Defining Art as a Lie is Far from the Truth

One of the first days of class we were asked to state what we consider the definition of art to be. Without a doubt I developed a more open minded approach to art since then. While this may be true, I still lack appreciation for the more unconventional forms of art.

Maybe this lack of appreciation of modern art is ignorance on my part because artists like Vincent Dubourg have great success with their art. Vincent Dubourg has a very peculiar art style, it involves a combination of chaos and organization based around a piece of furniture or other form of manufactured goods. In some works the line between organization and chaos is caused by a destructive force while in others the line is a representation of the division between civilization and nature.

Below are great examples comparing the two styles of Vincent Dubourg’s works:

When I look at these sculptures I don’t get a strong sense of amazement or awe, the works look very simple but Vincent Dubourg justifies his works saying that “the process may seem random but it is fully controlled”. The fact that every bent twig has a specific meaning, contributing to the major theme of defying nature but later successfully being consumed by it, adds to the poetic symbolism behind each piece.

Most of these sculptures are based on a form of poetic symbolism that is used to convey a certain message. In this case it is the cycle of creation, destruction, resilience and consumption that civilization has with nature. Because these works are built upon a foundation of truths it is hard to define art as a lie, especially since art is used as a form of expression.

The current abstract nature of modern art makes it almost impossible to predict what art will be like in the next decade or even the next century. Questioning the future of art is as futile as trying to define it. Maybe the best option is to just sit back and relax, after all what is art but the perspective of the viewer?

9 Responses to "Defining Art as a Lie is Far from the Truth"

Ann Privorotskiy says:

October 30, 2014 at 12:30 am

I’ve never heard of Vincent Dubourg, but the examples of his pieces that you posted, seem really cool and visually appealing to me for some reason. I like how his pieces incorporate chaos and unpredictability to standard, everyday objects, such as a bench. What Dubourg says about how every single bend and angle has meaning and purpose, is hard for me to believe. When I view art, I usually view it holistically, so if the angle in one of the bends was altered, I probably wouldn’t notice much, because the piece as a whole would still have the same meaning to me probably. I am also a fan of the artist’s theme revolving around the never-ending cycle of nature, because that’s something that is relevant and applicable to everyday life.
anandpoonai says:

October 30, 2014 at 3:09 pm

When you first started your blog, you mentioned that you had a lack of appreciation for forms of unconventional art. Its not that I have a lack of appreciation, but sometimes, I don’t see the huge hype about certain forms of artwork. Obviously, my perception of art is different from everyone else’s, but sometimes, I cannot see the meaning behind certain forms of art. There are certain pieces of art that really bring out chaos and unpredictability and I really appreciate those forms sometimes. When I look at art, I have a more simplistic view and I never really understand the complex meanings behind the canvas. However, it is definitely a skill that I would like to work on. You’re right when you say, “The current abstract nature of modern art makes it almost impossible to predict what art will be like in the next decade or even the next century.” We don’t know what art will become, but I think that’s just the best part about art. Art is a mystery.
layanahnsouli says:

October 31, 2014 at 2:15 pm

At first glance, these art works seem relatively simple and uninteresting. However, after learning the theme behind them, a combination of chaos and organization, I gained an appreciation for their intricacies. In the first four pieces, the stark contrast between the sharp geometric edges of society clash with the unruly shapes of nature. In this way, Dubourg’s work accurately symbolizes the clash between nature and establishment.
Susan Tenneriello says:

November 1, 2014 at 11:44 am

Does Dubourg currently have an exhibition up in NYC? Is there an article attached to his work? It’s not clear what your sources are for this post.
michalsudo says:

November 1, 2014 at 11:15 pm

Sorry I forgot to add the link, I edited my post.
No Dubourg does not have an exhibition in NYC.The reason why I chose to do this article was because there was a sculpture put up in Union Square that had a very similar style to that of Vincent Dubourg. The statue was that of a bicycle that had been badly damaged with rubble all around it and a large slab of concrete erected from the ground. I regret not taking the time to give it more than just a moment of attention so I don’t know the artist behind the work, but I don’t think it was Vincent Dubourg.
Susan Tenneriello says:

November 2, 2014 at 10:08 am

Thanks for adding the link, and your context. The article is interesting. Dubourg’s recycling and commentary on waste reminds me of another sculptor from Canada Brian Jungen. He uses mass-produced products re-create mythic and ritual objects: Nike Air Jordan’s become masks or plastic chairs become dinosaurs. You can view some of his works at the Smithsonian– http://www.nmai.si.edu/exhibitions/jungen/works.html
Isabel Vulakh says:

November 3, 2014 at 12:14 am

Art is simple yet complex, and it is interpreted differently by each individual. When I first looked at the pictures of Dubourg’s work, I was impressed by the funky design but I would have never went a step further to interpret the artworks as models of choas and organization. The design looked random, but it turns out each bend and curve was strategically done to emphasize a certain concept that the artist had in mind. It’s amazing that art can have a different meaning for every person.
krystalau says:

November 3, 2014 at 8:54 pm

I have never heard of Vincent Dubourg before but the artwork that you shown seems really cool. I love minimalistic pieces and his art work is minimalistic but they also have a great meaning to them. I also like that he incorporated everyday objects into his works like furniture. I noticed that in every piece there was a lot of just straight lines and shapes, but then randomly there would be something that just interrupts the flow. I didn’t know what it represented until you mention it, and the explanation made a lot of sense. I think his work is pretty amazing and I hope to see more of it.
stephenesses says:

November 6, 2014 at 5:38 pm

Although I may not fully appreciate some types of unconventional art, I would say That it is because I do not fully understand it. In my opinion, art is what the viewer sees, and the feeling that they get. The reason why I do not appreciate this art is because without a true understanding of it, it is hard for me to have strong feelings for it. His art is certainly the type that kind of confuses me, it is hard for me to understand this art, but I would say that I’m sure out does appeal to many people.

Comments are closed.