This is a detail from a Fabio Viale marble sculpture. Repeat marble sculpture. More.
I keep going back to the website of Fabio Viale and cannot decide whether I like it or not, however it does raise questions so it must, by my definition, come under the category ‘Art’.
Making artwork using an expensive and challenging material to produce items that look as if they are poorly made out of cheap material, in this case foam, is ‘clever’ and maybe even unique, but once done does it warrant repeating? Like Duchamp’s wheel on a stool, the point is made and does not require amplification by repetition (as Duchamp did!), One piece may be ‘Fine Art’, repeats are commercialism.
When we judge a work of art, does it always have to meet the criteria of ‘clever’? does it always have to be ‘unique’? and do those criteria ALWAYS mean that it can be categorised as ‘Fine Art’? (c.f. Emin, Hirst et.al.) Takes us on to the wider question as to whether we are so blinkered that we consider any work outside of these criteria as not ‘real’ today’ art…….
great comments, really like the amplification by repetition angle, been reading about warhol over last couple of days, who looks like he may have set a precedent for such characters. viales work may be fixated with marble yet surely his subject has diverts exploring the possibilities of material. can we ever truly escape repitition?
A very thin line between repetition as a technique for reinforcement of an idea and repetition for commercial gain. I recall Pollack in an interview saying that his ‘style’ (i.e. pouring paint) had placed him in as an artistic prison (his words), he became ‘expected’ to continue producing in this style long after the moment had passed – in effect he bowed to commercial pressure (with inevitable results in his case!)
Emin has done some remarkable neon words against dark backgrounds but few realise that she has produced dozens of these – reinforcement being replaced by financial greed?
Warhol, well that’s another kettle of fish, especially when you discover that at least four others (who he knew) had produced virtually identical ‘Marylins’ before he did. Difference was, of course, that he not only did multiple images but worked a very efficient publicity machine as well. Doesn’t stop him from being one of the most important producers of art in the last century though.
Required fields are marked *
Notify me of new comments via email.