At the age of 52, I’ve just had a taste of a real education. Inspired and greatly informed as never before. A genuine interest and food for the soul. Thank you sincerely
With the advent of AI Art, this video is more important than ever. Thank you, you're not only one of the few great contemporary master painters, but also a profound philosopher.
I very much appreciate Nerdrum's view on art and craftsmanship in our modern times as well as his own efforts to turn the tide. A man who should be listened and given more credit to. As a painter myself I hope to learn from him personally in the future.
I really appreciate what Odd is doing together with Roger scruton and others. It is time people start to fight against modern bullshit ! Its time to wake up ! Its time people start painting for real and create beautiful buildings to the eye ! Right now everything is depression !
I agree, it's this idea that anything can be art, but why is classical art or anything in the past considered evil? Classical art is not evil, the reason why contemporary art or modern art influencers don't want that return is how heavily it influences the regular people who like and think about art, they want to create new things. They don't want that power to be gone that in the past their revolutionists have fought so hard for.
@@javierpacheco8234 You have absolutely right of course. And in a minor level the modern artists don't want a change like that because out of the blue they will be nothing since none from them can actually create something beautiful. Only some exceptions exist and they are rare AF.
In these times where so many banal topics are discussed, it is wonderful to listen to this type of opinions, on art and philosophy. Very interesting video, i think it’s very important to bring this kind of topics to everyone, thank you so much.
I have been closely following Odds work for quite a while now.Before I knew anything of him I used to feel their was an Art Mafia that controlled the Art world and so glad Odd uses the term Art Police and elaborates the evolution of how Art aesthetics have changed since Kant. Has helped me a lot to understand the big picture. I hope he continues this type of dialog as I always look out for anything he has to say about Art. I love seeing good Art but it seems quite rare in Australia which is flooded with Contemporary works which I have very little interest and get bored as soon as I see it displayed anywhere. Thank you for this Post on RU-vid
Awsome video. 🌹 To me it explains it all. Why i feel the way i do in contact with modern art, modern music, messed up opera preformences. Our so called modern architecture, our litterature and so on... What would this wirld be withiæiut painters as Nerdrum and his high class painters from the past, out outstanding litterature from the past, our classical componists from the past and more... we had been a poor humanity. Indeed we would. Tusen Takk Nerdrum for at du deler din Sannhet som er VÅR Sannhet ❤
i could not have said it better myself. i agree with every word he said. modernism is an epidemic that has fallen up on us, killing the very core of what makes us human, our love and compassion for the world and the potential we have to thrive for a deeper understanding of this universal life that we share with all things. modernism is an idea and only an idea. but on the other hand nature is the best teacher there is and it's patiently wating for every man who seeks that higher love and that shared truth, patiently wating in anticipation like a loving parent for those seeking eyes approaching her in humility, so that it can generously reveal itself and embrace our hearts. there is so much to be gained if only we make the right choices for all the right reasons. but be careful and keep yourself in check. because you could be crushed just as easily as you could be made and remember that we are here to give.
“The first thing that impresses the student of Scandinavian art is the infrequency with which one meets representations of the human figure. Man is here not the center of interest as is the case with the Greeks and Latins. It is nature and natural phenomena that hold the place of honor.” (Laurin, Hannover and Thiis 1968)
Cheers for the quote - yes, this has been true for the longest time. I don't know if it's exposure to other country's art online or through travel, but the art scene in Denmark has just starting to pivot in the last couple of years to more figurative art. The momentum of the abstract and the socially safe things to hang on living room wall is strong though! Google 'Art Herning' (the big art fair) if you are curious what the Danish galleries consider to be the current edge of good taste :)
This hit the spot on so many levels. Thank you for making a fantastic movie. Highest magnitude about art and society. I sometimes wished to be able to say a lot of the words you just said but I have not the skills nor the knowledge to put the artist's words together. Please kindly make more movies explaining phase by phase as for what led us to this situation of poor art and the control of art "police" of the present day. One fantastic outcome of social media on the other hand shows, clearly, that the regular people would so very much appreciate good art and talented artists. More so they can distinguish beautiful real art from what the art police wants to push on them. Thanks to social media I, for instance, am able to witness wonderful art. The ridiculous art pushed on the public must be narrowed down and the great evolution of the Mannerism, baroque and the schools that worth seeing must at all cost prevail. The digital age can and shall push away and maybe force the washing of the dirty hands of corruption as well in art and in society.
You have articulated my soul's journey. Suffering under the 'modern' trend as a teen who had just discovered Rembrandt (a prairie boy from the plains of Canada where this was not the curriculum), I continued studies in music (which also was under attack from those same police). Zeus! This was a rape of a potentially ever-evolving culture and aesthetic. You are the mentor for whom I sought all my life. Your work and presence give me hope. No longer do I care about my age; damn the torpedoes!💐
So lifelike were his paintings that, once in a competition to paint a horse, Apelles felt that his rivals might be judged to be better. He asked that horses be brought to the contest and be shown the pictures that had been painted. Only when they saw his picture of a horse did they neigh in recognition. -Pliny
It was Apelles, says Pliny (XXXV.88, 81), who established the reputation of Protogenes when he made it known that he, himself, was buying his work with the intention of selling it as his own. Only then was the artist appreciated by his countrymen. Once, he visited Protogenes, only to find that he was not at home. On a large panel in the man's studio, he painted a single fine colored line. When the artist returned and saw what had been done, he knew his visitor to have been Apelles. He then drew an even finer line in another color exactly over the first one. When Apelles came again, he drew a third line, this time so exquisitely fine that no other could be drawn. Conceding defeat, Protogenes determined that the panel should remain as it was, to be admired for its artistic virtuosity. Pliny saw it displayed in the palace of Augustus on the Palatine, a seemingly empty panel except for the almost invisible lines, where it was more esteemed than any of the masterpieces there. It was destroyed by fire in AD 4.
For some reason the art police accepted everything I have painted, no matter how amoral or unethical it was, and this forced me to research Kant the more and agree with what you are saying - that is to say, to find better inspirations to create art that would be of more value, which would be inspired by Kant, inspired by Hume and so on. Thanks for your lecture!! Best wishes from Reykjavik, Iceland!!
Thanks for showing the excellent Art made by your students in their original state as highly skilled Artists with a story to tell. Nick Alm is an amazing narrative Artist painting a complex narrative that gets deeper with more detailed viewing.
This is a rather scary video. There are a few narratives as to how contemporary art got to be so bad and now dominate the "artworld" and why it's overly emphasized in universities. Certainly I think Hegel and Kant had influence, but I think the primary reason modernist thinking is so dominant and won't go away is because the primary function of contemporary art ideology is to allow people with no talent to pretend they are artists. And when you remove the ability to critically analyze the quality and the difference between good and bad in a work of art, not only does it make the work egalitarian, it hands over the authority that the best artists had to people who benefit from a lack of objective discerning ability. What I mean is, the curator and gallery director, with no artistic understanding or ability suddenly have the power to pick and choose whatever he/she likes based on fashion, ideology - whatever, rather than the quality of the work or message within. And as a result of the lack of subject matter contemporary art is the safest art in the world - a great benefit to those in power whose values might otherwise be questioned by artists. Read Frances Stonor Saunders: The Cultural Cold War to get an idea of how modernism is used to obtain great power. Art is very political, even if an individual work says nothing, the movement is incredibly beneficial to the powerful, not for us, the general public. The universities should not be supporting modernist ideology. It shouldn't be taught. There are many other ways of thinking and of working to create great art.
Unfortunately the teachers will not follow that idea, they will reject it Becuase of the fascist and socialist laws that have been put in our Academia and the ones who do want this change, are only a few small people.
Thank you for the video. It's interesting to hear you lay out the philosophy behind your painting. I disagree with the notion that Kant believes an artwork should be judged solely based on a "whim". It's true that Kant allows for a subjective reaction in what he calls "the agreeable" reflective judgement, but he then goes on to state that an artwork should aspire to go beyond this to a level which contains an objective truth - the "good, the "beautiful", and even the "sublime". Based on Kant's focus on moral objectivity, it would seem logical that he applies a similar framework to the judgement of artwork. Perhaps the confusion arises from his ideas of "subjective universal" judgments which allows for the introduction of new ideas of morality that the judge believes "ought" to be universal. It is then not surprising that bad actors could use this wiggle room to see what they can get away with based on a lazy interpretation. However, I believe Kant held himself to a higher standard and intended for these moral explorations to always have the Categorical Imperative as their standard. Thus, I disagree with your claim that Kant has destroyed the common language. If such a state exists, which I think is very debatable, it is the result of a misinterpretation of Kant's work.
Veldig glad over å finne aktivitet igjen, på denne kanalen! For meg, Odd Nerdrum, du er den største kunstner her i landet, i vår tid!Jeg kan ikke berose meg av å være inntelektuell.....for meg er kunst kommunikasjon, og når noe berører meg, er jeg takknemlig for det!En gang på slutten av 60-tallet, fant jeg et foto av deg i et ukemagasin. Poserende, foran et maleri. Der du hadde kopiert "gamle mestere"! Totalbrudd, med det som da var "på Mote".Jeg klippet det ut, hang det over senga mi. Det ble en slags veiviser:Det du maler, gjør du med største dyktighet! Hvert eneste penselstrøk bevitner om at her handler det IKKE om billig uttrykk!Bare det å kunne nyte maleriene dine, på det planet, gjør meg takknemlig!I tilegg, alt det andre som formidles.......! Takk!
Nice video. Philochrony is the theory that describes the nature of time and demonstrates its existence. Time is magnitive: objective, Imperceptible and measurable.
Thank you for the video. I didn't know the artist until now. That's why it would have been nice to see his face. But well. Those who have eyes to see and ears to hear will notice that in architecture, the visual arts and music, a mindless state prevails. We owe this not least to those who think they can determine world events at the moment. That is why I do not understand how one can be so short-sighted as to falsely blame the philosopher Kant for this. Therefore, many thanks to the commentator
There's nothing we could do about it, the evidence is warhol it's like he predict the future, what we can do as an individuals, artist or not or every form of expression, we should stay in what we believed or perspective, but one thing is to avoid hatred to one another
I have always found modern architecture prison-like and modern paintings the sloppy experiments of teenage adults. Odd Nerdrum eloquently and with a historical perspective explains how poor we have become without ornamental buildings with soul and paintings without craft and the power of transcendence. Not surprisingly, Norway, my home country, has been too small-minded to truly appreciate the artistic and intellectual genius of Odd Nerdrum.
Excellent articulation of the deviation from the basics of Art.The so called modern contemporary theory is delineating what makes Art meaningful. It is time we turn our heads to appreciate what real Art is. The classical are the right approach, not this colour saturated, throwing of colours in white boards without form. We live in a democratic society now and one must have a choice, like Nerdrum reiterated. An option to choose between abstraction and the real Art ( classical). The unilateral approach to teaching Art needs great overhaul. That must change...
One philosopher needs to be mentioned, too: Ayn Rand (1905-1982). Rand's philosophy, like Aristotle's, is also an antidote to Kant and modernism. Another antidote to modernism is the young composer Alma Deutscher (2005- ). She, like Aristotle and Rand, is a courageous genius of great talent. Listen to her play the debut of her Piano Concerto No. 1 in 2017: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-bWlAgksUQyo.html
Even Aristotle points toward "abstract art" in Poetics when he states the definitions of visual expression. There are those that seek to imitate, (and to paraphrase) there is a form of visual representation that does not seek to imitate using simply colour and tone. Aristotle seems not to have made value judgements here. Only to say that there are those that will imitate something better, something worse or something the same as themselves. The problem with the post Kant world is that concept of "hero" has degenerated to fucking Spiderman.
At 10:10 it should be "...Bizet, Stravinsky and Ravel...". George Bizet (France), Igor Stravinsky (Russia) and Maurice Ravel (France) were classical music composers.
Emanual Kant's Art Police: Ortega Y Gasset Herbert Reed Walter Benjamin Wittgenstein Adorno Heidegger Harold Rosenberg Clement Greenberg Danto Herman Broch Marcuse Etc
This is a truly bizarre video. I can’t tell if Nerdrum hasn’t read Kant or is deliberately-for some strange reason-misrepresenting him. He gets Kant wrong-colossally wrong-right from the start: Kant never claimed that “children’s drawing are always art.” Kant says nothing about children’s drawings in any of his writings that I know of. And he certainly doesn’t mention them in “The Critique of the Power of Judgment.” And it’s grotesque to say that “preborn talent untainted by empirical knowledge” is what Kant calls “The synthetic a priori.” The “synthetic a priori” has nothing at all to do with that. The “synthetic a priori,” in Kant’s Theory of knowledge, is a form of judgment-as opposed to “analytic a priori” judgments and “synthetic a posteriori” judgments-that make possible human knowledge. While by definition they are not judgments based on empirical data, they make empirical knowledge possible and place scientific inquiry on firm foundations. Kant does, it is true, allude to what we might call a “preborn talent” in the Critique of the Power of Judgment, but he calls it "genius," and further, implies that “spirit" is an inborn talent that generates "aesthetic ideas." He considers it to be the key attribute of artistic genius that allows certain artists to make work that is “beautiful,” as opposed to merely “mechanical” or ‘academic,” which are the results of “imitation.” But Kant is very clear that you can’t have beautiful art if all you have is "genius": for art to be art at all, there has to be "something academically correct," something "grasped and followed according to rules” .”(§§47): "every art presupposes rules which first lay the foundation by means of which a product that is to be called artistic is first represented as possible.”(§§46) There is, therefore, very definitely empirical knowledge involved in making art. So, a child’s drawing, according to this, would NEVER be art. It is true, he follows up by saying "beautiful art...does not allow the judgment concerning the beauty of its product to be derived from any sort of rule that has a concept for a determining ground." So while there has to be an ‘academically correct” foundation for the beautiful object to be understood as art at all, it is “beautiful”-in the very specific sense Kant means of “pure beauty”-only when a genius takes the rules of art and invests them with a transforming spirit. That transformation is not the product of rules, instead they give, in effect, a new set of rules to art. That’s a pretty convincing description of what artists that Nerdrum clearly admires-Veronese, Caravaggio, Rembrandt-did with the traditions they inherited: they assiduously studied the tradition of painting-thereby providing the “academically correct” foundation that Kant refers to-and then enhanced that tradition by establishing a new set of rules that created “the beautiful.” If artists never did that, then we would not see the development that we see in art from Giotto to David (keeping strictly within the tradition that Nerdrum seems to want to return to.) Kant’s theory could just as much bolster Nerdum’s approach to art as it could be used to think about Modern Art.
Si, lo que Kant habla es paralelo al concepto de Daimon, concepto que sobrevivió el academicismo inmovilista superándolo, por el innatismo.Goya, Rembrandt no fueron académicos estrictos como Mengs ,Jordaens, teniers que son vistos como buenos normativos reglamentarios aburridos pictóricamente hoy, sin "Genio" .No hay que idealizar el pasado,Rubens tiene obra sublime y basura, y tenía un batallon de asistentes.El arte tiene aspectos que evolucionan y mueren.
It should be canon that Odd Nerdrum apprenticed with Bob Ross .His love for the joy of painting was put into him by Ross.You can now buy the odd nerdrum joy of kitsch kit ,complete with robe and white wig
Perhaps Kant and his ilk are the weavers in The Emperor's New Clothes; the public (excluding the child pointing out the truth) is the emperor, and the emperor's nakedness, revealing a lack of talent, is modernism in art and other arenas.
Nerdrum may be a fantastic artist but he cuts a very poor figure as an historian of ideas. The amount of disinformation in this video on the subject of Kant’s aesthetics should be both shocking and distressing to anyone who has ever read Kant themselves. Section 50 of the Critique of Judgement essentially goes against Nerdurm’s entire characterisation of Kant in this video, as someone who values individual expression or ‘whim’ over craft. In fact, the letter of Kant’s own argument (notice the complete absence of any direct quotes from the thinkers discussed in this video) shows that for Kant precisely the opposite was the case. Kant writes, ‘Taste [i.e. formal craft]… is the discipline (or corrective) of genius. It severely clips its wings, and makes it seemly or polished; but at the same time it gives it guidance, directing and controlling its flight, so that it may preserve its purposive character. It introduces a clearness and order into the plenitude of thought, and in doing so gives stability to the ideas, and qualifies them at once for permanent and universal approval, for being followed by others, and for a continually progressive culture. And so, where the interests of both these qualities [taste and genius] clash in a product, and there has to be a sacrifice of something, then it should rather be on the side of genius’ This passage alone disproves some of the more spurious accusations Nerdrum levels at Kant, such as at 23:11 the suggestion that for Kant ‘The Genius doesn’t need knowledge, and neither does the critic.’ It is rather the case that for Kant the artist must possess the formal knowledge requisite for ‘directing and controlling’ the flight of an otherwise unwieldy impulse of genius. At 23:52 Nerdrum places Kant on the side of a radical relativism, in contrast to Aristotle for whom the purpose of art is to ‘convey universal truths.’ We can see in the passage that it is actually the case that for Kant taste was required to qualify a work of art ‘for permanent and universal approval.’ And rather than seeking to ‘orchestrate complete cultural Armageddon’ - as Nerdrum suggests at the close of this video - Kant believed art should be suitable ‘for being followed by others… for a continually progressive culture.’ Lastly, Section 52 totally goes against what Nerdrum implies at 22:15 about the inimical nature of Kant’s aesthetics to an aesthetics wedded to morality. Kant writes, ‘where fine arts are not… brought into combination with moral ideas… the above [art as mere superficial enjoyment] is the fate that ultimately awaits them.’ To the lay the blame for the absolute state of modern art wholly at Kant’s feet is an extremely limited analysis. The question we should really be asking ourselves, if we want to understand what has happened to the art world in modern times, is why some people have so grossly misinterpreted Kant’s philosophical system to make it mean something that he did not intend - as I don’t disagree with Nerdrum that this type of relativist sludge is what some very poor intellectuals might associate with Kant’s aesthetics. What forces - material, cultural, intellectual - have motivated this misinterpretation?
6:20 - “A prolific artist of the 20th century once quoted Kant in this way: I do not paint Nature, I am Nature.” Would anyone like to say who the 20th century artist Odd is referring to here? I’d love to know. Thanks.
I learn now the influence Kant's philosophy had on all kinds of disastrous events. Poor Kant. He himself would be thrilled at such influence. Intersting video with lots of springing boards to start thinking about many things. Who says nazism and communism are gone? I believe they still scald certain corners of the world. Who compares the art police to nationalism and the tyranny of the 'masses'? As much as I like Nerdrum's art...his 'melancholy" and his theories have a certain formula that feels as contrived as anything else.Nothing wrong with it but even Rembrandt had a cheer sometimes. I appreciate traditional talent in art as much as anyone else but you don't promote it against lazy modernism through victimism and dark chiaroscuro videos. His outlook on art is meditated and thoughtful but looking at his bituminuous pictures is not a window to the wonders of Renaissance and Baroque masters, only a limited slit into the variety of invention of artists and their use of skill. So while I agree there is much institutional modernist crap, I think there is really no persecution of traditionalists and, moreover, whatever persecution there was was compensated by sales to the public. I think Nerdrum is at the level where he would like institutional support (and tax free status) to come his way like it does for the Hockneys and Jasper Johns of the world. I am sure he is well aware that whining a bit will get him some.
I already knew pretty much all of this, and it's a nice overview of the basics. But I'm not a fan of this being available on such an easy platform, and understanding without critical thinking is just gonna lead to misunderstanding... He said pop artists today exactly does copy our time, exactly what philosophers in modernism agreed CANT take place anymore... Art can't be fast like our time is, and abstract art served at first a purpose of distancing away from the institutional time. Also you can't just take Kant's word for art very easy... His vision of beauty was mostly found in nature, to understand Kant you must translate his philosophy and indeed his proceeding philosophers are just as important, where Hegel was precisely occupied in art. I was hoping to see some critique on the genius.... The problem is certainly that modernism have being turned into all the wrongs, but look at what arts focus on the genius lead to; modern time from the baroque to modernism is a result in art still being incredibly genius oriented.
To be fair, he doesn't. He is technically skilled, but puts it all into modernist contexts. His paintings are completely without content. He just paints technically good and puts in some references to popular modern and postmodern artists and modern society. He does it to sell. It's easy money and easy art. No emotion. No narrative.
Well.. its very sad to see people have been studying for years and years to make art paint and so on.. And in the galleries it comes out as garbage. Wasted time. I could make it better myself. Much better. Nerdrum is speaking TRUTH ❤ By the way im norwegian and very proud of it when I see Nerdrums artwork. Its awsome.
And we do have a problem in the arts as that started with Immanuel Kant’s Critique of Judgment. The lack of a psychology of the unconscious mind led to the belief that a child’s drawing was art, created from a preborn talent untainted by empirical knowledge. Actually, a child’s daring is a first stepin learning how to draw, while empirical knowledge leads to the mastery we call the art of drawing, which is a big step above an amateur. A cement angel on a church step is a sculpture, but it is not the art of sculpture. Today we make a fetish of amateur art but that remains a marketing tactic to benefit vested interests, and won’t stand the test of time.
The commodification of beauty into investment potential is inherent in capitalism. The "art police" are capitalists, not Marxists, Marx was a humanist, not a Bolshevist. Mr Scruton pedals the same old conservative myth, ad infinitum.
Celestial Teapot great point. capitalism is America, we revolve around making money and nonstop commercials. Trump is the idea that represents American values. Art is just another product one can purchase of trade
I have always appreciated all types of art. I like Van Gogh but he's not Raphael....I like Monet but he's not Mantegna ...Who is crazy enough to think that Basquiat has more value than Ingres..lazy observation and an inclusion of all art has become the norm...how tragic!! Let's not make progress in technology either, or medicine!a return to plato's cave!!!
Mmm ok, maybe not in the museums, but nevertheless "classicism" has persisted in graffiti art, which is mainly representational and humanized... And they are very much into technique as far as I know. Even into trampeloieil
Nerdrum wants a droll dead art of old responsible grandpas! This is why he paints with a dead brush into the soppy browns and dead flesh tones of a pile of mud!
Well.. his work comes out AWSOME... I can look at his pictures for ever... never get tired... Its a nerve... its a soul into it... and skills.. all from another world... ❤ The modern shit is shit...garbage. In galleries when I see it I curse it and run away...... Many do. I promise you.
The first rule in a Art is ...that there are no rules ... and there is only one person that can decide what is Art ... and that is You! don't let anyone tell you otherwise :)
The phenomenon was named the Dunning-Kruger effect by the two researchers, and describes how those who know least often overestimate their own knowledge, while - to a lesser extent - those with a lot of knowledge overestimate the knowledge of others.
@@sveingeraldhansen7275 it is ok to hear rational thoughts about why something is good...thats learning... But if you just go with what others say just because they are supposed to know more... Why do you even go to a museum?
@@Shazzyshell You can have your own opinion, of course. But I bow to science and to others who have more knowledge on the subject. I know that science is changing, and so must I. To be informed.
@@sveingeraldhansen7275 mmm more than bowing I'd use the word "learning"... But a learn that doesnt close, but opens your world, that doesnt tell you what is good or bad to draw you into a dogma.
@@sveingeraldhansen7275 i dont thing that doesnt make your opinion less valid, but i wonder, if you dont dare to have an opinion/experience, if it matters whether you see art or an empty wall.
Why is Kant always blamed for the downfall of painting? I personally feel as though it has more to do with the invention of photography within the past 100 years. It's very difficult to beat the realism that is shown through a printed photo. Downfall of music could even be blamed partially on the invention of electric powered musical instruments, amplifiers, software used to create music, synthesizers, etc. Books have not been effected (yet) since it has always been linked to written words and speech so it can't be modified like music or effected by things like cameras and photo printers.
What have we won? A comprehensive list of 3 items?? Is this a distillation of the main benefits or a cherry picking to marry with the premise of this argument? Do I love the "Art World" as it stands? NO! But like all things historical can we really see our present time through a myopic lens? Modernism was an exciting foray into the expressive possibilities of paint. Kant and his aesthetic rumination was an influence but so was the advance of technology (photography/paint in a tube), the appreciation of Oceanic, Asian and African traditional art (Primitivism),the onset of war and the disdain felt for tradition and classical realism (which supposedly represented cool rationalism), the exploration of the newly discovered field of psychoanalysis and the subconscious (Freud/Jung) and the list could go on and on if I had the time and erudition to continue! My point is we now have what Postmodernists term an "expanded field". Art has opened up in an exciting way to accept all mediums and all comers. Now your gender or where you are from is not necessarily a handicap to your aspirations to make your life a creative one (or at least this is the narrative presented). I would have more respect for Odd's discussion if he afforded the artists he chooses to illustrate his points (one of which is the accusation of a lack of sincerity), some explanation or at least NAME them so we can look at their art not just in isolation but within the context of a corpus of works. The self portrait he singles out by the renowned artist Albert Oehlen is amateurish but that is the whole point of the work (see quote below) Qualities that I want to see brought together: delicacy and coarseness, color and vagueness, and, underlying them all, a base note of hysteria. -Albert Oehlen This amateurish quality he derides is a quality this artist earnestly and sincerely pursues. The other work that also remains nameless is that by Basquiat another artist who would flip in his grave if he were accused of lacking sincerity about his art practice. Basically Odd what I am saying is, chopping down other art and artists is not a great methodology to promote what you do. It comes across as mean spirited. My son is a musician. When he studied Jazz at the Sydney conservatorium he did it around ALL genres of music (Classical, Contemporary, Jazz, etc etc). Respect for sincere effort to be creative was the institutions aim. Art schools and artists could learn so much from this inclusive approach. Musicians respect but the Art world is about ephemeral fashion and clique snobbery. So I agree that the craft aspect of art has become poorly respected BUT attacking other artists in anonymous fashion is impolite. Admittedly it is also a tired strategy used time and again by art movements of the past.......Why not let your brush do the talking? It provides the most powerful testimony to your heartfelt beliefs!! Incidentally I liked the talk and the ideas, just didn't like the swipes at fellow painters.....
Immanuel Kant is almost funny, because he must have adopted the Gospel of Jesus . where its said that man is saved, not by WORKS, but by faith . Kant copies (imitates) the the Gospel and says, critique of art, is done on a whim not by craft . Is Kanth here preaching another Gospel ? Toward the end of the lecture Nerdrum says that Kant brought down the Tower of Babylon of classicism, in so doing, created a new tower of babylon that is "the modernists" . Whatever Babylon is at a given time, dont be part of it, let them have it . Do you have to sell your soul, to sell commerce to the world ? Is the system, replacing faith God ? If so its Babyon For it is written 2 Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
“ Immanuel Kant changed our Heads “ The way Copernicus changed our solar system 🙄Hating on Kantian metaphysics is as backwards as saying the sun revolves around the earth.
The modern fine art world is definitely a dogmatic religious institution, however all of Odd's pupils work looks like lesser copies of his own pieces, I'm not impressed. Modernism was not only bad, enormous progress has been made in the fields of design, photography, film and architecture. The art of the 21st century emerges as a convergence between the representational and the abstract. Old critics will die off along with their dogmas. Personally I don't give a fuck about criticism or ideologies, I don't need PERMISSION to make the work THAT I WANT TO MAKE.
You know, if Rembrandt were alive today, I'd like to hear him talk too. But you know what I'd like more? To watch him paint. Frankly, there are plenty of videos of people talking and rambling on. But one day, Odd will be dead. He's not so young, yes? I'd rather watch him paint in silence then hear him speak. I think his philosophical ideas would be better said through quiet work then dramatic soliloquy. There's plenty of that already. Words fail, unless you are a poet. He is a painter, show him painting!
