Table of Contents:
- QUESTION 4. HOW SHOULD ARTISTS IMPROVE ART IN SOCIETY?
- QUESTION 5. WHAT DIRECTION SHOULD ART TAKE NOW?
- QUESTION 6. HOW CAN ARTISTS IMPROVE AMERICAN ART AND CULTURE?
Read Part 1 here.
A Dialogue between Frank Ormond and Matthew Pungitore
Introduction by Frank Ormond
Postface by Matthew Pungitore
QUESTION 4.
HOW SHOULD ARTISTS IMPROVE ART IN SOCIETY?
MATTHEW PUNGITORE’S RESPONSE—
Dear Frank,
Improving the current state of Art would take sweeping reformations in all facets of society and government. There are four important things that artists should start doing right now: (1) Artists should revive the real world; (2) Artists should assemble together and disseminate their artistic criticism and theories; (3) Artists should seek the best education, especially from outside of conventional academia, if possible; (4) Artists should resist those styles that are opposed to Classicism and Aestheticism.
Artists should seek extraordinary education and train classically. We need more people who can teach us and people willing to learn from us, masters and apprentices, new guilds, individuals devoted to wisdom, philosophy, professionalism, and aesthetics.
We need scholars and artisans to legally, mannerly congregate together at cafés, restaurants, hotels, museums, squares, piazzas, in public, gathering more and more people to discuss important artistic concerns and innovations. People should communicate, mainly in real space, but also, if necessary, on blogs, to share opinions, reviews, criticism, and to debate about Art. Make a more accessible artistic network of amateurs, academics, and intellectuals free from conventional academia.
Why not fashion our own exhibitions and ceremonies?
With hope,
Matthew Pungitore
(END OF MATTHEW PUNGITORE’S RESPONSE.)
FRANK ORMOND’S RESPONSE—
Dear Matt,
Improving art within society is a difficult cause for any artist in any society, let alone the current age of internet and technology.
I believe there are three tasks artists must take to improve art within society:
- Artists should develop intention behind their work. By this I mean that a work is not without meaning. In fiction, we encourage authors to think critically about why a character would say something or react a certain way, but in paintings we too readily accept a choice of color or a scribble as “part of it” without questioning the intention behind it. Artists must have intention in their work to improve art in society.
- Artists should be active consumers of art from all eras of art history. Modern artists are familiar with their local artists and the “art scene” in that area. To put this in a literary perspective, it would be like authors being familiar with only the authors in their hometowns and not reading work from the 20th century. Artists need to know what went into the art before them to bring great new art to society.
- Artists should share their work and their interpretations of others’ works. Artists are often afraid of feedback, even when it’s tame. This is less apparent in the world of fiction where both you and I are from, since we deal with rejection of stories and criticism constantly. However, painters and sculptors fear sharing their work (especially when starting out) because they fear any sort of criticism. Artists must overcome this and share with one another their work as a whole.
I hope this makes sense, but I feel there should be an addendum that sharing work and criticism isn’t nearly enough if an artist is unfamiliar with the medium. Hence why I think all three points are required together.
Thank you,
Frank Ormond
(END OF FRANK ORMOND’S RESPONSE.)
QUESTION 5.
WHAT DIRECTION SHOULD ART TAKE NOW?
FRANK ORMOND’S RESPONSE—
Dear Matt,
I am curious what your interpretation of this question will be, as there are a number of directions you could take it. The art world has entered a phase after it sought to find its identity in the 20th century, when manufacturing and machines were able to produce works that mimicked reality with minimal change. This sort of hits at the unrealistic nature of Aristotle’s idea of art, since cameras are now able to produce photographs that mimic reality closely, but often lack any heart or soul behind the image.
Now art is struggling with artificial intelligence, where AI can mimic the work of humans down to brushstrokes in paintings and word choice in fiction. With the soulless machine mimicking the created art of humans, we ask ourselves: what direction should art go now? It seems there’s only one way we could go: continue creating in a way that is less reliant on machines.
This is not to say that I think we should abandon computers or digital art (whether digital paintings or word processor created fiction) but that we should start producing tangible creations outside the digital space. It’s harder or fiction to realize this, but much easier for paintings and sculptures to find this golden mean.
I have previously mentioned to you in our correspondence that I took up oil painting. I feel a connection to my art when it’s on the canvas much more than I ever did when painting digitally. I feel this is the correct direction to go for painting.
However, what of fiction? What direction should it go?
I think artificial intelligence is still struggling to mimic the novel. In that way, the best way an author can create is to produce books and get those books printed and on shelves. We can discuss what this entails later, but I really do think the printed word has a purpose in our society still.
Your friend,
Frank Ormond
(END OF FRANK ORMOND’S RESPONSE.)
MATTHEW PUNGITORE’S RESPONSE—
Dear Frank,
For those of us who wish to resurrect Art, we artists should accept that there are objective hierarchies of purest Art; we should embrace Academic art, Classicism, Gothic art, neoclassicism, Beaux Arts, Art Nouveau, Aestheticism, Symbolism, Decadent, Pre-Raphaelitism, Impressionism, and Postimpressionism as the highest styles of Art; and we should attempt to honor and emulate those highest styles, while also being innovative and exceptional, striving to demonstrate expert virtuosity, first-rate craftsmanship, and exhilaration. We who oppose the current disrespectful tyranny of acedia, frustration, and ludicrousness, we will honor the past and sculpt a majestic future. Our art will utterly reject the contemporary corporate and the anti-art of today. We will distance ourselves from styles that are cartoonish, comic, gaudy, and immature, as we seek to achieve fine art. We will oppose the formless chaos. We will oppose Brutalism, abstract expressionism, Dada, neo-Dada, Bauhaus, conceptual art, cubism, Fluxus, Pop Art, and the now-reigning Leviathan of ridiculousness and insulting degradation.
Writers are artists. All artists should be trying to learn, grow, and network with as many other artists as possible. It is important that we create anti-elitist associations for better spreading wisdom and the love of Art. For some, joining expert artistic and intellectual societies could be beneficial. We should, if possible, craft our own masterful ideologies and movements. Our work can be Comedy, Tragedy, whatever, but we should always be working harder and harder to improve our skills and our artwork to the maximum degree. Reach the ultimate levels of artistic, masterly excellence. Uplift and raise every standard of Art, without forsaking class or taste.
With hope,
Matthew Pungitore
(END OF MATTHEW PUNGITORE’S RESPONSE.)
FRANK ORMOND’S REPLY TO MATTHEW PUNGITORE—
Dear Matt,
I tend to agree with your own preferences towards the classical arts. The high-minded arts of mimicking reality that I discussed are likewise the same ones you seem to value above the other styles. However, am I to take this to mean you’ve assessed other styles of art as having lesser meaning?
Abstraction has its place in art. I know in poetry the more abstract you can make a line, the more emotion you can add to it while obfuscating the subject, the more interesting the line becomes. However, abstraction to the point of eliminating meaning is abstraction without purpose. There must be a balance.
Do you see little value in cubism or brutalism? Did the Bauhaus movement have little meaning to you?
I am asking out of a place of genuine interest. I tend to agree with your preference, but I wonder how far such a preference can be taken. Pop Art in particular is something I’m fascinated by because of the message it has. Andy Warhol could depict Pete Rose from a baseball card and call it art because the art world had no formalized definition of what it is to be “art”. I find it interesting that you use it as an example of what should be opposed.
Understand this is not a disagreement, mind you. I tend to agree that these styles have something fundamentally missing from their formula, though what it is I am unsure. Is it the disconnection from nature? The degree of separation from the world as observed?
I am interested to hear your thoughts. Please let me know what you think.
Your friend,
Frank Ormond
(END OF FRANK ORMOND’S REPLY.)
QUESTION 6.
HOW CAN ARTISTS IMPROVE AMERICAN ART AND CULTURE?
FRANK ORMOND’S RESPONSE—
Dear Matt,
Artists need to organize. I think that’s the easiest way for artists to get their intentions set and American society on track. We previously discussed improving art within society in the earlier discussion, but I think improving American art and culture is a slightly different discussion to be had.
In many ways, artists can improve art in the same way I explained previously, but the last bit of the question mentioning “culture” is a hard one to touch on. How can artists improve American culture? Do we mean simply “American art culture” or “American culture” as a whole?
- If we mean to ask “how can artists improve American art culture?” there are a few steps that artists can take to improve the overall culture within the American art world.
- Artists must develop a culture of sharing their work. I talked about this previously, but I believe it’s imperative that artists share criticism and interpretations of works.
- Artists must develop a culture of passion for art. Why would you be a critic or artist if you hate the art you view? Far too often film criticism on the internet falls into a cynical, negative framework and refuses to show what they actual enjoy. The entire point of art is that it is enjoyed for some reason or another. An artist should have a passion for their art, and it should reflect in the overall culture.
- If we mean to ask “how can artists improve American culture as a whole?” then there are a few steps artists can take to improve American culture.
- Artists must band together to encourage the funding and distribution of art within American society. Whether this is through government means of grants and scholarships or private means of foundations and seeking patronage, the goal should be to support art and artists.
- Artists must refuse calls for censorship and deplatforming. As a whole, artists tend to be progressively-minded, but I have no specific political inclination behind this idea. Censorship hurts art by cutting off lessons that could be learned from art that one may not agree with. Deplatforming hurts artists because it makes it easier to remove artists from view for minor concerns; the noose only ever tightens in these cases, and never loosens.
Ultimately, I feel the American art scene is still growing, though some pushes in the more recent history of American art has encouraged lazy, performative art instead of intentional, meaningful artwork. I make no clear judgement call on this kind of art, but I feel encouraging people to see art and encouraging artists to make art is never a bad thing.
Thank you,
Frank Ormond
(END OF FRANK ORMOND’S RESPONSE.)
MATTHEW PUNGITORE’S RESPONSE—
Dear Frank,
Politicians should send money to artists who will lift up the underclasses through works of Beauty! Elevate rich and poor through ornate exquisiteness. If we had the ability, the funds, we artists could beautify our local towns and cities. Society must evolve, mature, grow up. Artists have the potential to generate togetherness, to create virtuous communities around mature culture and beautiful, thought-provoking works of Art.
By helping to fill more places outside the urban areas with beautiful architecture and artwork, artists could help drive tourism. Let us find a way to get more people outside, get them actually visiting places other than the major cities, people walking around together, civilized, friendly. Develop greater interest everywhere in tasteful, mature events aimed at adults. Develop greater support for small-business and the mom-and-pop. Demand for more production of classy cabarets, parades, street performances, as well as sophisticated and culturally significant events and festivals. Build new stadiums, markets, bookstores, parks, galleries, museums, libraries, theatres, opera houses, dance halls and music halls, ballrooms, carnivals, public gardens, zoos, and circuses. Not just in the cities! Totally remake the suburbs and the small towns anew. Revive the Belle Époque. Let us be committed to the construction of better and more beautiful universities, hospitals, therapy and rehabilitation centers, hospices, civic centers, town halls, gymnasiums, ateliers, and dojos. All the construction that would be needed, the labor, hiring, rehearsing, preparing, and what have you, this would create many jobs, mature culture, national pride, wholesome communities, and civic togetherness.
With hope,
Matthew Pungitore
(END OF MATTHEW PUNGITORE’S RESPONSE.)
FRANK ORMOND’S REPLY TO MATTHEW PUNGITORE—
Dear Matt,
While I understand the motivation behind your ideas, I am not sure the solution should be the politicians. These men and women are supposed to represent the people and work for the people, but historically have been self-interested and driven only by selfish political motivations. However, they also have the funds.
I agree that artists could beautify their local areas, if they had the means. Outdoor spaces in particular need improvements. However, much of the artwork that is displayed tends to be the types that you and I both agree are lacking in intention and beauty. Local parks tend to display abstract art instead of classical sculptures. This is unfortunate, but what can be done?
One of your points was to foster tasteful mature events for adults. By this I believe you mean art shows, performances, and live music. Such things are able to make a park or neighborhood more beautiful. Yet, local communities who do practice these things fall into the abstract and political.
A push towards the classical arts of painting and sculpting what is seen should be the primary focus for many art groups. Yes, art schools still teach how to paint and draw from models, but the end result is to get away from that and use the learned techniques for the conceptual rather than the empirical. This applies also to the author, since author groups can advocate for book clubs and discussion groups.
I love that you didn’t forget the small towns in your response. All too often we forget that the arts can flourish in the rural, though the urban is where the art shows are. Let us not forget the artist who lives on a farm!
Thank you,
Frank Ormond
(END OF FRANK ORMOND’S REPLY.)
End of part 2. Stay tuned for the following parts.
Thank you.
Continue to Part 3.
Frank Ormond 