I don’t think it’s possible to view art without prejudice. Richardson did. Richardson believed that to be a true connoisseur, they had to be completely without prejudice. I don’t think that’s possible. I mean, even to be a connoisseur, one must be some sort of prejudice to be able to honestly view art as more than just an enthusiast. I think that prejudice is viewed the same way as just preferences. One might like one kind of art or certain elements of art and automatically have a slight prejudice on a different type of art. However, the reason I believe the prejudice plays a big part in art is because of modern art. Now, I love art. I love to look at it and study it and make it. Because of this, when I was 16 and in NYC, my mother took me to the Museum of Modern Art (MOMA). There are two pieces of art that stood out to me enough that I took pictures of them.
The first of the two is called “Essex” and it consists of automobile scraps crushed and shaped into an awesome mass that was suspended against a wall. It was really really cool. The colors are all basic earth tones which was further complimented with the rust color of the metal that inevitably showed through. The shape of the piece is abstract and there’s not a lot of consistency throughout. However, it was definitely one of the coolest things I saw at the whole museum.
The second is called “The Absolute Naked Fragrance.” Now this piece of art I spent a lot of time just staring at because, in my opinion, it was not art. This piece was literally a piece of plywood covered in fiberglass that’s pink somehow. It was a large rectangular piece that stood about 6.5-7 feet tall. That’s it. That’s really it. Like I couldn’t figure out how that qualified as art. I can see how splotches of paint on canvas is art and most kinds of abstract art I find very cool. This particular piece, however, I could just not wrap my head around. I still don’t understand what makes this art.
I digress. My point is that there is really no way to be non-prejudice when viewing art because we are very opinionated and entitled and feel that we have some kind of right to judge someone else’s form of expression.
I think if Richardson had to look at modern art, then he would say it’s not art. I think that one of the biggest reasons Richardson believed that you could be non-prejudice of art is because the art then was all very much the same. There was a specific style that was always used then. I think Richardson would be pretty pissed that we consider some of the strange things we consider to be art, art.
I apologize for the crappy quality of the pictures and would like to add that my mom took the second one and called it “Contemplating Pink” because (as she said) “If that’s art then I can make better art out of it.”
I think that Richardson would find my ideas and my thoughts to be uneducated and wrong. I think that he would believe that I obviously had not done my research and I simply didn’t understand enough about art to be able to properly understand the meaning or purpose of the work.