I do not have an answer to this question. And I don’t mean to use the term outsider art in a derogatory way.
But the question I was asking myself is can art be classified as high art if the artist has no art training. One of the first things I learnt at art school was that without an art education the art world would not take you seriously. So if an elderly Aboriginal just starts painting without ever having an art education should it be classified as high art. Well I guess the argument would be that the individual has an accesses to a knowledge that is more or less equivalent to the knowledge that any other artist has.
The problem that I have is I come from a very westernised way of thinking and viewing the world. So my instant view that it has to be outsider art. But the majority of the western world does consider it high art. I’ve spent hours thinking about this and I think I have come to a realisation.
The question does just come down to labels. The concept of having different levels of hierarchy in the art world just sounds stupid. Why are we so determined to put labels on everything? I think the concept of hight art is a term that would only be used in the art market anyway.
No comments:
Post a Comment