We have to decide whether [Japanese print makers] had a different pictographic culture or simply were retarded by technological slowness in achieving soliditie
Woah, this quote threw me back. As someone who is Japanese descent. Art is different in every culture, and could share similar customs and techniques that others may perceive as "slow" or wrong.
Likewise, “installation” is not a movement but a means of presenting art.
In February, I went to an art installation in Napa. There was no movement, but they put up new installations yearly that glow in the dark.
We are entering a more stable, more happy period of artistic endeavor where the basic needs to which art has always been responsive may again be met,
Is art more responsive to moments that are harsh? Such as historical events? Is that why I haven't seen much impactful art floating around in the news?
The timeline pinpoints the historical inception of particular movements, while also naming key historic artists
Who picks and chooses these historical artists to represent the key historic movements.
What made Warhol’s Brillo boxes acceptable as art in 1964? What would Neo-classical painter Jacques-Louis David have thought of Warhol’s work? How would Leonardo da Vinci, Phidias, or a caveman react?
That is the right question to ask. This reminds me of the question of who invents what, and how it is made. Were the meanings crafted by accident, or through careful development and intelligence?
The world has to be ready for certain things, the artworld no less than the real one.
Being ready for art is uncertain, there could be anything right now that could have little to no meaning but could be important later on, or what is happening in the moment.