LOAD THE CANON!

Even if it were possible at this point to create a new canon that would unify the conversation of contemporary art I would be against it. I understand the desire to unify the masses in order to counteract the negative effects of the capitalist marketplace, after all I'm a communist, but I'm not sure how helpful a contemporary canon would be. It seems to me that strictly defining the elements and objectives of "high art" does not unify a artistic community but instead segregates it. There are the chosen artists who are working within the constraints of the canon and then there is everyone else. The question then is if those working within the canon are truly moving any sort of discussion or understanding of art forward. While Frank Stella was painting "The Marriage of Reason and Squalor, II" R. Crumb was creating "Fritz the Cat", and Henry Darger was close to beginning his work in an upstairs apartment in Chicago. All of this work was going on simultaneously but only Stella's was considered part of the fine art discussion, even though both Crumb and Darger have arguably had greater influence on contemporary visual culture. A "fractured" art world filled with artists creating idiosyncratic works may make it difficult to identify the artistic concerns of the day. It also allows us access to a rich and diverse discussion where we have to evaluate each work on its own terms instead of holding it up to a score card, and I think that is a good thing. It is a good thing because it requires that we as viewers really engage with and question the work we see. It is also good because we as artists are not restrained into to making the same work.