My two oldest cousins are graduating from college, today and next Saturday. One will end up with some sort of masters degree in Art Education and the other a bachelors in International Politics.
Having been to the graduate show for the first mentioned cousin I almost have to weep for the future of art and, by extension, the human race. I suppose all these folks will eventually become reasonable people, dedicated to creating useful things in order to feed, clothe and house themselves but is the exploration of boundaries and creativity obviously encouraged in art school really neccessary? Not that I saw anything obscene or offensive – well, the dude that incised a 1×1 cm piece of his head and placed it in a reliquary on display might be called offensive – but most of it was the sort of thing that makes you scratch your head and ask, “What’s the bloody point?”
Naturally my brother loved it, he could see the angst and troubles that caused people to create such momentous works as Bee-yotch! I particularly loved the display of formless finger-painting on a grand scale that the artist’s explanation indicated was prompted by her recent discovery that she was from a single parent family and was not breast fed as a child. The jury is still out on whether these people need to do more or less drugs.
I think everyone’s favorite was the hindquarters of a horse, mounted on the wall as if the front half was on the other side. While we all contemplated its meaning I offered the explanation that it was a representative self-portrait. You draw your own conclusions.
The only positive side of the art school I saw was the close proximity of creative people led to some nifty posters for shows and the best thing seen all day: on the top step of a flight of stairs was written “Tripped,” then on every succeeding step was written “Fell,” and on the landing below was drawn an outline of the person with the word, “Bam.”
Now that’s what I call good art.