If you've read previous blogs, you know I have a problem with the art world, so in this post, I'm basically going to jot the entire thing down so I can refer people to it later. It should be noted that this will basically be a rewrite of my 25 mark essay for the Art HSC.
Art died after modernism. Reason being, that everything up before modernism was a representation of visual life. Modernism was brought about after the invention of the camera forced artists to question "what is art?". Everything prior, in case you were wondering was basically the renaissance era with romanticism and neo-classicism and whatnot. Modernism is basically all that hoodoo people seem to think is bizarre looking, but don't question its intent. (Picasso, Monet, Dali.)
POST MODERNISM HOWEVER, is that nonsensical array of colours people seem to unrelated to the art world simply because they don't understand it.
The problem I see with the logic of this is that pre-modern works dealt with what you could see. Modernist works dealt with what you could experience and feel. Post-modernism basically ran out of places to hide and rather than finding a nice gutter to sit in, decided to flash its hairy balls upon the world. Fuck.
The general thing I'm trying to say is that people are trying to create art for a world that died a long time ago, and has for a long, LONG time needed a new meaning because for the last 4 decades, it's basically been the newer generations trying to beat a dead horse -- no, a dead, zombie horse.
Cultural significance would be a key part of the core definition, as really, art is simply a place holder or a historical identifier of a time period, but to think that todays art could compare as importantly to the world like Caravaggio's religious works in a heavily Catholic Sicily would be stupid and nonsensical.
Hooray, art jokes no one will actually get.