Letters from abroad

BOLOGNA, Italy – When I hear people railing against modern art and its lack of aesthetic value, I usually get upset. Most try to compare abstract works to the masterpieces of the Italian Renaissance or to the brilliant colorations and light patterns of the impressionists. This causes them to draw the conclusion that modern art is “worse.” This simply cannot be done. With each new period of art comes new techniques and, more importantly, new theories.\nWhile I would definitely not consider myself an expert on modern art theory, I have formed some of my own ideas about its principles. For example, I feel that modern pieces do not place a heavy focus on aesthetic value. Works are no longer created to be “pretty,” they are created to express ideas. The “art” no longer lies in the actual finished product, but rather, the artist’s creative concept. The physical manifestation of the idea is what the artist presents.\nModern art is also very egocentric. Pieces can no longer be interpreted on the surface, where the average viewer can appreciate their value. Therefore, it is necessary to understand the artist’s purpose to fully appreciate each work. It is oftentimes very difficult to enter the minds of the artists, and truly see their visions, so it can be said that modern pieces are created for the artist, not for the audience. \nI have little tolerance for modern art exhibits where explanations and information about the pieces are not provided. This weekend, I went to the Museo dell’Arte Moderna di Bologna, and found such a display. I looked for a brochure that would give me some insight into the pieces that I was viewing, but found none. As I wandered around the museum, I couldn’t help thinking how utterly weird most of the pieces were. There was a video clip, titled “Bouncing Balls,” that was just a shot of a nude man from behind who was bent over, and swaying so that his testicles were bouncing off of his legs. \nNow, how am I supposed to be able to appreciate that, without some explanation? What in the world was going on in this artist’s head? I began to sympathize with the museum patrons who simply laugh and brush the artist off as a nutjob. I believe that the artist had a purpose, but without any information about his thought process or that of any of the other artists, the entire museum seemed like an over-sexed freak show. Every piece seemed to be created solely for shock value. I was severely disappointed. \nI never believe the “artsy types,” when they draw conclusions about modern art pieces, simply upon viewing them. I hate it when I have to hear someone wax poetic about the “apparent reference to the women’s suffrage movement of the early 1900s as depicted by this lone man’s swinging testes,” or some other similar crap. One would have to be a mind reader to interpret this piece – and all modern art. \nIt irritates me when people do not stop and open their minds to the revolutionary ideas of today’s artists. However, the artists seem to not want the audience to share in their concepts. They close the significance of their pieces when they do not explain their intentions, and they then wonder why the general public brushes their works off as ridiculous and meaningless. It is a paradox that may only be solved by the next major artistic movement.