|
Introduction
I have always wanted to examine the issues of
interpretation, fetishism and gender- issues claimed by art historians and
critics alike as significant elements in any work of art. The
purpose of that is to see how research in that direction may yield
something useful pertaining to a better understanding of art. However, I
always think that a full understanding of a work of art must be attained
through an examination at its core, that is, the art’s own reason for
being, NOT by proving its relevance to outer issues which reside at
the circumference of art. Of course, I am referring to that specific kind
of art that steadfastly refuses to be governed under the jurisdictions of
those outer issues.
A work of art’s reason for being can be found
within the internal considerations of that art regarding its potency as an
agent of communication, such as its structure, balance, movement,
composition, inventiveness and its metaphors. Those are the inner
issues of a work of art as compared to the outer ones. In other words, the
reason for the art’s being lies in the consideration of those inner
issues- enduring factors that may or may not provide beauty, sensuality
and harmony. Those internal issues, if understood intuitively and
approached appropriately, forms the core of that art. The issues of
interpretation, fetishism and gender concern only with the external and
circumstantial effects of that art. They have attracted attention only
because of the art’s presence on the art historians’ radar of time and
space.
Since contemporary
discourses and critiques have placed such an extraordinarily high value on
those external issues, I shall examine the New York master, Knox Martin’s
works in the light of their relevance within the cultural context of the
contemporary world. Eventually, I shall be able to compare such discourses
with Knox Martin’s own criteria about his art in order to reap a greater
clarity of vision for the viewers.
To read the full article (Printer
version)
|
