There is this wonderful 1960-ish art documentary viewable online hosted by the great Orson Welles himself, in it he interviewed a fellow connoisseur Peggy Guggenheim about her take on Andy Warhol’s art, she opined, ‘it is NOT ART’. This school of thought is kind of obsolete in current light. But it still has adherents. The theories and musings on popular media and appropriation were only starting then.
In the 2010 BBC special, Alastair Sooke took on Modern Art’s Greats (Picasso, Matisse, Dali and Warhol) and presented the now-popular and seemingly universal appreciation of art’s commercialism and appropriation. But it did not project where contemporary art would be heading. No foresight was ever proposed.
And now there is the meme-ing NYT article on the current darling of Southeast Asian art auction houses, a former instructor back in the Pontifical University. I do not agree completely, but it is a good read. IMHO.
The Philippine art forum/a on Facebook are now ablaze. But the best critique is still from that old reliable and pragmatic Ecclesiastes where it summed everything up,
"What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done, and there is nothing new under the sun."
In a video interview of Warhol, he was self-deprecating and genius enough to admit and tell the world he was just copying, and that his art was never original. This extreme self-awareness and seeming absence of self-delusion (if only for the showmanship of it all) marked him an original artist and a visionary. Artistic appropriation was never the same since. Oh, the divine inspiration that is IRONY, lost to everyone but the inquiring few.
Live and let art. Whatever rocks your artistic and creative neurons