Letter: Art without the mysticism

David Rodway
Friday 18 April 1997 23:02 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Sir: John Pope-Hennessey's idea, quoted by James Hall (Letters, 12 April), that use of life masks in portrait busts introduced "an interpretative element", and the latter's gloss that "it forced the artist to give the depicted body a soul", is typical art-speak mysticism.

The point about merely reproducing the shapes of "ready-mades", no matter the materials used, is whether it is really inventive, and shows anything of deep importance and interest, when it ducks the hard-won lessons and insights - including those about perception itself - acquired through the observational and analytical demands usually associated with artistic practice, and notably with painting and drawing skills.

Nowadays, the literal copying of sources or references, as in casts and "academic" art, is a poor device for addressing, and casting light on, our complex, social, cultural, ideological, landscape. The artistic bankruptcy of the jelly-mould, pseudo avant garde - Antony Gormley, Rachel Whiteread, Marc Quinn etc. - is that it relies on an easy and limited formula, and on the facile principle of "defamiliarisation" or "making strange". This conveniently skirts the more difficult, discriminating, but complementary, task of familiarising the viewer with unfamiliar things that matter - new and perceptive ideas, experience.

DAVID RODWAY

Lecturer in Art and Philosophy

Kensington and Chelsea College

London SW10

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in