The problem of understanding contemporary art Automatic translate

First, the time gap separating us from works of art of the past, and the absence of such a gap in the perception of contemporary art, imposes an inevitable imprint on the understanding of the latter. We are deprived of the possibility of objectively assessing and correctly interpreting modernity because we ourselves create it. More precisely, we are able to understand the deep immediate meaning of a certain work, the meaning that was originally embedded in it. We may understand it better than later generations, just as, say, Baudelaire or Hürnberg were understood more clearly by their contemporaries then than by us now. But at the same time we will not be able to evaluate the significance of this or that work of our time. Time is needed for that.

Secondly, contemporary art (let’s talk about cinema and music) is extremely diverse. The matter is further complicated by the fact that each self-contained genre is itself highly eclectic. We can even say that now we do not have to speak about a separate genre in the vein of which an artist creates (in shir.sm.sl.), but now every artist, every musician (music group), every director – it is a separate individual genre. Everyone creates at the intersection. Therefore, no one can refer himself to any particular genre. Hence another difficulty in interpreting contemporary art.

Thirdly, it is worth noting that the art of modernity is extremely unevenly developed. For example, music, cinematography, photography, and perhaps painting are actively developing. Less actively and successfully – literature. This is due to the fact that the first of the above-mentioned directions of art are characterized by extreme emotionality. It is very difficult for a modern person to concentrate, to gather in one point, which is necessary, for example, for writing or reading a serious novel. Music, instant photography, drawing, film as a compressed visual literature – all of this is as well suited to the ability of modern man to perceive. It cannot be argued that our consciousness has become «clip». It must be remembered that a song or a movie – is a complete work of art that we perceive holistically and in no way in a clipped way. But the amount of time we can devote to a particular work has changed. Hence the form of that work has changed – it has become more concise, precise, epathetic, etc. (depending on the author’s goals). (depending on the author’s goals). This is important to keep in mind when analyzing contemporary art.

In general, we can say that the main problem is to identify contemporary art as art in general. One is often faced with the absence of any reference points with which to relate the work of contemporary authors. It has become impossible to compare it with the classics, because it is almost impossible to find points of intersection between the old and the new. There is either a repetition of what has already been created before, or the creation of something completely unlike anything else. The so-called classics are kind of standing aside. I don’t mean technical techniques, but the meanings and ideas put into this or that work. For example, such a genre as cyberpunk touches on completely different layers of human existence than just science fiction. It is clear that we can turn to science fiction as the progenitor of such genres, but it is also clear that cyberpunk raises problems that science fiction will not tell us anything about. Therefore, contemporary art creations are, as it were, cast into a void where there are no points of reference, only other similarly abandoned, individualized new creations to the death.