Contemporary art

"Contemporary art" refers to recently produced visual art. As it is newly made, it follows that it is also unevaluated as concerns its deeper meaning, if indeed any deeper meaning exists. Contemporary art can, of course, be described in superficial terms. These would include such superficial characteristics as the materials used and the techniques used to bring the object into existence. It is also possible to apply the term contemporary art to slightly older works of art. How far back in time a work can still be considered "contemporary" is not established, but it is probably not more than a few decades, and the burden is on the speaker to explain why an older work of art should be considered "contemporary". Of course, the work of a recently deceased artist can also be called contemporary art.

The term "contemporary art" roughly replaces the term "modern art". This possibly results from the concept of "postmodern" art, which has risen to prominence in recent years. The concept of postmodern art posits the notion that a significant inflection point was reached in the history of art in about the 1990s. Whether this is true or not is open to debate. (See Postmodern art, Postmodernity, Postmodernism, etc.)

The term "contemporary art"

The phrase "contemporary art" is the preferred phrase for serious art being produced at roughly the time of reference; that is, "contemporary art" is used indexically, and seems to have replaced the formerly preeminent phrase "modern art". There is no specific point in the past at which art is no longer considered contemporary; art produced decades ago could conceivably be considered "contemporary art." An explanation should probably accompany the application of the term "contemporary" to works of art not produced in the immediate past.

"Contemporary art" refers to serious works of art. "Serious" is hard to define in this context (see Classificatory disputes about art). "Serious" of course does not mean "without humor." It is even debatable whether or not the artist called "contemporary" needs to have an awareness of currently active art issues. (see Outsider art, Naïve art, and Folk art.) Nevertheless, most contemporary art is made by people who are fairly well aware of the issues in art and of the wider world.

A commonly recurring theme in art involves the two questions: is it art? and is it good art? Obviously these questions can be difficult to answer. They often involve the previously posed question: is it serious art? There are forces and opinions that want to widen the definition of art as well as voices that wish to restrain and narrow the criteria that come to bear. Aesthetics has a bearing on these questions. But quality in aesthetics is as highly debatable as are other factors that have bearing on the judgement a person makes of an object submitted as a "work of art".

As contemporary art is fairly recently made, its place in the history of art is largely unsettled. It is quite possible that a work of contemporary art will never find a meaningful place in the history of art.

Much of the "meaning" of some new art comes through implication, rather than by way of explicit statement. As there are "open questions" simmering in the art public's mind, it can be easy to "push the buttons" of fellow artists and the art public in general. The field, as far as what defines contemporary art, has never been wider. Almost anything can be considered "art." Indeed it is difficult to say that anything is not art. Nevertheless, a good deal of critical "self censorship," keeps the field more confined than the above would indicate. Much art that receives critical acclaim, does so because it addresses one or more of the "issues" of concern to the contemporary art public. There are no shortage of these "issues," because art is indeed "undefined." The key to understanding how this could be so, is to bear in mind the unlikely state of affairs, that art is actually defined by art. An artwork "passes comment" on art. A good deal of artwork addresses exactly the questions concerning the definition of art. In this sense individual works of art engage in a "dialogue" with one another. It is not a dialogue that takes place in explicit terms, but rather only one that transpires by way of implication.

Commentary about contemporary art is primarily descriptive. It is not yet possible at the time of inception to know its place in history. It is not yet possible to know its significance -- in relation to society or in relation to art. Its ideological significance can't be gauged at this point. Its relation to older works of art can't really, conclusively, be known at this stage in an artwork's existence. It is really not knowable at this point if an artwork will have any lasting relevance to art history. But contemporary art certainly can be described. Commentators should describe what they see, and what is obviously knowable about a given artwork. Description can include taking note of unique identifying visual characteristics, such as types of marks, colors, overall visual impacts, and impressions. Description can be made about what is knowable about the materials used and the techniques used to bring the object into existence. Techniques might include general categories such as photography, painting, printmaking, and stone sculpture.

Contemporary art has seen the arrival of the biennials and the triennials such as the Whitney Biennial, The Venice, São Paulo, the Kwan Ju, the Havana, Echigo-Tsumari), and documenta in Kassel, Germany.

I dissociate myself expressly from contents of the linked sites! If you should state that a linked Site exhibits pornographic, right-wing extremists, or other bad contents, I ask for your message. Thanks!