Note: This is a direct copy from Microsoft Word 2007.

The images didn't carry over, and neither did the formatting.
This is the raw copy.

STATE OF THE ART

An art project by Ben Prudden

Introduction

It has come to my attention recently that announcing either the word “Art” or “Artist” out
loud in public draws a very particular, almost acute, kind of attention towards you. It
becomes intimidating yet humorous to enunciate the words as they drag their feet out of
your mouth, with each syllable the face of the person listening contorts and changes as their
brain processes exactly 3 things: Experience, Function, and Value. This is by no means an
exact science, merely an observation defining the content of this essay; however the
proliferation of such mentioned words is of interest, particularly their prolific reproduction in
modern culture where they become just another word. The project that I am going to
describe and try to explain to you has caused, let’s say, great turmoil; which is an
understatement. In the words of David Falconer, “It involves pain and struggle.” This should
not imply that I have wrestled a bear, unless a bear has connotations of complex thought.

It may appear at first that this project progressed directly on from my AS-Level project
where the primary concern was illustrating the conceptual “Man Machine Interface” in an
appropriately visual manner. To a certain extent you would be right in thinking that what
you are looking at now while reading this is one and the same, but the personal transition
between then and now intrinsically alters the project. “True artists are always perfectionists
regardless of what you see in their work” is what my mother said to me a long time ago,
and I have never really understood this; I always thought I was an artist because I could
think of a concept that interested me and depict it however I wanted. This is what the
education system teaches you. Yet, I have discovered that I am not an artist. The meaning
of that statement is not in the artist’s perfectionism or how people see their work, but the
truth behind it. I have never been true in my work.

The dialogue between me and the medium, and then between the medium and the audience
had been falsified by the desire to create a very particular dialogue between myself and the
examiner to get grades required to pass the subject. I always achieved the educational
requirement, but I was never pleased with the work I had created. Last year, I created a
piece of work that required people to interact with it. It was a simple interaction requiring
people to crouch down at a particular point for the desired effect, yet I was still astonished
that people did as I asked them and then stayed to watch the entirety of the piece I had
created come together. I experienced a combination of emotions I had never really felt
before, a feeling of elation, but also a feeling that I had never been an “artist” before that
moment. In retrospect, I observed the same reaction as I did recently where their facial
interaction with the work told me that the experience I had created caused them to emote
with it in some way; as the images transitioned, the function of the piece became apparent
as the audience expressed a silent opinion about the experience. The worth of the piece is
when the audience understood the artist behind the work without knowing a thing about
me.

“State of the Art” is taking concept from what it is to a sensation, an immediacy which our
increasingly fast paced culture desires. It desires to form itself, to create for itself, as “art”
and “artist” take on increasingly broad meanings, what is considered art has to adapt to
maintain the feeling of being a truthful and transparent. The title isolates particularly well
what I want to focus on, the double meaning of the phrase illustrates how state of the art is
Note: This is a direct copy from Microsoft Word 2007. The images didn't carry over, and neither did the formatting.
This is the raw copy.

a sensation of the brand new but it is also a quantitative statement about where something
is in relation to time. The ambiguity of this is deliberate because of the evolved definition of
art itself; the range of associations makes for this incredibly dynamic new medium that has
the chance to be active and empowering.

“Art” should become active and empowering, the starting point of which is embracing and
progressing the most exciting thing about art; from the audience wanting “it to do
something” to challenge, to relate, to effect them in some way, it should become, “I want to
do something with it.” Artists should become innovators in connecting experiences between
the tribal attitudes of modern society. Like any relationship, argument, as long as it is not
with a bear, only reasons to strengthen that relationship; it is the differences and the
epistemology behind generations of cultures that we need to bridge rather than burn with
ever increasingly complicated and disguised art “movements.”

Artists like Takashi Murakami (Img. 2) and Anish Kapoor (talked about later) are just two
names from a new breed of artist, coming particularly from different countries and cultures
entirely, bridging the gap between people’s varying understanding of the word “art”. People
like meeting new people, if it wasn’t for the Judeo-Christian taboos that are instilled in us
from such a young age, a singular audience from child to grandparent, from gallery to video
game, could be achieved. Seth Godin argues that we all want to change the world; we all
find something that bothers us and go about our whole lives changing it. We used to do that
through factories and labour, and then advertising on TV, and now finally through
leadership. We lead the people that follow us. Artists have the opportunity to be the leaders
of the future expressing the world’s ideas; putting them into action. I’ll end on a quote
strangely from Megan Fox, personifying art, “It is what it is. Everybody should shut the f**k
up and go have fun.”

State of the Art – Chapter 1

Experience:

This essay will take 3 logical steps observed in the introduction: experience, function, and
value. As I got increasingly involved with “State of the Art” it was clear I was looking at
state of the art artists for my first chapter; modern artists driving new experiences derived
from a need to involve people in their artwork. It would be an impossibility to state without
conjecture that the 3 artists: Anish Kapoor, Richard Serra, and Tatsuo Miyajima, are
destined to become leaders; but what they all do is provide “State of the Art” with a more
tangible experience. That of which I would liken to the birth of a child with life experience,
these are not a new breed of artist, but they are innovators in a world that seeks to imitate
what they originally created.

One thing these artists have in common is that they are middle aged. They are middle aged
artists. There is no romantic notion that people between 50 and 70 years old are
“revolutionary” artists; instead they are generally considered content. There is this general
perception that the great artists of past and present are, in a child’s words, weird. It is
presumed by the people who write about art that due to this person’s irregular life event,
they are more susceptible to the small amounts of this magical art element found in the air
we breathe. When we say it out loud it sounds ridiculous. Art should not be above anyone;
contention brings about reflection, and reflection allows the artist to better understand the
experience they want to create.
Note: This is a direct copy from Microsoft Word 2007. The images didn't carry over, and neither did the formatting.
This is the raw copy.

The “Cultural thug” known as Richard Serra is one of these artists. Alan Yentob created a
BBC program called “Man of Steel” around Richard Serra in the fall of 2008; the thing that
struck me was Serra’s twofold celebration of subjectivity and how he was “more interested
in the misinterpretation” of things rather than what they were supposed to mean. The
phrase “If you come to the conclusion it’s a sculpture, then it’s a sculpture” kept recurring in
various forms, epitomising the ideal that art should be in exactly the same position; if you
substitute sculpture for art in that recurring phrase it makes further sense.

Richard was known as a “Cultural thug” because he fought for his belief, an argument that
clearly generated an empowering relationship between him and his audience. Serra’s work
is all about the process, there is no narrative that drives the piece forward, only a truth in
materials that is scrutinized, solidified, by our own curiosity. Furthermore, he challenges
those curiosities; he understands that his art would not exist without the audience, as he
puts it, “The viewer became the implication of the piece.” We become part of his sculptures.
The state of Richard Serra’s materials extrapolate a solid, secure, fundamentally of this
earth quality that allows people to interact directly with the art. People run their hands
across the surface, walk in and around its weighted curves and structure, all interacting with
it, but on completely different levels. His work unifies, excites a playful invention, and
changes our world, even if that is just the immediate space around it.

If Richard Serra epitomizes the position of art, then Tatsuo Miyajima epitomizes “State of
the Art.” His work consistently draws from three base concepts: keep changing, connect
with all, and goes on forever; that are slotted neatly together in a display of shifting light
and digital technology.

The immediacy of Miyajima’s work, that feeling of coincidence when something changes in
front of you when you are there, is grounded in old Buddhist principles. There is this sense
that there should be a clash between the very old and the very new, but instead the tension
between the two forms “an endless text on time” that harmonizes the people and things
caught between it. Tatsuo talks about his work in terms of base concepts, “Art should be
positively engaged in anything, a reflection of the reality, and hence should be continuously
changing; moving on a never ending (immortal) line as it changes itself.” He recognizes his
artwork as a “devise that inspires people's artistic mind. It is not independent of mankind;”
using digital verbs to access everyone. Everyone relates; especially to Tatsuo’s literal use of
clocks to create an immediacy with your own body clock.

“One of the currents in the contemporary experience of art is that it points to the
experience of the author. That is to say it dwells in the author. It seems to me that there's
another route in which the artist looks for content, which is different from meaning.” Anish
Kapoor is an incredibly articulate individual; of the artists I have chosen to reference here,
he is the youngest, but also the most pivotal. People are suspicious of artistic notions of
individualism and transcendence, they like their movements and categorization so they do
not feel threatened or estranged by a new idea. The beauty of Anish Kapoor’s work is that
his singular focus on a few significant tropes between mythology and ordinariness “Build
bridges between metropolitan centres and the periphery,” wrapping the entire audience with
the depth of his work. The layer upon layer of mathematical imagination, ancient Indian
philosophical ideals, and Scale; becoming not a matter of size, but content, relative
proportions, inviting the audience to indulge in the principles of construction, we all want to
create. An experience articulated to perfection.
Note: This is a direct copy from Microsoft Word 2007. The images didn't carry over, and neither did the formatting.
This is the raw copy.

State of the Art – Chapter 2

Function:

Articulating an experience is one thing, but allowing that experience to become a function of
the piece is another thing entirely. Art is essentially a form of expression, the results of
which culminate into a sophisticated form of entertainment; art critics may wish for a higher
purpose, but fundamentally we look at art because we enjoy it, not because it is necessary.
Yet, as the word “art” broadens its horizons into modern culture, the visual is interpreted as
more than entertainment; it is interpreted as essential. But if art is to become essential, it
must have a function.

Art has long been isolated from the real world, spoiled within a framework of the ‘art world;’
it was able to indulge itself for that extra 15 minutes of introversion. This was previously
accepted as the function of art; you ask someone “What is the meaning of art?” and if they
gave you an answer at all, it would be about its ability to express. The function of art was to
function as art. Art can no longer segregate the people that can express themselves from
those who can’t, with experiences becoming ever more connected and shared, everyone can
express themselves to varying degrees. Art now needs to resonate with a culture; it needs
to take on a greater responsibility for interpreting a culture.

The function of art has to project a collective mind set, translating its culture for it to be
understood by others. The major instance of this in the last decade is that of post-war
Japan; Hiroshima caused great trauma to the Japanese psyche, in exchange for the
countries autonomy, the west forged peace. Out of this was born Otaku culture, a form of
pop subculture where people became obsessed with specific forms of Japanese
entertainment, particularly Anime, Manga, and Video Games; but Japan lacked the
confidence to feel that its culture was relevant outside of Japan. It is now understood that
through a culture that founded itself on disappearing tradition and an influx of western
influence, a value system built on an infantile sensibility brought about exciting new forms
of creativity.

This brief story of Japan reflects art in general. The man that links the two together goes by
the name of Takashi Murakami. The most important artist to come out of Japan, probably
ever, Takashi Murakami created the foundation for which Japanese contemporary art could
be understood by the west with 3 self-curated exhibitions created between 2001 and 2005.
He toured various US cities to expound his impassioned “Superflat” theory; grabbing the
attention of both critic and general public by making appearances on Television and in
major print publications. It is unusual for the artist to publicize himself, acting more like a
public figure than the typical artist. This is Murakami’s underlying purpose, not only to be at
the forefront as a public figure, a business man almost, but to close the cavernous gap that
has been created by the division of ‘low’ art and ‘high’ art.

Takashi Murakami, coming directly from a society that he says is, “without any definitive
standard of wealth,” was baffled by the separation of art behind the likes of animation,
comics, cartoons, toys, and video games from that of art hung on gallery walls. He
responded with Superflat. An allegorical embodiment of the hypocrisy found in western
societies unending desire to consume, portrayed in a visceral, vibrant, violently and sexually
explicit warping of modern western icons like Mickey Mouse and Louis Vuitton. Using
materials and techniques, like painting each of the 70-150 colours in each piece 40 times
over and then polishing each layer down to get a flawless finish, Takashi replicates ‘low’ and
‘high’ art to sell to opposite ends of the audience. “I wanted the West to know the singular,
indisputable fact that otaku subculture is art in Japan,” says Takashi Murakami after
claiming Best Thematic Museum Show, imagine the audience if the west did the same, if
Note: This is a direct copy from Microsoft Word 2007. The images didn't carry over, and neither did the formatting.
This is the raw copy.

culture was art. Art becomes essential. Art becomes accessible; to everyone.

This concept has been taken further by a collective of artists, composers, designers, and
authors dispersed across the world; the loose term for this collective is “Fluxus” meaning “to
flow.” Fluxus itself is far more about social and political issues with consumerism than
specifically about art as a cultural function; however the thing in the Fluxus manifesto that
does interest this project is: Artists and composers and other people who wanted to do
beautiful things began to look at the world around them in a new way, "Hey! - Coffee cups
can be more beautiful than fancy sculptures. A kiss in the morning can be more dramatic
than a drama.” (Dick Higgins)

This is interesting because it hints that human beings are fundamentally of art. By the fact
that we observe the world around us, we inherently mould it, empowering us to function
further; incidentally creating exponentially more experiences. But for some reason very few
people value this; is this because few people want to lead change in the world, or is it
something that can be provoked in us all? Art functions as a means to provoke something
greater than ourselves.

State of the Art – Chapter 3

Value:

If the definition of “art” changes so too does the inexplicable link between emotional value
and economic value. As “State of the Art” seeks to provoke a broadening of the subject to
both make it more accessible and solidify its position in global culture, the ranges of
emotional and economic values must also broaden. It therefore becomes important to
understand what the value of an artwork means, its worth, which is quite possibly a harder
question to answer than the meaning of life itself.

Digressing back to personal experience for a second, an artist is all about the exhibition;
regardless of how introverted the artist may seem they want their work to be in the hands
of an audience, as without an audience, there is no work. Whether that is from the
developers of a video game finally releasing years of hard work, an animator getting their
character into an animation, or an A-Level student displaying his work in the small corner of
the hall to his family and friends; artists inevitably want share what they have done, what
they have found. The latter point is increasingly relevant to a culture that consumes
increasingly large amounts of free content; self discovery for the artist turns into a form of
discovery for the audience. A direct dialogue is created between the artist and the audience
through the work, with neither party knowing a thing about one another, art becomes a
research process.

From this point, it is easier for us to understand why the discovery of, say, a new Picasso
painting reaches ridiculous sums of money. People think they know all there is to know
about an artist because they have, on a base level, truthfully exhibited themselves; that
fundamental concept of meeting new people, and then something new is discovered that
changes the relationship. Art constantly changes; relationships are constantly being formed
and broken every day. It becomes clear people will pay to get to know someone or
something.

This has become very apparent with the recent enormous Chinese art boom on the
international market, so much so that it is being called “The Great Chinese Art Revolution.”
Note: This is a direct copy from Microsoft Word 2007. The images didn't carry over, and neither did the formatting.
This is the raw copy.

There is a link because the recent rise in Chinese artists after the utilitarian reign of Mao
Zedong ended in 1976 correlates to the increasing interest in the country as a whole, a
country that has contributed one third of all economic growth over the last decade. The
audience purchasing Chinese art no longer just want to meet and understand the artist
behind the work, but also the country behind the artist. Art therefore becomes this cultural
translator, giving people “insight into this awakening giant.”

So it has been established that economic value is dependent on emotional value, a desire to
discover, but does it work vice versa? The simple answer is no. Fundamentally the economic
value of art is as much as the artist sells it for; any appreciation in value that comes after
that point is through a false system of demand that no longer adheres to the transparency
between you and the artist. True emotional value is grounded very much in the reality of a
working process; a silent dialogue directly between you and the artist through the work is
attained if the effort the artist put into the work is reflected by the work you put in to
finding the artist in the work. When I mentioned truth and transparency in the introduction,
it referenced how artists falsify their intentions to obscure themselves from the piece; both
artist and audience need to be active, but the feeling of discovery should be empowering,
not difficult. Typically all human beings are egotistical in some way; art essentially becomes
an emotional mirror.

That emotional mirror is a new way to quantify ourselves at a point in time, as a “state” it
reflects not only ourselves, but our wealth, our taste, our ambitions, our desires, it forms
such an intricate part of our identity that when people see it on a wall in a gallery, they
want to purchase it so others don’t. Yet, as our culture becomes more disposable, what
value does art hold for the future? Hopefully, it becomes more widespread. With the rise of
the technology, what is known to signify our identity changes; Jan Chipchase from Nokia
observed that people in developing countries are now using their phone number as their
house number, and using that as their primary form of identity. This is typically what the
expansion of art means, Jan Chipchase is an artist because he observed this and is leading a
change.

People will feel the need to own the emotional mirror less and less, instead wanting to share
it with others. Eventually economic value and emotional value will collide in something that
should shake cultural foundations; we could see more art like that of Digital Kakejiku (see 3
images) where the artist takes on the responsibility to project his work big, ever changing
on the canvas of cosmopolitan society, accessible to everyone. A mass shared experience
rather than little interconnected ones. Value is the precise equilibrium between artist and
audience.

State of the Art – ‘That’ End Bit

Ending:

In the end, there is an inherent need for things to be beautiful. After writing thousands of
words, “State of the Art” as a project, as a theory, hopes to be a beautiful experience that
functions to provoke your cultural values. It has been proved time and time again that
cultural values cannot and will not remain constant; the rise of the computer, the global
recession, the expenses scandal, all indicate a fundamental cultural shift towards a more
open society, but the majority of society has become complacent, they procrastinate while
waiting for someone or something to come along and lead a creative change. Art follows
this, art is this cultural indicator, cultural translator, but is never willing to lead.
Note: This is a direct copy from Microsoft Word 2007. The images didn't carry over, and neither did the formatting.
This is the raw copy.

After a conversation with my Father recently, this complacency has gotten to the point
where we no longer care who or what is in a position of power, as long as they aren’t the
same as whatever was there last. If, as suggested, Art is a reflection of ourselves, it has
gotten to a point where art is aimlessly wandering around in a cultural no man’s land,
convinced that it is still relevant as long as it does something new. Art can no longer afford
to do this.

Above are 3 snippets from a short Japanese comic strip; they illustrate physically what
metaphorically needs to happen to art. I genuinely believe creative minds are amongst
some of the most intelligent in the world because they look at things differently; there is
creativity in all of us, it is fundamental, essential to us, our desire to shape the world
around us is indicative of it. In the modern world everything is connected, the need to make
more connections extents into the beautiful as art translates the beauty of global culture for
everyone to understand, the truth of this process creates an immediate sensation, one that
can be placed shoulder to shoulder with any form of entertainment. With our identity
projected, shared, understood, the lines between artist, art, and audience blur as we “shut
the f**k up” and value our function, to enjoy changing the world.