Modern Art-sy-ish-stuff and Progress

I overheard J telling L about the art books he had been looking at. He commented that art history seemed to start poorly, got better and better, then degenerated into randomness--"splotches of paint".

This progression--from an art's simplistic beginnings, through perfection and refinement, to a high point that then degenerates into more and more chaotic work--can be seen not only in painting, but in sculpture, music, poetry, dance, and almost any other art form you can think of.

I said "chaotic." It's often called "modern" or "progressive" (which mean the same thing in this context), or "abstract" or "avant-garde*." Those who wish to defend it might say that it's a physical expression of abstract thoughts or feelings (generally feelings, which are less orderly); they might also say that it is a free expression of the artist's independent spirit. I say it's still chaotic.

What is the reason for the change? There are many and complex reasons, but the central one is atheism. As men lost belief in a orderly God they lost belief in an orderly world. Evolution is another: the idea that all life is the result of random chance is a good reason that art should be the result of random chance. (Or at least look like it.) Pessimism is another reason (though it is also a result): we believe much more in the grittiness and pointlessness of life now than we did five hundred years ago--and that is a good reason that art should gritty and pointless.

People nowadays seem to have art and science confused. They hail progress in both as if it were equally good and beneficial. But it's not. When science progresses, we learn more about the world and get nearer our goal of full understanding. When art progresses, we move away from truth, which is the goal. Look at it this way: if you were standing in the very middle of the city of Truth, then any progress you make would have to be away from it. Once perfection is reached, any change is for the worse.

("Stone him! stone him!" they cry, "He's trying to stop progress! His Christianity is trying to send us back to the dark ages!" If you mean scientifically, then that is complete nonsense. If you mean artistically--I say, "Why not?")

But back to my brother's comment, the thing that seemed to key him off most about modern art is that it's unrealistic. All I can say is, "Amen!"



* "Avant-garde" is related to our word "vanguard," the foremost part of an army. It means radically new and original, innovative, and pioneering. This is good when applied to science, but bad when applied to art. Or government. Our founding fathers consciously tried not to be innovative when they created the Constitution--they disliked the word and idea.