May I have your attention?

The art world has been shrouded with a dark stigma for a while now over its radical, sometimes too edgy nature. Artists continually push the envelope in dark, sometimes disturbing ways that began during the Dada period in the early 20th century. Perhaps one of the most famous pieces from this period is Marcel Duchamp’s “Fountain,” a found art sculpture of a urinal signed “R. Mutt.” The piece, revered for its drastic existential questioning on the basis and standards of art, can be found as a replica in IU’s own art museum. Artists continued in Duchamp’s steps to create new forms of art that have brought on serious questioning on the status of art. Were the artists creating personal meaning, or were they merely craving attention?\nIn 1989, photographer Andres Serrano submerged a plastic crucifix into a clear vat of his own urine, photographed it and won an award from the Southeastern Center for Contemporary Art for the piece, titled, “Piss Christ.” It caused great controversy by some who argued that it was blasphemous and disrespectful but brought out praise from some critics who agreed with the idea of religion’s place in the modern world. Putting any arguments of its meaning aside, I would like to express my honest and researched opinion:\n“Piss Christ” is not a great work of art. I wouldn’t even call it decent.\nThe photograph is imbalanced with bad centering. It is dimly lit and the figure of Christ is very hard to make out. There is an inconsistency of light and shadow that causes blurring in some portions and sharper depiction in others. The photograph was hastily done as an entrance into the contest. The image as a whole is not arresting, contains little clarity on the subject matter, and is hard to make out what it even is.\nSadly, this photograph has ushered in a new wave of “artists” whose works and eccentric media can only bring the term “attention whore” to mind. The stigma of artists as relentless people who will go to any shocking measure for coverage needs to be undone. Artists such as Robert Mapplethorpe, whose fascinating activist photography is considered classy-controversial, have been dismissed as invalid due to this maltreatment of the intent of true art. However, there is still true art out there, but it is not being given credit because of its lack of shock value.\nAt this point in history, it seems that nothing can shock us anymore. And maybe that’s a good thing. Maybe now that we can see what is art and what is attention-seeking, we’ll be able to get back to the fundamentals of artistic intent and creative meaning.