Thus, in the nf oriiofin Hni;olnn_ VI U1 liOUV, UVTVIUU ment and artistic change, such art is simply decorative. It is interesting that such MAI ring the 1 to TJSC lay, Octol e Golden ci 8 pm i L 91 ifigiWwf, ^^ V4r'"> ri ~!^' ;e burns STARRING in OH. COD! A GILBERT CATLS Hl.M 5HETTE-DAVID BIRNEY * INt?OOUCINC JOSH GREENFELDiCW,N^^ FREDS FOX.SEAMAN JACOB |?ST!0?1 ""SSa.SE CILBERT CAT A Woirv?( < KM Technicolor** S OCTOBER lEATRENEAti decorative, traditional art is always worse than that style which it attempts to imitate. The advantages of contemporary materials and historical hindsight cannot compensate for the missing element that made historical art historical. That missing element is the unhampered, non-conforming impulse that, in its time, made the art culturally relevant. Since it has now been projected out of its historical context, only its decorative elements remain. see Pluralism, page 14 u I m m ! x DAjU Jsio i>er 3 f5nnr J & BOOK II : LOUANNE / JOSH GREENFELD S.MELISSA MILLER ES liom Wciin?r lioi ;ommumcotK>M Compony ^\jJ v worf*#i vol *11 3RD f YOU I