Newsletter installment #2, we’re getting somewhere now.
I wanted to talk a little bit more about the different format that The Newsletter had before it reached this point. I also want to talk about abstraction, vehicles that art can use, and standards that we can all use for evaluating art.
Like I briefly mentioned in the first newsletter, I had been considering starting this for a while. I was into the idea but wasn’t married to it, and I was unsure if it would fulfill me creatively considering it’s outside of my typical scope of work that I would consider abstract and conceptual most of the time. When I decided to pull the trigger, I began sorting through a handful of ways that I could fit it into a box that I could present like a work of art in and of itself.
One of the early ideas was to open up submissions, run a fully fledged Instagram ad campaign, onboard as many people as possible, and once you were all signed up, never send a single newsletter. This approach would have been a bit more on the “stunty” side of things and ultimately would have resulted in all of the subscribers discovering that the participation and impression that everyone who joined was a part of something was the finished work of art. I believe there’s an art to interpretation and this method was playing on the (what I consider childlike) emotion of inclusion to create art out of a feeling. If you don’t consider feeling like you’re a part of something a finished work of art then you’re not getting it yet. But that’s okay — we’ll get there. Essentially, everyone would have realized there was no real newsletter on their own time. Or maybe some would never figure it out. The end goal if I ended up going this route would have been to install two large monitors next to each other in a gallery or public space — One displaying the sign-up page, and the other displaying and empty text field with an infinitely blinking cursor as if someone was about to type something out but never got around to it. I even thought about how cool it would have been to get a metal plate with every subscribers email engraved into it displayed next to the screens. In theory I still really appreciate this idea but it never really felt like the right move. I decided to build a real newsletter on the basis that it wasn’t going to be treated like a boring piece of copy that you don’t really bother looking into, but more so treated like ‘word art’ and I’m happy with where we’ve landed.
Abstraction
Before you dig into this portion of this weeks read, I want to clarify that all of these thoughts are my opinion on abstraction and conceptual thinking. I’m not claiming to know best, and I’m probably going to learn something new about art within the next 30 days that will change my mind all over again about this topic — and that’s the best part. I’ll probably never give a disclaimer like this again but I had to just this once. That being said, here we go.
I love the idea of “abstraction” and I’ve always gravitated towards conceptual art. Years ago when I was heavily into photography I would take very obscure photos that I never shared due to fear of misinterpretation. Before that I found myself very attracted to simplicity in art museums. Even as a child I remember being drawn to small details or specific scenic frames in movies without really understanding why — It just felt good.
With this evolution from “why do I gravitate to these things?” to “I’m trying to make a career out of my ideas” I’ve discovered 2 things that I catch myself dwelling on or struggling with about once a week.
Conceptual art and abstract ideas are 100% worthless. These ideas are entirely subjective by nature. They are ideas that worth is bestowed upon the moment the artist decides to bring them into the world because they feel a tangible sense of discomfort if they don’t see that idea living in the world.
A quote from the beautifully gifted mind of Sol LeWitt that reads, “In conceptual art the idea or concept is the most important aspect of the work. It means that all the planning and decisions are made beforehand and the execution is a perfunctory affair. The idea becomes the machine that makes the art.”
Both great things to keep in mind, but this quote from Sol LeWitt has always spoken to me because it feels like the perfect go-to for any situation where you’re consuming something creative and think to yourself, “what is going on here?” I also love that he used the word perfunctory. One thing I have always had strong distaste for is looking at art with friends or family and hearing, “I mean…I could literally do this myself. This is all it takes to get into a museum/gallery? This is so easy.” Yes, it might have been easily created. Yes, you might be able to replicate it yourself. But you didn’t and you won’t. Nor did you go through the creative process or life experiences that drove the person whose art you’re looking at did to get to that point.
What I’m trying to say is — It’s important to have a softened heart and opened arms when consuming abstract ideas. Often times the artist knows that its existence is visually one dimensional and that’s the point.
Vehicles
A fun thing to think about when creating something is what vehicle it should driven in. In this context the word vehicle could maybe be interchangeable with medium but vehicle accompanies my point much better.
All creative ideas are delivered to the world in some kind of vehicle. But if you put it in the wrong one — It could greatly impact the way it’s received and make or break the idea. Picture your art piece, small business idea, script, or marketing strategy as a child that you’re responsible for taking care of. You want to protect that child at all costs — the child is fragile, directionless without assistance to get where they’re going, but valuable and nurtured. If you put the child in a car with a driver that doesn’t know where they’re supposed to go, the child could get lost or even be put into danger. Put the child in a car with someone who you trust, and the child will get from A to B safely because you chose carefully how they were transported.
In short — you wouldn’t paint a business proposal on the side of a building as mural or take a photo of a finished movie set. You would pitch the business idea and shoot a movie.
Choose your vehicles carefully if you care about how your art is perceived. Some won’t notice. The people you want to notice will.
Standards
To tie together the thoughts on abstraction and vehicles — Here are 4 standards for evaluating art that I find useful.
Technical Excellence — Technical excellence is a lens that we can look at art through to help us observe something even though we might not agree with the creators worldview. In the context of a painting, technical excellence would reveal to us the use of texture, color, style, materials, and form. Technical excellence allows us to appreciate an idea separate from its creator.
Validity — Is the artist creating from a place that’s honest with themselves and their worldview? Why are they doing what they’re doing? Are they creating for things like money, acceptance, or recognition? If so, is their work valid? This is not to say that an artist shouldn’t be paid or recognized. However, if an artist is primarily motivated by financial success or fame instead of the message they’re communicating — it will only be surface-level or diluted at best and in the end, lose integrity.
Intellectual Content — Potentially the most important standard. What is the artist saying about the world? Is it true? What makes it true to them? The criterion for the judgment of a work of art is its content, that which reflects the world view of the artist. While not rejecting all of the other standards, if we disagree with the works message, we disagree at the very core aim for which it was created. This is a tricky one though because individuality does in fact, exist. Therefore — using opposites as contrasting examples, if we have an artist who views the world through a lens of trauma and negative connotations and another who views life optimistically and as a challenge, the artists and their truths will greatly differ as we examine their intent. Intellectual content is a standard by which we can get an glimpse into the belief system of the person that is allowing us into their world. Creatives will reflect their own beliefs and moral codes even if they don’t attribute their messages to the same things. In addition to this reality, objective truths will also vary depending on who people are at their core — spiritual, non-spiritual, joyful, hardened, etc… it will bleed into every ounce of their work if they mean it.
Integration of Content and Vehicle — Great art has a correlation between the style and the content. The greatest art fits the vehicle that is being used to the world view that is being presented. I also believe this rule can be broken if done correctly.
That’s it for this week. As always, thank you for being a part of this weekly conversation and taking the time to read these installments. If you’d like to, you can download the Substack app and browse these installments to The Newsletter in chronological order and avoid having to keep track of them in your email inbox if that’s something that interests you. If not, please feel free to send me any feedback, questions, hate comments, good books, disagreements, compliments, topics of conversation, or things you find interesting. Talk to you soon.
— C