Studio Talk; The Redefinition of Painting

My guest this evening is Paul Slansky associate professor of Art University of Connecticut. We will be discussing redefinition of painting on the panel this evening. He was a dentist being a painter and teacher at the Massachusetts College of Art. Paulson Lansky Why do you feel that it's necessary to redefine painting or redefine the arts today. Well first of all I'd like to state that I firmly believe in order to have progress you have to really destroy things and rebuild them. And I think the things that have happened in the past 20 years starting with the abstract expressionism start a redefinition of the visual arts. It's a lot slower than literature and music which already have been working on a redefinition for maybe 40 years. And then in the past 10 years. Well what of what is this progress that you're talking. Well all progress as far as I'm concerned is built on some form of destruction. An art form is destroyed by a new

art form. Movement is destroyed by a new movement growing as if necessarily desirable to destroy an art form. Oh I think so sure. Why. Well for instance. Statically as we grow in are affected by different social conditions we couldn't accept the things that other people accept and the same but the same values are for the same reasons. We look at Renaissance paintings today with entirely different eyes we are static a valuation of these using entirely different terms and the artists use themselves we have destroyed it from the artist's point of view what they heard. I'm sure of Raphael heard us talk about his paintings the way we do in an art history class you'd be appalled. Because we're taking the most of the time to love out of it. The feel for it and we talk about it as an analytical thing we're cutting it down to a mathematical equation almost. I've heard people talk about these paintings stressing you can get books even stretching the composition of these people you know showing Solomon's little diagrams

you know. Oh how do I read I'm convinced that this wasn't his intent. Have we destroyed that art form. You know in a way we have yes I think just as sure it is with the invention of atonal music and dissonant music we have destroyed for all times other types of music that still exist but we can never view it. In the same terms have we changed our idea or have we destroyed that which existed previously. I think I think we've actually destroyed because it could never come back to it. Maybe you are using the word destroyed like Humpty Dumpty would in through the looking glass if it's my word I can use it any way I mean. Will you define the word destroyed for us. To destroy something would be like to tell windy that Tinkerbell didn't exist and once when he knew think Adele didn't exist she's destroyed thinkabout doesn't exist even though she had the memories of flying with her. But she does she no longer

exist she she exist on an entirely different level but no longer on the level that she first was conceived at. And this is the type of destruction I mean. You have kids you know what happens when they find out their father has feet of clay. You can never be this. I'm the president who versity the collateral I know but you can never be the son of present person and I think that we when we re-evaluate and give new definitions to an art for we're actually destroying it. We're destroying the personal level of acceptance that this workout at this one time and it could never exist on this again and as far as I'm concerned this is a form of destruction. Sometimes it's for the better. Sometimes it's you know nothing might come out of it but it does happen. And I think we're undergoing a tremendous phase of this right now especially in the visual arts because art now seems to be married to science and people are starting to realize that. I think of it of course. Oh I think that it's

really a tremendous marriage you can get to the point where you can pick up and read about shows that are going on where the the painter is working with the electronical engineer or the composer and both putting. There are titles on the work and they were trying to get something that by the definition of a painting 30 years ago wouldn't be considered a painting today it would be considered a work of art to be considered something of a monstrosity a freak a Frankenstein monster if you like. But today the younger kids coming up I know my talk to freshman and sophomore classes at the university. We have kids that are working with light machines and they're working. One kid is working on a Color Organ where he's trying setting down to transpose a silent wavelength into a color wavelength and you know that in Hockley talk about this quite some time yes but the thing was he talked about it and so didn't Walt Disney when he made Fantasia he tried this type of thing but they didn't go over it these times because the definition of the artist the visual

arts that we had at that time was so. So perfect and so formulated so pigeonholed that if you moved out of it it was just destroyed. I remember having an art teacher telling me that a painting must have in this sitting five things. What are those fights and I can remember. I know you're going to ask I'm going to say color yes. Lie for three. Repetition and content kind. All right but now I've seen paintings was no lines but as a line as such as definition of lie which are seen paintings devoid of color. I've seen paintings with no texture. There are many paintings that people didn't have much time tends to as well texture or repetition. I know I see paintings that lot of people would swear have no content. I think a lot of the optical paintings would be considered to have no content in the terms

in the meaning of the term that was originally used. Content being some form of literal type of like right when it's me. My question goes back a few minutes Paul but now in this destruction of art and painting everything we have different groups of people we have our historians we have the artists themselves ones who make the make the painting we have the the patrons would buy them and the museum directors and hang them in everything now what is there one group in particular that is to say to be given credit for destroying us or is it all happened to various degrees among the groups. Well I did answer it this way. Who makes the diagrams do you mean that diagram such as the compositions of Suzanne's paintings things like this that would be unheard of or not understood by Susanne would this be a good example. No I go back to I wouldn't really would say I would put CS on it but this would probably lead to many people to give me arguments that I don't want to argue about.

I go back to the Renaissance painters that obviously there's an awful lot written about I think that the. Well I guess I get to make a lot of enemies. I think that art historians are fine if they're dealing with art history most art historians that I talk to will admit themselves that they're not really capable as scholarly to give scholarly dissertation on contemporary art much rather work with it as a historical significant personal dissertation on contemporary art. But we had a woman here on the program a while back an art historian who said as admitted that you know the but she felt very strongly that the art historian made art. I think this is ridiculous. While the art historians that I talk to say that the artist shouldn't talk about his work this he should just merely make the work and that the artist Dorian's job and area cetera to discuss it and tell us what is really there in the work of art nobody but in doing this is this destroying into this one form was one we had that one that read something else entirely I think that this is I'm talking of what I'm talking about maybe I should say maybe I used the wrong word

destroy reevaluation which sure is I think a lot but I think that the the art historian has a place in society I think that in former times it was much better defined I think that the place of the art historian our society today seems to be one of giving a smattering of the right dates and right names to these people who are being fed through the universities so they can walk into a museum and say Oh how nice of a go. Why that is because their teachers said you know it's fact and give dates and be very happy. How did things go then. But I think that the art historian has a place to critic has a place to buyers obviously have a place but let's face it the artist makes art. I think that so not only the artist that destroys it all this is mine while these people destroy it negatively as the artist destroys it constructively. Right. Sure and this is the

point of the I was trying to get across I think that your question was helped formulate the idea better. If we cannot destroy it so we can rebuild on it then certainly these I don't want to be parasites but these outsiders who are sort of living on the fringe of this artistic world they really don't have a right to destroy it. I don't care how scholarly a man is about the Renaissance. He can't tell me what I'm doing in my paintings. That's kind of a nice idea you like keep the people these people on appropriate as necessary I like to talk as far away from the RC and I as the artist makes the work he's going to should destroy them. Yes right. Destroy it so that you could build on it. I know personal cases of young painters for instance who would want to push their painting into another of another direction because something happened in gallery owners tell them Don't do it because I'm selling you right now. Now this is a negative type of the screw I think that the artist will for instance.

Again Picasso and Brock destroyed art and rebuilt another art from the bones with the ashes as the Phoenix rose they did something and something came out of it whether it was an intellectual game for them when they went to cubism or not doesn't matter but they did do it. This wasn't an art historian. I don't care if our historians get the title that it goes by. They're not in the they're not in the studio doing it. And I think that the sooner people realize that there's nothing wrong with an artist searching for new ways there's nothing wrong with giving a new definition to visual art. For instance in music now I don't think a serious listener to music would say that music had to have the certain component parts that you'd find in a musicologist book notebook 100 years ago. Because for instance we have people who say Today sound is music now melodic sound but just sound pure unadulterated sound.

And they work with this. And they they have developed a whole new study for this. We have people who need in the visual arts for instance who said right now painting is more than a story on a canvas. It's not a social comment it could be more painting could be the thing that happens between your eyeball and the brain. This is where the movement is in the painting. It's if I could it's like insert it's a store it's like a story that kind of give Brown the card and brighten up the sculptor wrote about once and for ants. We're sitting on a log and obvious on the lock start to move and one answered. Isn't it marvelous to log is moving in a second and said no no no the movement is in our heads. And as to what I had said no no no the movement is the stream taking the law and he proceeded to have a tremendous argument and then he finally looked at the fourth that and he said all right

now tell us which one of us is right. You said you're all right because the movement is in our head. It's in the law and it's in the stream and of course the clinic's episode this will mark a lot. And this is the type of thing that seems to be happening we get these people on the outside you know they're saying that what you're doing is not art. Someone else says what you're doing is a form of art someone else says it is art. And they look to the artist and he says well you're all right. You know if you don't like today find it doesn't matter. Our society is complex enough that if you if you like Andrew Wyatt fine looking ahead to what happens you can go on to say museum and see an Andrew Wyatt and Jackson Pollock in the same music even though both art while the artist is kind of bobbing around in the water after being thrown off a log. How was he supposed to deal with these with the with the problems of redefinition. Would God forbid the artist to get on a soapbox and talk about what he has to re-educate the public in.

Take it a step further he has to go out and be his own best PR man he has to do a little brainwashing and I think this is happening more and more because the status of for more and more artists you know there are a Lord-Master they're allowing us to exist. But I think in our own way everybody in the classroom if you get a new idea if you get very excited about a new form of art no matter how objective you try to be in your classroom a little bit of your own excitement about what you're doing comes in and you start to say ah yeah how abstract expressionism was great but let's see what happened since then you know this isn't the newest day. And sometimes you get people come in and think that you know my guides Renoir this is tacitly modeling you know and then when you bring them up to something new. This is this is sort of giving this to redefinition going it's me how has this affected your or your teaching. Oh I think it's helped me tremendously. I think what ways well it's helped in the way that I think that I'm a little more willing to learn from my students now a student is a

marvelous creature because you do things that. He that I wouldn't do because I know they can't be done and he'll try it. He doesn't know they can't be done. He'll do it and I think you learn this way and I think that if the if a student sees that you're excited about your own time your time. I mean like miking 66 not 64 63 or sixty two. But today if you're excited in new sings a new idea is that your question you more he'll draw more out from you. But if you're a traditionalist and he could get the same thing from reading a Jackson you know well what do you want to bothers to talk to. You going to sit you know drink coffee and talk to someone who's going to stimulate it and I think it makes me stay on my toes. And when I do new things the kids keep on questioning me I think the the questioning of my ideas makes me have to verbalize out and it helps me understand a lot of things that I might have done intuitively and that I still just want to ask one more question. Sure. Now in this new way of teaching and as you're learning etc. I mean I think I am too. Do you feel that you are less and less than

using traditional techniques for teaching traditional techniques or is there much of a gap between that kind of thinking or as little as a total cleavage. Well I think that if I were to teach. Two weeks in some schools that I would consider fairly traditional schools that I would be give my workin papers was no trouble at all. It would be the type of thing that this is all wrong. I know I've talked to other educators that I feel aren't quite as inviting as my own boss and were appalled at the fact that I run my classes the way I do. They're appalled at some of the things that we do in class and some of the things we talk about some of the disciplines that I sometimes go into are some of the disciplines I completely ignore just simply by the fact that I don't really care if a student does a finished product or not the most important thing for me is the thought that goes into it so they can learn to think something I

say idiotic things in class to maybe get a rise out of the kids. I certainly am not perfect and they know this and I think this is good and I think this is contrary to the academic image of the capital T. College professor where you're almost infallible where you can stimulate but you can't be wrong. Did you know I guess I made it to being wrong many times because I have been I in fact I could wake up tomorrow and have a revelation to realize that everything I said today was wrong and then when people ask me about I'll say well that's how I felt yesterday today I changed in my work my change just as quickly and this is good I think this is good I think that again getting back to this redefinition of art the thing that I find so exciting about it is that it opens up whole new vistas of the visual stimuli and visual disciplines in order because this basically is the definition of art its visual disciplines in the world

and I don't think that it has to be confined to just things we do we have a great many people who work today on things that you could flip a coin on to decide whether it's. Flat sculpture are a three dimensional painting and I don't think a lot of the artists really want to make a distinction anymore. It's a it's a work of art it's a visual thing. It has discipline in order to exist in time. It's conceivable that you might have to get to the point where art might be nothing more than a certain branch of art not all are but nothing more than going in and seeing a series of lights being worked in such a way that the art is created with just light which is an intrinsic thing which will never stay which will be just a momentary experience. I think that this might happen I think that we're getting to a point to where art is becoming much more. Right now I'm going to pronounce the word robots

becoming anonymous writers not signing their names on it like they used to it doesn't really matter it's just due to the anonymous art of of our day. Well that's it much more now than any other time and I think this is good I think that we're learning more. I think that the artist is is not like a great many of them were sort of off in the little cloister by themselves that you know they knew it all but I think that more and more of the harvest that they seemed to be by the life the artists are saying my gosh look at all I can learn here I thought I had it all in the you know in a paper bag. And I found out that I just opened a door to the shop there's everything in there. And this to me is exciting and this is good and I think that you know the art historians. You know we think about the past and stay with the past Farai and if they want to talk about the future or about the present let them. Well they'd have to change their term they wouldn't be our historians would be critics of our today

and then from what I read of most critics they're still dealing with things that already could be pigeonholed to take little titles to that it's nice you know really not dealing with the guts or the essence of the matter and I think the painters are and I think that the thing that's getting excited and is more and more painters are are willing to take the time valuable time for the thing to write they make a decision to talk to people into talk about their art and another one of the reasons for this I think too is that the artist has been forced into a classroom situation and he's not afraid to talk about his field anymore. The doctor talks about medicine he talks about it with authority because he knows that he's not ashamed of this music professional. Well then I'm a professor. And I don't want someone who is not a professional in my field talking about my field and if I want to change the definitions in my profession I feel I have the right to do it. Well it disturbs me a little bit to know professors and Lansky is that you say I think I would agree with with you your last statement that as a

professional you have the right to change definitions and to to make the statements. But a little bit earlier you were referring to the fact that your students who are either real novices or sort of certainly the beginning journeyman are the people who are redefining the art form for you. No I didn't say that you misunderstood what I said. You made an assumption to the words that I use and obviously it was wrong. Well what what I think you mean when you say that you are learning from your students and they are they and they are not tied down with the definitions of right that you like. What I mean. But I'm learning from my students is that I think that part of the thing. It's much too complicated to just it it becomes a state of being about things that I can verbalize I'd say this is one of the things that I'm learning from my students is something that I had as a student myself that I've lost over a period of time and that is. You know to explore again to get with it to try

to be it's free as a student to have the inhibitions that a student has you know I mean not to have the inhibitions that a student has to sustain you know what I hope it comes out. Do you find you asked your question let me finish. Well I am but I you know I think you're making an assumption here that I don't know that I'm necessarily would agree with well I don't hear you asked me you know how can you say you have to let me finish. Another thing I think that I will you know I'm trying to. Don't interrupt. Another thing Linski. Please go ahead. We do this all the time and other thing I think that I learned from my students is that I should be questioning that which I'm doing and I should be questioning the definitions. I should be looking for answers I should be I shouldn't be afraid to stand up and say what I'm doing or what I'm trying to do or what I did do last year was fun. It was great for last year but Dab a dish here things are different and I'm different and I have to change you know and I get this from my students because boy they come in they might look alike every year and the longer I teach

the more they do look alike. But they keep on coming in in a change. We kids that I teach today are entirely different from the kids I thought 10 years ago and their response was different. And boy this keeps me on my toes and I think this is good and this is how I learn by them and I think that we could if you're honest about it you have to admit that you were these kids. Do you find that they're in their thinking that arms are really all that time all right and that their definitions of art are are emerging broader than yours were. Interschool Well I would say if we put it on a comparative basis like that are there are the student entering college today more broadening the definition and understanding of art than I was when I had to school I'd have to say yes because the time is entirely different. They've been exposed to so many more things than I have when I had to school like abstract expressions this was so far out this was sort of on guard you know you could buy into Coney for a couple hundred dollars right. I mean that's how far out it was to the kid coming into school today. They know an

archduke least are our students most from you know the Coney they you know what he did and they know how far he went and they you know you could talk to him about some of the things I really think this is true under students that are really interested you're making faces but I think it's true. And you could talk to about things that came after that they're excited about the things that are happening today they know about optical are they better than that they know why the foolish thing works and somehow know more about it than I do why oh why. Do you think kids today just know more. A kid at 19 knows a hell of a lot more today than I knew at 19. Obviously I would agree with. It has to be so this way they're more inquisitive and a lot of ways to just as compliant as any student coming into a class to come in with fantastic prejudices about everything and actually it's a teacher's job to help these kids knock down these prejudices. Fine and one of the things that helps knock them down is when they start to realize that maybe that which they thought was art was taught to be art and then they started out as a little bit you know they get to be maybe at home their parents have

beautiful little pictures of Renoir or a Van Gogh or Bo Gad because he's a popular things you know and they have these little reproductions of the Navy except you know for Norman Rockwell or Norman Rockwell and they were told that this was art right and then they get into high school and I have a pretty swinging teacher and a teacher says no you can get into abstract expressionism or you can look at these people and then they this is the cleavage made in the wall of registers. They start to doubt. And they come up to you. A lot of times you know blank faced. Big guy you know like you know when they say not necessarily to me but you hear him talk now the teachers too and they'll say like tell us what is art like if you could put it in a nutshell. And they go to one person say you know walk up to someone they say what is art and his father says art is order and discipline and then you go to another teacher and they say what is art and he says Boy it's God's it's a vocation. And they go to somebody else and they say what is art. He says Well art is in the Open up there at Jansen Bach and they started to beginning in the beginning you had this the cave painting this is art.

And they go through this and so even the kid starts to worry because all these people he likes and he admirers start to give him a little bit different definition and then if you get to know him and he starts to work in your class boy he starts to pick up this. How come you said this and they said this and then you have to realize that if an art is a living growing thing it's flexible it changes the definitions change the things that motivate us to things that motivate the observer start to change and things start to get very exciting you know. And this again is what I think is very important too in this I think is some of the things that a lot of teachers have a tendency of losing and it's. It usually gets to be the teacher who all of a sudden isn't painting anymore because they can't quite you know keep up with this and rather than go into something it meant that maybe they did something wrong or can't give a definition for it or can't put it in a pigeonhole. They go back to sort of the traditional way of teaching and traditional to a lot of people now is

something you would not. They think it's far out but some people say traditional by house training you know I mean this to some people this is so far out but this is roughly the traditional type of training people get. And now and then when the new person comes in you know and starts to say to get kids excited you know he says all right now let's do something. Now what are we going to do. Well I don't know what you want to let's buy a box and see how many things we could do with a box. And someone says you can't teach design that way. Junction Why not what's designed This is why this is Titan. So this is the type of thing that you have to redefine what you know about redefining it. What is the what is the process of redefinition. This is so complicated I really don't think I. I know some of the very good have got I know some of the things that are just starting I think the first step that you have to make in redefinition of any type of art form is a step backwards so you can get a little better perspective of what's happening and this is to stop and see what was the definition. Up until this time

what classes what classified a particular thing. You know literature was this music was this theater was this painting was this sculpture was this. Let's start with that. What was painting. Well I think that just a few years ago painting was considered to be. First of all it had to be two dimensional two dimensional surface. It was a working within a picture plane. Usually working with primarily hubristic space mystical Renaissance space primarily keep distinct the attitude towards it. It was a formal type of relationship of colors to be its symbolic glory of naturalistic or local color but it was this type of thing. I would say would remain primarily the action took place on the canvas and I think then one of the things that came about

in the first start of change of this was when people started to say well how would the formal type of thing did we just need to treat this as this type of space. What kind of picture plane. There could be a different classical interpretation of working on a picture plane and I think this started started to come to a head with the abstract expressions. But I think people started to say well this is fine let's carry this step further let's have some of the action take place up in here in the mind. And they started to rediscover the modern Old Masters. BESSER Ellie Alba those people they're working with. A structure based on color not necessarily on formal composition and then you had people who said OK that's all fine and fine and dandy but aren't you getting much too serious. You know what we need is another good shot in the pants like we had after the first world war. You know

actually we don't maybe we don't have enough sense or taste to really know what a beautiful thing is let's go to the nine again let's not start you know showing what our culture really follows and follow you and you might say that a little bit of this happened with. In pop art. But then some of these things could go a step further because in pop art I think you start to get an introduction of three dimensional forms in painting. They start to do things you know I mean there were other people were doing it too but this was like a first movement that they could start to put a label on. Then people started to say well when they started to work with optical effects in art they started to realize that the greatest producer of color is light itself. And so they started to work with like a great many people working with light now so all of a sudden a painting doesn't have to be first of a two dimensional object. And it is not really sculpture. Well what's the difference between a painting that is not two dimensional and their piece of a vase really wanted make you Summit to basically.

But I think that the attitude in the intent of why was done is entirely different than it's been. I asked my sophomore design students the other day this question that that is very relative to what you've just been talking about. The question was whether whether or not you could or I should say Could you is there anything that you can do with a sculpture as such a sculpture in the rounder sculptural forms that are being created now that are colored as I think you can do with these that you cannot do in painting. Or vice versa is there still something that we can do with the flat two dimensional surface that we've known as painting that we cannot do and in sculpture. In other words where the there's the need shifted you see and I mean. And they can think of very few answers to this and when we finally produce that the only really only reason that you can use this or should use necessarily use I should say the two dimensional surface was for an optical effect of color or using the additive light primaries of

blue red and green and where you have to have a flat perfectly flat smooth surface which create this image. Why do you have to have a perfectly flat surface because you can have a multiplier reading surface acoustical with a multimedia surface planes built up and have to work with color too. I mean you could get to the point where you could start to bring in an interest and an instant of doubt or a whole new world of amazement where all of a sudden the thing could look quiet until you moved in as you start to move then you can spatial allusion changes. Well you know I think some people like to think that they're working with paintings not just on the surface of the painting but maybe going around the edge or going over the top of the page you have to think that maybe this is what I'm trying to do with my painting start. It's three dimensional. You know why should it be confined just to this thing and then I you know I can get into it. I can get into it optically into a picture plane. And I also know now that I can get into it physically. And this is great. Plus I know the fact that I have new materials today that I could work with

that I could do was things that you know I could paint on Plexiglas and set up a series of Plexiglas panes to go back. I could work with light. I could work with light and sound in Plexiglas and I could have read as a painting would from one point in perspective one's bottom space. But as you move around it as you would move around the Orchestra Hall concert hall you know one side here more strings than on another side of you sitting next week drummer in a jazz place you hear an entirely different feeling of the music because you're hearing the percussion you're hearing the beat and if you get up you move to the other side and you hear the melody. Here's something else. Well I think that you can do the same thing in a in a work of art I think that the big definition changes come is that I think a lot of people just don't give a damn now if they were to say well I'm a sculptor I'm a painter you're an artist. This in itself is a you know maybe it's such a fantastic stuff or we're going back to where we were in the Renaissance you know where man so will I be you.

Visual things period. You know if you want to rob me I'll make a round if you want to flat out make them flat if you want to decorative I'll make them decorative it's all the same thing we're not saying now this is going to be you know this is a craft now and this is an art. And this is a minority and this is a major art and this is a sculpture. This is cultural and this type of change I'm not saying. Getting back to the definition I'm not saying I have the definition I'm saying that I feel we're undergoing a change in definition the way music did when the tonal music came into being and the way literature did when stream of consciousness and this type of writing. Dylan Thomas E. Cummings and James Joyce this type of people the troops dying when all of a sudden literature and poetry became something else when music is becoming something else and I think that this is an exciting time because we have a lot of artists groping for this type of change and I think that they need they today are giving more emphasis to this definition of what it is where 20 years ago it was the art historian primarily and the critic I think more and more of the artists are doing it and the reason again I

guess is because more and more of the artists are teaching now and they realize they can verbalize and there's nothing wrong with it because they are professionals I think art is ceasing to be a third rate profession the way it was 25 years ago 30 years ago when it's becoming it's almost becoming fashionable to be an artist you can get invited to parties today not if you're an artist. Twenty five years ago it was a lot harder and people told me as will hard 25 years I really care 11 every day. Well old man I wish you were you. If I was as you go about redefining and trying to to find new new positions I get a feeling that you know what what you've said up to now is that we really haven't necessarily redefined what painting and sort of what the arts are dealing with but that we have done away with the previous definition that in a while this is the first step to saying we need to Humpty Dumpty and he has to sit on his wall a wall

and it might be done. He could fall into completely shattered rock and put it back together again and this is the difficult this is why it's tough for someone to get up there and do it because he lets himself open about this and they are starting to do it he sits up there and he says just like Humpty Dumpty. They work for me and I tell you they mean just what I want him to mean no more no less. And if you don't understand that you're coming that's really not mine and I think by the artist doing this and saying that this is what it means you know mimsy means flimsy and miserable at the same time that's what mimsy means when you say this if you want to mean something else fine but it's not the way I mean it and when they start doing this then I think that when you start to see in definition of something let me let me see if I can explain this I mean you know I listen I'm not saying I'm very dull as that and this is something I don't I don't follow that at all you that island in the normal way. However let me know when you're dealing with communication in our tech mean acacia you must have basic similar experiences. Bishara

right. You know you can explain a hangover to a man who's never had a something to drink never had a headache you know never you can understand now. As peoples will suppose he never drinks and I'll never understand it. That's why you're never under the really understand what a headache is never just like a Mac never really understand what it's like to have a baby. It's impossible you could be sympathetic you know but you really can't understand. You make assumptions on it. I could give a great definition of what it feels like to have a baby but that kind of right off the air. So let it go. Now you take basic similar experiences and as we build basic similar experiences we can have a vocabulary on these things. We could talk about it and we can converse a certain amount of sense. Now this is only when we're dealing with things actually that could be drawn to the objective level. But it was just that we could put it on some plane and say this is it now. When we deal with art we're almost on a bubble of

unreality because you look at a painting and you says this is art. What is art. Art is the thing that all these paintings in the museum have in common sculpture has in common. This is one definition of art in a violin that would relate to our common experience. Yes this would relate to our common experience. Now getting to Humpty Dumpty again. Yeah what I'm trying to make is see if you read Alice Through the Looking Glass eyes you understand that Humpty Dumpty explains to Alice that words work for him which they should to everybody and they only mean what he wants them to mean nothing more nothing less. Well this is what art really is for you. Art means for you what you want it to mean no more no less. If you want to be. I am going to present the thing that you want to take everything into consideration fine. And this is our for you. If you want to be the man who thinks Norman Rockwell who's you know the presence of God on Earth to the painters or if you want to go further than you want to say that you know Al

Capp is the great savior of American art then fine Who. Al Kath. What does he have to do with I. Well I've heard him mention things about art you know where he sets himself up to get definitions of art. And people do this and I think the more and more the artists did it they start to say now art shouldn't have to be a two dimensional surface ARCA be this because I made this in this is art if more of them start to do this then I think that we would start to see things in common between these people in their work that we might not have seen before. And then we could go into a new museum and see new things that never existed in the previous museum and say Ah now the things that these things have in common is art 1066. But it isn't. It doesn't rely on previous experience altering does. I just how would it be like if it's all done outside of the experiences which you've already had with with works of art then

you're confronted with works of art that don't have it. Unless you're assuming that all works of art have something in common I'm not in this so I'm not sure this is true. You are making that assumption you're not making that assumption. I'm saying you could go either way. I'm not going to really get out that part of it so you could hack my mind I will put it down state tell me I will put it this way are you all works of art have something in common. Yeah OK. Order and discipline all works of art have order and discipline just by my definition because they don't have order and discipline then they are not works of art. A is equal to a very. Yeah I make a dogmatic statement. That would be terrible. Now the thing is for instance. It's conceivable for someone to say that certain things that I have seen or they have seen in shows and Archos supposedly they're listed as art and advertised as art or are

not art I have said this myself and the numerous occasions about things that I call very strongly about but under the preview under the normal definition of these things I didn't really know if they were art. They seemed to be closer to a more restricted type of definition that you might give to a basic design problem where you working with very limited type of restrictions. Or they might look to be more like something that is a model or something to be produced for the masses. OK for art. Or some of those things look like very exciting experiments that should be carried out and the South-North Physics Lab at the university or the school someplace where kids are excited and working with things that are of our time because we're really getting with it now you know all electromagnetic magnetic field. Air pressure radar

lights gases you know this type of thing. Now what I'm saying is that I think that I have to be broad enough to say well maybe. Maybe that's it. Maybe I can just say maybe I have to say that art has to be more than just order or discipline. Or maybe it should be art has to be less than order and discipline. Maybe you can say art is nothing more than a pleasing or unpleasant visual experience. And I don't know I'm saying that it seems to me that we're undergoing a stage or a phase if you like where the artist himself seems to be in the same predicament to where they're redefining their own work. They're they're redefining it not necessarily through a bully but a statically you know they're getting excited they're saying with my God you look like I could do I can do so much more than what I thought before. You don't maybe I am a craftsman maybe I should be making you know chest 200 years ago were painting signs 50 years ago but today he maybe this is art and him

or some of the leading artists in a park I mean other things abstract expressionism has been destroyed then right. Well you know it's not everything's been destroyed but it's not all that's fine says it well you know sitting conjecture than ours but who is a possible Humpty Dumpty now today and you and your who what artist is exciting now. You mean besides me. Yeah yourself personally I mean what. Oh yes well I'll tell you I'm guilty of a very very terrible fault because I got to the point where I don't like to go to shows or galleries. That all very seldom I live in a country and I could in the country. But I could tell you roughly who the people I think are the most exciting maybe not by name I think the people who are the most exciting people are the ones who are pushing that which farthest limit. And this would be a lot of the English sculptors who start to work with marginal sculpture. I think this is a start. I think people who are starting to work more and more with color other than color just from A to working with other

sources of color be a light or projection projected I think of people who are also thinking of more in terms of art as more of an experience than just a visual experience whether it's good or bad I don't know. Only time can really tell. People who are willing to change I would have to say are exciting. This is this is all I could tell you who I think is a very exciting painter. Maurice Cantor because if you see his stuff two years one time then go back two years later it's grown it's new it's different it's developing it you know it's a beautiful garden it keeps changing with the seasons. This to me is an exciting painting and I think what he's doing in one way he's pushing his own extremes. But the people that have to hold just a little bit in more respect other people are saying well fine with the picture plane. It's great it works for a lot of people. But I'm not interested in this I want to do something I want to throw a ball up in a year and not have it come down. This is exciting. You know this type of thing just this type of

search and it doesn't matter who does it. You know this to me is an exciting painter or an exciting artist. And he might be something. It might be like Charles Ives you know who might not be discovered until so long after he's done it but he doesn't give a damn like they gave up you would surprise in 1058 I believe. What piece of music you wrote in 1994 and he said the how was it. You know why did you give it to me that I don't want it now. It might be someone like that you know this is great what you're saying sounds very exciting. I was like you know they could be very rich and rewarding. And to be involved with. But I wonder why it is that we don't have more artists who are actually individual. Why do we have so many pale imitations of other artists. Well I think one of the reasons is that if you're an individual you're always going to be called on to explain something whether you do or not you know if you're

leading a group. It's when they point their finger at someone has a wide and a point to think about the guy on their own. And this is a very delicate spot to be in there. The Grammys had a bird seat you know You're Humpty Dumpty. Yes I know a lot of people who want to know it's much easier to say to fall in line and say yeah this is great you know and let him do the work and then you just wait to harvest and do you we're talking about Morris Cantor a moment ago and I suspect that that happens how he is very much the same type of pain. Yeah. And both of these painters spend a good deal of their life working and doing very exciting things and moving out in front kind of standby and years later someone else picking up at a particular point where they were and that person became relatively famous sold a lot of paintings. It became fashionable popular and so on but the guy who actually did it first was was really not known.

I don't know how many people really know what Maurice Cantor has really known. Well I know very few you do and you could say that the difference between Morris Cantor an X artist I'm not going to mention names anymore because I got so much trouble on his program you know. Boy you wouldn't believe it. But you take we do have a listener too. I know but you have to be careful with names because when I say things like It gets back to me now and I never got a letter for which someone tapped me on the shoulder you know and say You stupid so-and-so and let me know about it. I think with some things I think that more scattered because I had the privilege of studying with the man and knowing him is the type of man who just paints I know that he had big shows offered to him and the idea of big retrospective things like this and he sort of scoffed at the idea you know he was interested in painting. I think we have part of our society in our time has gotten to the point where we're a part of the big cell movement you know let's face it the guy makes the most money in art today not necessarily doesn't necessarily have to be the best artist Sokoto has the best publicity going for him the best. You know

a PR man actually I guess some of them really do or you could be a little different you know. Play the game if you want to be a personality we live in an age maybe that's what we live in an age of personalities and personality to me as someone who doesn't do anything it's just a personality we find him on television all the time. You know only they can sing they can't dance but they're there. You know any time the political can always enough political campaigns we find art we find in music. And a lot of times because they're a little more colorful. They're willing to spend more time playing that game and doing it and then these people are accepted in the tastemakers like these people very much because if they have a show tastemakers being gallery people and critics and museum people especially and you can get it if you have a show and you can bring down a couple of these people see that are willing to perform. Also with their work a more I don't mean a formal performance type thing but they'll play the game according to the way that these

taste makers want to and everybody says oh how quaint how cute you know he's got his hair painted silver or green or purple. He doesn't wear socks he swears in public you know he has dirt under his fingernails. And they do the things that they want to do will find and is this is very interesting we bring Iraq a lot of people you know don't even buy paintings they buy artist you know if you if you're not around for your openings or if you're not around at the galleries back and called to be there when the prospective buyers come in a lot of galleries won't touch you. This I know for a fact. And a lot of other places you know if you sell a painting. In Texas when I was there if you saw the painting it was expected that the purchaser would have a cocktail party and veil the painting in the artist at the same time and this was a busy artist's trade all of this is just as much about painting a great entrance would be made and I you know I'm not some supposedly very big guy just from New York and you're this way because they even fly in for the you know the big ceremony and then he

just a rather standard rock interesting comparison Oh yeah and you know I'm sorry all the things that he's supposed to say and this is why but let's face it. This is possibly again everything I've been saying obviously is like a double edged sword it has the opposite side to I'm saying the army should talk about his work more but if you get to the point where you do become this type of person you just talk about then you're not going to have time. So again you're sort of caught in a bind but I think that the artist should work primarily. But he shouldn't give That's just you know if you don't understand it the hell with you. You should you know if people do question especially people who really want to know then it's being asked the question earlier Paul I think it's a very very very thin and again what role does they taste maker play in the redefining of the art form. Well every time you ask me a question I'm lighting my pipe. I give you time to think you know I'll put the pipe down I think that's really the only time you have a chance to light it is when I ask a question I think truly that it let her know I put it down.

I think that the taste maker has too much emphasis right now much too much. They're selling the museums. Who are the primary takes hackers. The way they almost sell soap are things you know they had a marvelous article on the art magazines about how they hire directors and what happens and how they promote things and they get people there and you know they talk about the attendance records and stuff like this. And it's become fashionable and I think a lot of kind of things become too fashionable people don't really understand you know. I happen to know of students they carry books of poetry around with not only at our campus but I'm sure every campus and they never read him. But it's fashionable to carry this particular book. You know it's fashionable to get on the hump Humphrey Bogart kit for a while you know when you talk about him you don't see. You don't have to see his movies anymore you read a book. You don't need a book to read the flyleaf of it or read a summary supplement the New York Times. Right and then you play this game and I think that the trial is one ups manship. Well true obviously and I think that

to a lot of these taste makers are people who really play this and I think some of them really do it with the intent to really making a buck. You know I got a good thing here I got a good property if I play this right you know I'm going to make myself a lot of shekels. And they go on you know really do this in. I know that you must know of cases where this is happening. I know some and I'm pretty naive and a lot of things you know where they just really case makers I mean big names that are big collectors and patrons of the art you buy cheap you go them up a little bit it's a good investment in it sorry to say but they do it. And one of the reasons they do is because the poor artist is. You know we're like a poor slob walking down a stream and every time we take a step it's conceivable that another bloodsucker can get on you know right there. I hate to not gallery's But let's face it look at how many galleries have gone up now commissions that are taken and they get what they give you a service obviously. But it seems to be an awful high price to pay

for an A D B average singers will raise your price. You know what this is going to but then this starts to put you in a bracket where maybe the people you like to sell to can't afford you. The taste makers also have their little thing other taste makers museum people things like this have their own little ways of working on this too. I couldn't go into I'd have to stop and really think about it. But it's very fashionable to knock someone to build them up too. You know it is. Let's face it if you remember Jackson Pollock I think was in 1950 a great article in Life magazine. I remember I could see the page to page but in color of a Pollock painting across the top in bold type white type on a black ground I'm almost sure it said Jackson Pollock the world's greatest or worst artist and it was marvelous his shows and CEOs were fantastically right after that. Well you know it's I don't know this does to me. It's there. It's seems to happen great deal in our century more so than other centuries I think I really feel that because art has become a commodity and maybe we have to stop and

maybe this is part of the redefinition that we have to sit back and say all right you make soap and make paintings. And I'm going to approach it from this way I'm going to package it better than you and I'm going to have all the gimmicks with that I'm going to get green stamps and I'm going to give bingo and I'm going to give you a certain amount of money if you buy it on the right day. You don't galleries do that if they have a pet. Cly. I know I've been approached by gallery owners and say well this guy buys from us all the time let's sort of knock a little bit off the price. Well this is like giving Green Stamps. Will become a commodity. Maybe we're going to big money. Maybe we should view it from that way all right we're coming. But if we did with the mother you just couldn't you know and it seems to me that most manufacturers exert a little bit more influence over the way that their their product is handled some of them think oh I would think so but I know that if I was selling so I would want to have something to do with the control obviously they do they pick their agents to promote it you know and they decide on the hearts

of the soft sell where they're going to use for the appeal the sheer or masculinity or are we going to appeal to the kids and let's face it I've been in galleries. I want to mention where but you heard the gallery people talking about a painting on the wall. To one client praising it and someone else coming again and they could see the key right away that did in my case and knocking the work so that they could pitch a sale for something else. Now if this is the world of business that you know I really don't know. Maybe I've been living in that IP tower up there a little too long. Welcome to a gallery deal it doesn't matter what they sell just as long as they sell. Oh I see I don't know I think we ought to be defined as part of it too you know that's I just don't know I get thinking about some of these things and I realize that you know what it's just a terrible cold world out there and you know anybody standing around and they want to hurt their piece. Well fine you know if I knew why but I really don't know why. It's amazing and it's sort of frightening too and it's

frightening to the point of who the people are buying are not because they like it but because it's fashionable and they you know they change paintings in our house the way they change their clothes the bad changes you know all while this is our bridge and he was in two years ago. Obviously it's no good for today. This hurts. Now when I said earlier you know you can call me on the destruction of something when I said you destroy something this doesn't completely push it back I said really just usually destroy the way we look at it as a coming back and what now seems like if you think of the Renaissance statement it was listed in the why of the painting. He would question the how the painting how it was done you know and they didn't give it. I'm sure they came out but it wasn't the primary concern you know was the why was this feeling for the church or for a certain individual ruling. Well Paul's Lansky thank you very much for joining us on studio talk.