ART AND THEORY

The purpose of this journal is to examine the relationship of artwork with theory in general with a focus on paintings in particular.
While there are plenty of articles and books about various theories of art, I do not aim at constructing a new theoretical framework, but instead examining my own existing concepts (may they be conscious or unconscious) and strip them off reactionary and conservative elements I may be not aware of yet.

By talking to many people about art, including some excellent artists, I stumbled over many immature, crude or even false and idiotic and reactionary conceptions of art. I think myself as committed to art but as great my love for art is, as great is my interest to demarcate true art from mere art-production and the art-market.
Intuitively it should be clear, that pink ponies and unicorns flying around are neither surreal artworks nor can be considered as art in general.
There are many examples of this kind, but this is a common phenomenon I came across on deviant-art.

The initial spark for this journal-series was a short conversation with *Zablocki and others here on deviantart through commenting each others artworks.
I then began to read the Manifest of the "Stuckists" (see also www.stuckism.com/) in search for a renewed conception of Avant-Garde.
Whereas I was intrigued by its radical manifest, I nevertheless felt intuitively repelled by some statements like the goal of Remodernism shall be "a new spirituality in art" or "painting is the medium of self-discovery".  True art has nothing to do with spirituality or exploring the mind of the artist. The first notion relates to a rather "romanticistic" understanding of art, whereas the latter relates to art as therapy (a rather psychologistic understanding). If there is a definition of modernism it is "the time where the death of the Big Other became evident" (a rather existential definition).
Another common problem is the simple (at first sight) question of whether one should use titles in paintings or any contextual information to "explain" their art (for example a story "behind" the image, an story about the process of creation, about the mind of the artist, etc. ).

I felt that just answer with two or three sentences to each of them wouldn't suffice to explore the complexity of art, so I choose this format as a more general attempt to clear some questions.
To give a glimpse on what will or could come, I name a few theorists whose contributions to an philosophical understanding of art I consider as essential:
Martin Heidegger, Alain Badiou, Jacques Lacan, Friedrich Nietzsche and Slavoj Žižek.

To conclude this first entry I would like to quote Alain Badiou speaking about "the Good" and "the Truth" (two terms which are very important in relation to art!):
"My philosophy desires affirmation. I want to fight for; I want to know what I have for the Good and to put it to work. I refuse to be content with the "least evil." It is very fashionable right now to be modest, not to think big. Grandeur is considered a metaphysical evil. Me, I am for grandeur, I am for heroism. I am for the affirmation of the thought and the deed." ( Badiou, Alain. "On Evil: An Interview with Alain Badiou." in: Cabinet. Issue 5, Winter 2001/2002).

PS I would love to develop these thoughts further in an active and constructive exchange of arguments with you!
So comments on this and following issues are more than welcome!

Thank you my friends and fellow-artists!