The Modernist Imperative

As much as mid-century modernist art philosophy can be faulted for being domineering, misogynstic and callous in its disregard of opposing viewpoints, it did generate loads of potent conceptual fodder which still fuels a great deal of contemporary thought. Yes, I'm aware that the last sentence is a totally unsubstantiated claim which nonetheless acts as the cornerstone of my argument – whatevs. The major principle that I would like to dredge from the modernist pond is the notion that various media are imbued with a sort of ideal platonic form – that paint has certain qualities that cannot exist in sculpture or film, for instance, and vice versa. Futhermore, the goal of said media is to eliminate all unnecessary trappings and hone in on the essence of the material.

This concept can also be broadened to not only include medium but also form. If you are making a two-dimensional design, it is important to consider what exactly it is that a triangle can do that circle cannot, or that a color can do that another cannot. Here we start to get into some Göethe territory, which is awesome to do if you're into that. Not only is it important to do that, but it is essential. Now I digress. But more on shapes and their connotations later.

Which is great, and all well and good. However, Casual Aesthetics recognizes that the problem with such grand theory which aims to function so broadly, and of matters of such grave import, is that the practitioners feel a great need to stand rigidly by their rules which they fiercely conjured as a testament to their mental mastery. The Casual Aesthete understands that for every forceful and passionate conjecture there exists a couple other rad alternatives which will still function if the individual's creative vision is broad enough.

Here's what I mean. To me, the role of the artist or creator is not to be in service to the self, but in service to the concept or idea. The concept is the puppet master that makes the artist move, and the concept, seeking to make itself material in the most perfect way possible, should manifest in a way that is appropriate. Some ideas function best as an image, as the image can communicate certain qualities that no other means can. Likewise, sometimes an idea needs to be a song, or a performative gesture, and is imperfect in other forms. The goal of the artist is to be the most flexible vessel possible and let the concepts manifest in a natural fashion, and not bend the concept to fit a presupposed form.


However, there are many interesting things that happen when you purposefully counteract this impulse. Most prominently, one can achieve a sort of cognitive dissonance in which the content is at odds with the form. For instance, the german artist Thomas Demand makes highly intricate sculpturs out of paper and then photographs the scenes, and their versimilitude is astounding.



Rather than seek to explore the essence of the material, he uses it in a seemingly contradictory fashion, as well as 'nesting' his process, i.e. taking photographs of the sculptures rather than show the sculptures themselves. The photos completely pass for normal still life photography, though on inspection prove to be something else. What his work does do is highlight the fragility of the medium by trying to force it to act permanent and solid, and the pleasure of viewing his artwork comes from this tension.

There are many other examples of this type of cognitive dissonance in art work, which sometimes simply masquerades as Trompe L'Oeil – whether the material illusionism of Jeff Koons' balloon animals made of steel or more traditionally imagistic chicanery.



So where does this leave us? The Casual Aesthete should be aware of the mercurial nature of material, and how it can be bent and shaped to achieve conceptual nuance. Once again we can construct a sliding scale of usage. observe –