Alexander Adams is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. When the movement we recognise under the name “the Impressionists” first exhibited together, they called the 1874 exhibition,
For what may be obvious reasons given the name of my journal, I think about these issues often and I'm glad to know that someone is doing such fine intellectual work on them as you.
It seems that the foremost obstacle in the present is that there are no discernible movements going on of any kind. It's one thing to have a Salon des Refusés when there's a recognizable hegemonic, old-guard style going on in French painting at a time when art was valued by the public. Now we have outsize, maybe absurd levels of pluralism in a time when visual art is largely an afterthought in the public mind. It's a wildly different dynamic.
I know of a single instance in which the rebels had to fight for the freedom to be left alone by the forces of institutionalized progressivism, and that is the Wuming Painting Collective in Beijing. The work they produced is good but not groundbreaking like the Impressionists, surrealists, symbolists, and Viennese Secessionists were at one time. Possibly the last dissident art movement of any note was the Stuckists, who were specifically opposed to conceptualism. I'm still making up my mind about Meow Wolf, but they did perform a viable end-run around the institutions.
My own focus of opposition is on bureaucratic culture. That jibes with your intention to disdain "the interference of the state and quasi-state actors." There needs at least to be an independent support network, and given the extent of contemporary bureaucracy, that may mean extremes such as independence from state money itself, which now possible through cryptocurrency. Wuming, the Stuckists, and Meow Wolf share an awareness of how to produce work that is comprehensible to people who don't have a degree from Yale or Slade or whatever; I believe that consideration is necessary, though not to the detriment of ambition or quality.
There is much work to do. I'm heartened to see your contributing to it.
This is an excellent, well thought out starting place. I found nothing to disagree with, and much to agree with very strongly. With the established institutions in various states of disarray and decay, it's on us to offer a compelling alternative vision - the best propaganda for which is beauty and virtue.
"Some of the founding members exhibited their first works anonymously, signing their paintings with the monogram PRB. When their identity and youth were discovered in 1850, their work was harshly criticized by the novelist Charles Dickens, among others, not only for its disregard of academic ideals of beauty but also for its apparent irreverence in treating religious themes with an uncompromising realism. Nevertheless, the leading art critic of the day, John Ruskin, stoutly defended Pre-Raphaelite art, and the members of the group were never without patrons."
Thank you for this very thoughtful essay. I would caution that what you are describing is a fraternity. Nothing wrong with that! . . . but you should understand this.
Very, very interesting and well-informed. Thanks. Being aware of the psychological dynamics within groups and cultivating virtue seems crucial to avoid descending into chaos once there is some traction.
Herding of cats aka highly sensitive artists with vulnerable egos prone to overreaction—what can possibly go wrong? 😉 An endeavour largely futile, or at best transient, it must be by default. Just as rightly observed in retrospect 🙂
Something analogous to Sec 230 of US Communications Decency Act might work. A support network of sorts. Virtuous moral code is *very* nice to have, but I have serious doubts about its practicality 😇
For what may be obvious reasons given the name of my journal, I think about these issues often and I'm glad to know that someone is doing such fine intellectual work on them as you.
It seems that the foremost obstacle in the present is that there are no discernible movements going on of any kind. It's one thing to have a Salon des Refusés when there's a recognizable hegemonic, old-guard style going on in French painting at a time when art was valued by the public. Now we have outsize, maybe absurd levels of pluralism in a time when visual art is largely an afterthought in the public mind. It's a wildly different dynamic.
I know of a single instance in which the rebels had to fight for the freedom to be left alone by the forces of institutionalized progressivism, and that is the Wuming Painting Collective in Beijing. The work they produced is good but not groundbreaking like the Impressionists, surrealists, symbolists, and Viennese Secessionists were at one time. Possibly the last dissident art movement of any note was the Stuckists, who were specifically opposed to conceptualism. I'm still making up my mind about Meow Wolf, but they did perform a viable end-run around the institutions.
My own focus of opposition is on bureaucratic culture. That jibes with your intention to disdain "the interference of the state and quasi-state actors." There needs at least to be an independent support network, and given the extent of contemporary bureaucracy, that may mean extremes such as independence from state money itself, which now possible through cryptocurrency. Wuming, the Stuckists, and Meow Wolf share an awareness of how to produce work that is comprehensible to people who don't have a degree from Yale or Slade or whatever; I believe that consideration is necessary, though not to the detriment of ambition or quality.
There is much work to do. I'm heartened to see your contributing to it.
This is an excellent, well thought out starting place. I found nothing to disagree with, and much to agree with very strongly. With the established institutions in various states of disarray and decay, it's on us to offer a compelling alternative vision - the best propaganda for which is beauty and virtue.
"Some of the founding members exhibited their first works anonymously, signing their paintings with the monogram PRB. When their identity and youth were discovered in 1850, their work was harshly criticized by the novelist Charles Dickens, among others, not only for its disregard of academic ideals of beauty but also for its apparent irreverence in treating religious themes with an uncompromising realism. Nevertheless, the leading art critic of the day, John Ruskin, stoutly defended Pre-Raphaelite art, and the members of the group were never without patrons."
https://www.britannica.com/art/Pre-Raphaelite-Brotherhood
You need a Ruskin and patrons.
Excellent piece. This is something I've been thinking about lately.
Thank you for this very thoughtful essay. I would caution that what you are describing is a fraternity. Nothing wrong with that! . . . but you should understand this.
A superior set of principles, nicely blending realism and idealism.
Very, very interesting and well-informed. Thanks. Being aware of the psychological dynamics within groups and cultivating virtue seems crucial to avoid descending into chaos once there is some traction.
If I may, I would suggest something else:
1. Form is more important than content, and
2. Beautiful things are harder to create than ugly things.
Herding of cats aka highly sensitive artists with vulnerable egos prone to overreaction—what can possibly go wrong? 😉 An endeavour largely futile, or at best transient, it must be by default. Just as rightly observed in retrospect 🙂
Something analogous to Sec 230 of US Communications Decency Act might work. A support network of sorts. Virtuous moral code is *very* nice to have, but I have serious doubts about its practicality 😇