A WEIRD ESSAY
A long road through the European history, till actuals years, has given a discrete example of art to understand the human entity: now - during the 21st century - a lot of differential techniques of art’s operation have given different points of creation to contemporary artist, like me. The great conception of the light has let new tools to interpretate the phenomenology and, likewise, the same existence: the correct question could be: how a great artist should interpretate this grotesque facts - like wars, immigration and economical crisis - in order to improve the human conception of decency?
The answer could be only one: the human conception of decency died during the previous century - the twentieth, in order to be preciser - and now we can only enjoy this unwilled decision. The artist, in these present days, must decipher the actual imago of suffering to give a satirical point of view of them: which is the best way in order to terminates this will? The new translation from b&w (black and white) into color and - with the suitable applications - into canvas should be the new land of Art’s artistic interpretation.
Notwithstanding the new tools’s critiques, a lot of artists have given an important improving to the art of the sequentiality: we could think to Andy Warhol’s canvas, like Marilyn Monroe’s popular module. His conception of worked artistic canvas wasn’t connected with the usual view of handmade work: he tries to revisit the antique form of operation in order to re-create the Artistic Being from the nothingness.
The paradigm of the Warhol’s art is the musicality which every art’s shape have token during his manual creation: we can think to a simple and dramatic object - for example an electric chair - and we can revive its same being with a sound or a smell. Warhol doesn’t shout Watch it! but Smell it!. In this instant born the Industrial Art.
In this dialogue’s moment we can get into a minimal impasse: the conception of industrial momentum of art isn’t related with the fruition of the same art but it’s linked with the hand-work capability of the artist; the pop fruition must be connected with the intellectual capability of the beholder.
Now we can create a small scheme which will introduce us into a more complex argumentation:
- Pop (derived from Popular): a specific connotation related with the artistic witness;
- Industrial: the specific connotation of hand-ability creation of the artist;
This two fundamental column of the contemporary art generates a wonderful complex called: Bipartite Module of the Contemporary Artistic Research (B.M.C.A.S); this dichotomous theory was never ideated, or cited, but it lived during the years in the underbrush of the artistic relationship between witnesses and artists.
Previously we’ve said that the creation could be compared with the specific connotation about artist’s hand-ability, but it could seem reductive: by invoking the definition about Industrial Music we can comprehend the real meaning of Industrial Art.
Citing Jon Savage - and his related partition about Industrial - we can find five different prerogative:
- Organisational Autonomy;
- Free access to Information;
- Anti-Music;
- Use of extra-musical elements;
- Shock tactics;
The real paradigm about Organisational Autonomy could be interpreted with the necessary freedom of the artist, recollected with a useful message to give: anyhow - an Industrial Artist - can free himself in order to let space at the unconsciousness, one of the most important connotations of a freelance artist. So the real use of the I.A. must render a confusional state of the interpretation, in order to shock for a free fruition of the same Art: now we can understand the polemic being which fills the born of Art, and it’s not so weird to find some gothic infiltration or Death’s spectra. Now - between horror and fear - we can comprehend the motivation of the second point, the free access to information. If I’m not linked with common sense or with a usual artistic view, if I’m not lined-up with a unitary vision of the existence, I could be comprised with an outcast: this terrible misunderstanding’s form push the subject to reject the giving information’s thought system. Afar from this system, the industrial artist create a new exemplum of communication and a linked new form meaning’s extrapolation: from a sincere line He want to give a memorandum for the lined-up humanity, only for reveal the slavery of the contemporary society.
So the new access of information wants a revealable freedom: the controversial argument and its linked explication creates an innovative artistic shock.
The Artist’s fortune come from a specific condition, or rather the capability of the artist of upset the viewer: much more the viewer is shocked, much more the artist will be remembered, hated and discussed. Why Anti? Jon Savage spokes about Anti-Music only for identificate the new tools of musical engineering, from the 70’s Mellotron and others: but - for us - the prefix Anti must become a Must! According to our soul we must be antonyms with every dictums, law or rule (about intellectual research, surely):
You do just what they tell you
Repent, that’s what I’m talking about
I shed the skin to feed the fake
Repent, that’s what I’m talking about
whose mistake am I anyway?
Correctly says Marilyn Manson into the Antichrist Superstar’s text. The humanity do, thinks, writes and sings just what they tell you: now I’m calling on you if it’s right, isn’t it?
No, it isn’t.
The Art must regain his power and must drown the ignorance, unseating it with the violence of the intellectual lucubrations: the best sword to fight the beardless identities is our tongue! Try to render your dialectic the most harmful gun ever existed, try to kill the philistine with the strength of a deadly seaquake: finally you’ll prove the joy of the Fallen’s ruinous fall.
Can you recognise the vainglorious soul of our identities? Every times we stop ourselves in order to affirm an external, probably false, something’s interpretation: so not, we aren’t able to recognise the falsity and we aren’t capable - too - to rise up into a structured rebellion! Why, in your not modest opinion? Because we’re subjugated whit an execrable system of necessity, born with the idealities’s death.
So we must be Anti-Everything, but in an intellectual way: to be alway opposed with a conception without a serious motivation could be view as the same ignorance; why? Because to be antonyms requires a major kind of knowledge, dialectic and culture: so we mustn’t be demagogy’s sons but proud Philosophy’s husbands!
Why we have to have a major culture and a grew up knowledge? Because to be Anti-Everything creates a physiological and willed vexations to the system, so - starting by this - we must be able to answer with criterion and cause’s sense: we mustn’t create sorenesses without the capability of fight it because we could get into the ourselves destruction, whose same arrival means the ourselves destruction. In short: tease and don’t be provoked, nettle and don’t be vexed!
About external elements into I.A. - specially into the painting and, more specially, into the digital painting - we can say that they’re normally the constant in our daily life. How? We could think at the silk-screen printing by the yet cited Warhol: it constitutes a primer, as we can call it, and - by that - we can create successive work of Art. The colours’s gradient work, or the modulation onto light’s spectrum, establish new form of synthetic research. Subsequently we can work this elaborated primer with specific software of crosshatches’s UHD simulation or specific simulator of different paintbrushes. Anyhow we render our knowledge onto techniques more cultivated and specific: then we could think about different integration with photos or fragmentations (always with software); photos could set themselves up as other primers, but usual they’re used as integrations or overlaps, always melted with other primers or photos.
The constitution of the canvas - like a printable element - renders the same elaborated work referable to others kinds of integrations, like: the varnish’s addition or some aesthetic insertion as acrylic’s polychrome brushstrokes with the technique of the dripping or the technique of the gravitational trickling.
About normal conception of artistic beauty we must be through with this senselessness: there’s no critiques about Art and Artist but only communicational freedom; some intelligent elements could response about my affirmation with these words, more or less: so, following your reasoning, there’s no critique and all the artistic interpretations must be freed in order to let space about human communication? In my opinion you’re hiding yourself behind a finger; this is a poor delirium of a person affected by some relational disturbs.
No, I only want to break into this delicate argumentations: now - specially in the my country, the Italy - we’re not able to comprehend these kinds of discussions because we’ve the eye covered by greed’s gifts; there’s no interest about intellectual speculations and philosophical ideas. We only want something easy, something that everything can understand without problems: this is the worst thing that an anthropological community can do, or rather to think that culture and linked sons are a mere senselessness! This is madness, pure insanity. Now you’ll understand the reason why I want to shock the witness: without a real trauma - obviously intellectual - the beholder couldn’t react with a personal idea; I’ll try to render this reasoning easier for the viewer: during the disagreement, a person could free himself in order to let space at his own personal conception; it’s an unwilled part of every soul: in front of the broken sureness people react with their personal comments and tastes. So - and I’m more than sure about what I’m going to say - an Artist to be considered important in this period must shock and traumatise his follower: this is catharsis; without it none could be freed and saved from the common vision and interpretation of Art.
WHAT ABOUT
CONCEPTS’S SATURATION?
What is the Concepts’s Saturation? It’s the physiological derivation from the external elements into I.A.: that construct wants to represent the polychromy originated by the superimposition of different channels of communication, in Art are represented by the various techniques that we’ve used to create our work.
More communication’s channels, more shocked people, more interpretations and so: more free thoughts!
I testi, le immagini o i video pubblicati in questa pagina, laddove non facciano parte dei contenuti o del layout grafico gestiti direttamente da LaRecherche.it, sono da considerarsi pubblicati direttamente dall'autore Matteo Bona, dunque senza un filtro diretto della Redazione, che comunque esercita un controllo, ma qualcosa può sfuggire, pertanto, qualora si ravvisassero attribuzioni non corrette di Opere o violazioni del diritto d'autore si invita a contattare direttamente la Redazione a questa e-mail: redazione@larecherche.it, indicando chiaramente la questione e riportando il collegamento a questa medesima pagina. Si ringrazia per la collaborazione.
