In Defence of Postmodern Art

 In Defence of Postmodern Art

By: Nathan Steward

Postmodern art has been interchangeably described as “boring” (Benford), “[not] important” (Lane Craig), and frequently meaningless; many prefer to view the enterprise as one grand money-laundering scheme – an elitist scam where vast quantities of wealth are exchanged for blank canvasses and bananas taped to walls. The medium is often compared to others like literature, music, film – it is wondered why visual art specifically refuses to produce material which is appreciated by the majority, rather than a high-brow minority. Yet, despite my sympathies for these views, I am writing to defend Postmodern art; not for the aesthetic value of the art itself but for what the movement means for our future.  

Firstly, we must examine what ‘art’ really is – we will not, I am afraid, be able to provide a true definition – there is an entire school of philosophy embattled in finding the ‘real’ answer, which, as with anything else furiously debated by philosophers, means giving the ‘truth’ is not worth our time. Instead, I will offer my own loose definition: art is an aesthetic product – intentionally created – which involves some level of sensory perception in order to establish a meaning or interpretation which is reflective of the times we live in. Under this framework, despite many claims to the contrary, Postmodern art is definitely ‘art’. There is the argument to consider that many Postmodern artists love to paint themselves as ambiguous and claim their work is absent of any intentional meaning, or even, actively exists in opposition to ‘meaning’. All of this is of course the intellectual masturbations of a profession where 53.5% of working artists come from “the highest levels of privilege” (DAC Survey of Earnings). Sadly, as cerebral and dramatic as the ‘death of meaning’ presents itself, one must wonder if these people have realized that the intentional absence of meaning is a meaning in of itself. The aspect of my definition I want to draw attention to is its final part: that of being reflective of the times – which I think, is where Postmodern art asserts itself most. 

To clarify, we live in a post-meaning age, crippled by Trumpy ‘fake news’, an abandonment of objectivity, and a wholesale rejection of what used to be considered beautiful. We need to look no further than our buildings; soulless skyscrapers, nauseating concrete geometry, and polished-white ‘insane-asylum-quiet-room’ home décor. Conformity and simplicity have conquered almost every aesthetic aspect of the modern world, as a further example, take note of the artistic degeneration of company logos into soulless cartoons. We can blame this on the boom in mass machine-controlled production, the tyrannical hegemony of a small number of leviathan-like corporations, or on our universal reliance on plastic conveniences and decorations, but I prefer to address our own artistic complacency. This is our age – depressing as that may be – and Postmodern art rises to the occasion. 

 

There is however light at the end of the tunnel. Art may evolve, but this evolution is not a ladder – there are no neat steps upward toward some higher form of art, measured by the century. Instead, like most things, art is cyclical. We need to dispense with the snobbery of assuming we are always progressing – humans are human, and as scientists keep telling us, we are no smarter than we were two thousand years ago; we just have better nutrition, generational wealth and more things written down. The worry that art is destined toward an even more abstract path defined by further technological advances is ill-conceived – there will always be the next stage of the cycle – which brings us to the silver lining. 

Art is always reactionary. Pump the people with empiricism and ground-breaking scientific discoveries like the Enlightenment did, and they will respond with Romanticism. Give them romantic ideals and heavenly beauty and they will invariably turn to Gothicism and wallow in dark, uncanny waters. It is a fact of life that in most artforms the junior practitioner will always attempt to refute and transform the senior school’s work. Give the people a dead and deaf culture – ignorant to majority opinion – weighed down by nihilism, subjectivity, and AI-generated slop, and with luck then, they will create something better. 

Postmodern art is as important as any bridge – any steppingstone or liminal space – which takes you from where you were to where you are going. Postmodern art is important because most of us don’t enjoy it; most of us gain no meaning from it; most of us don’t understand it. What comes next then will be enjoyed by the majority; will burst with meaning; will be understood. If art is a cycle, then we must recognise we are fortunate to be the furthest from ever seeing modern art again. Even if the cycle starts from the very beginning – the nuclear apocalypse strikes – and we are back to daubing clay and ochre stickmen onto cave walls – I, for one, will eagerly join in and await whatever movement comes next.