An inquiring mind
Over the 4th of July weekend I had two separate discussions with two different artists-that lead into each of them putting forth their idea of what constituted being an artist and consequently what then constituted good art. Both of these discussions were casual and each statement made in the moment.
The first artist, Jack Scott, told me that he felt that all good art was conceptual. I should say that Jack, whose work I greatly admire is a conceptual artist. He is also on the board of Bucklew House which sponsors a yearly landscape show (MarinScapes), which I participated in and which he does not, as he is not a landscape artist. In that our discussion took place in the middle of the MarinScapes event, I wasn’t able to pursue the discussion with Jack further, but what was in my mind, was wondering how that concept, the idea that all good art was conceptual, related to landscape or landscape oriented art. When I see Jack next, I’ll make sure to continue this line of thought.
Then on Monday I went for a hike with my friend, the artist, Thomasin Grim. One of the topics that came up during our hike was how each one of us felt that one of the essential aspects of our personalities was that we each had inquiring minds that lead us to question assumptions. We each acknowledged that not everyone enjoyed that aspect of our personality, but those having this aspect of who we were appreciated was essential in an in-depth friendship. I put forth that many artists had an inquiring mind and Thomasin rejoined by saying that she thought that having an inquiring mind was almost the definition of being an artist.
So this brings me to a link between these two conversations and what I consider a basic dilemma of any artist who makes an object that becomes part of the marketplace, or then part of the livlihood of any artist, and that is; one, how does an artist maintain an inquiring mind, make art that begins with a concept or lead into a concept, and not get mirred in reproducing a product over and over again because it has been deemed to have market value? And then the second question, which comes from my recent readings (The $7 million stuffed shark, Seven days in the Artworld) and my current reading, A Peoples History of the United States-how does an artist whose personal moral leanings are with egalitarianism reconcile the fact that the people who drive the marketplace, therefore ones potential clients and collectors are those who often pursue work that perpetuates the inequality of the system and lack of egalitarianism.