The State of the Arts: Will Drawing And Painting Continue To Hold A Place In Our Evolving Contemporary Visual Arts Landscape?
The contemporary visual arts landscape is in a constant state of flux. Alina Cohen calls it a ‘pendulum swing’. It’s seen historically in the late 18th century move from lush Romanticism into stark Realism; the lingering brush strokes of Expressionism into the geometry of Cubism; and, most recently, the 21st century transition into digital and immersive art.
Given the latter trend, it may be appropriate to question the necessity of the traditional fine art practices of drawing and painting in contemporary visual arts. Once the undisputed cornerstone of Western Art, they now share an increasingly occupied visual arts arena alongside an array of contemporary media. Some critics are wary of this evolution - I believe this concern is unnecessary. Drawing and painting will not suffer extinction at the hands of modernity. As we embrace the natural evolution of the visual arts, we carry the paintbrush and pencil with us as long-standing, invaluable elements of the artist’s toolkit. Not every modern artist will choose to paint or draw, and that’s okay. But isn’t this creativity’s central principle: the freedom of choice?
In 2018, Jacob Willer published ‘What Happened to the Art Schools?’, airing grave concerns at an apparent ‘reduced focus’ on drawing and painting within UK higher education. Now ‘art’s old ceremonial vestments’, the two traditional practices have been replaced with the intention to ‘make a novel statement’; ‘less a matter of making a good – or even beautiful – picture’. Willer seems to directly correlate “good art” with the use of traditional media, as such constructing a dangerous binary between classic and contemporary fine arts, with the latter deemed lesser, antiquated and ‘chaotically diverse’.
Willer’s writing does prompt ideas worthy of note. Namely, that our perception of the contemporary visual arts landscape is fiercely reliant on how the individual defines “good art”. Of course, this is entirely subjective. Some may look to the work’s representative accuracy; others to the emotion it stirs within them; perhaps some may consider the price tag and the artist’s celebrity. Some will favour the aesthetic of classic methods, whilst others will be invigorated by new, contemporary methods. This is all up for debate, and I wish not to settle on any certainty, rather accepting art’s inherent subjectivity.
One certainty I do wish to establish, is the artist’s endeavour to respond to the world that surrounds them. And, undoubtedly, our 21st century reality is increasingly tech-centric. It follows that the artist will find themselves working in ways that consider this development. Alina Cohen predicts, for our coming decade:
“As a young generation of artists who grew up with instagram and experiential art comes of age, art schools will cater to their desires to push digital and immersive art further.”
It’s easy to understand Willer’s concerns in light of Cohen’s prophesying. However, she does not dismiss traditional practice. She speaks of current emerging ‘young painters’, as well as predicting the names that will dominate the global painting scene over the next decade. Cohen welcomes the progression of digital art whilst acknowledging a robust durability in traditional methods such as painting - for her, it seems that all media hold a future in our visual arts landscape.
Moreover, I believe a lot of the criticism against immersive, conceptual and digital methods is founded in our stereotypical perception of “the artist”. The image that is conjured is a figure, poised and ponderous; paintbrush or pencil in hand; dedicated to honing their craft. It is less likely to be a character like Jeff Koons - the artist runs a factory-esque operation, with a paid workforce crafting artworks on his behalf. Whilst he does participate in the preliminary designs of the work, the artist’s own hand rarely features in the construction of his creative portfolio. Koons’ methods are divisive in contemporary discourse, largely because of his divorce from the stereotypical “artist” image earlier described. Koons’ work is not a product of huge personal dedication or a honed individual artistic craft, yet he is, in so many senses, an artist. His artworks are widely exhibited and hold great renown.
As the visual arts evolve, more figures like Koons will undoubtedly appear. That is, artists who overturn tradition. They populate the art historical timeline consistently and are essential agents of change. Some do so with paintbrush in hand - an example being James McNeill Whistler. The artist painted Nocturne in Black and Gold – The Falling Rocket (c. 1895), a painting that, at it’s time, was so outrageously abstract it would take Whistler to court to defend its artistic worth. Others choose less traditional media; immersive, participatory installations such as The Obliteration Room (2002) by Yayoi Kusama, where the artist invites the visitor to collaborate in creating the artwork by marking a blank, white room with stickers they are given on entry.
Over the course of a few weeks the room is transformed from a blank canvas into an explosion of colour, with thousands of coloured stickers stuck over every available surface. Kusama has become a much-loved pioneer in the immersive exhibition, a format that entirely dismisses much of the historical fine art stereotype. Notably, unlike Koons, she is largely celebrated for this fact. Artists have been, and will be, subject to criticism and/or celebration whether they adhere to the use of traditional media or choose to investigate alternatives. Some such artists will overturn tradition, and in doing so, drive Cohen’s pendulum to a new creative place - a fact not to be feared, but to be both expected and exalted.
So, where does this leave us? Certainly, we must accept that the contemporary visual arts landscape has grown busier. Once a horizon punctuated most significantly by the pencil and paintbrush, we now see them stand alongside the presence of immersive and digital media as well as studio methods that divert from the independent craftsman and easel. There’s a near overwhelming breadth of artwork and artists to be received in contemporary culture, but this does not mean the demise of traditional skill.
Indeed, the advantage of the visual arts landscape is that it’s horizon is limitless; what Willer describes as ‘chaotically diverse’, I believe is the appearance of freedom and inclusion. Undoubtedly, Cohen’s pendulum will sway into the future, developing the art world ever-further. All media belong to a single visual arts landscape: a delightful, chaotically diverse, ever-developing space; subject to judgement but inclusive of artwork in all its forms, painting and drawing included.
Written by Lucy Pratt
I'm a Liberal Arts graduate working in arts marketing and research. I’m particularly interest in access and creating ways for all kinds of people from all kinds of communities to experience the visual arts. Fave colour: green; fave animal: frogs.
