Eric Siegel writes:

>   Amy: What do people buy, music or art? Do millions flock to any
>   manifestation of visual culture as they do to any one of a number of
>   music acts that are out there? Do millions buy reproductions of
>   anything that might be categorized as visual art

What about TV, film, video?  These may not be ART but they are certainly
visual media, and Amy's point was not so much about the power of art as the
power of visual images.  Her examples were flag, cross, swastika, and she's
right.  These are among many highly charged cultural icons that have
enormous expressive potential when used by artists.  The controversy
surrounding their use comes not from the art world, but from an audience
which feels that the meaning of such icons are absolute and no artist
should have the arrogance to manipulate them. People assume ownership of a
culture's visual material and feel personally violated when those images
are "stolen" by art.

Who can know whether it is musical language or visual language that are
most embedded in our culture.  These things are not really quantifiable,
except by individual bias.  ART is certainly marginalized in culture and
speaks to only a tiny fraction of the populace.  But visual language is
very much a part of us and our dependency upon it seems only to be
increasing.  When ART and the visual vocabulary of a culture collide, the
combustion is spontaneous and powerful.





Stephen Nowlin,
Vice President
Director, Alyce de Roulet Williamson Gallery
Art Center College of Design
1700 Lida Street
Pasadena, California 91103  USA (818)396-2397vox (818)405-9104fax
[log in to unmask]