|ink and acrylic on paper|
|sumi ink on paper|
Ten minutes into the program, the host began to gurgle with moralistic fervour about what constitutes beauty in art. Ballet music played in the background. The whole thing was quite dogmatic, almost to the point of lamentation about how modern artists are ruining it for everyone, the kind of talk that has been going on since even before the days when Mozart challenged musical conventions.
The non-dogmatic approach to art recommends keeping an open mind. There's enough room in the universe for all types of art, from cave painting, to the warm glow of Renoir pictures right up to the monumental mixed media paintings of Anselm Kiefer. Why does it have to be an either or situation? Must it always be this as opposed to that? Is art supposed to exist within agreed upon boundaries or limitations? I have a feeling that some people feel frustrated and threatened each time a creative person explores new ground.