Art = The Conversation Death Trap

Masaccio was the first great Master of the Renaissance. His work perpetuated many of the ideas that Giotto, the first person to be famous since the classical period, revolutionized and brought into light, though in a poorly developed manner.

It was Masaccio though, an apprentice of Masolini who really embarked on the quest towards realism and humanity while deviating from the standard flat frescos, tempera art and gothic art that meant to instil fear in godly forces and tell stories from the bible. Judith Clark writes that art was the ‘television’ of the Renaissance, and Massacio formed more dramatic, and importantly realistic art that drew people in and moved them to feel the emotions that the people in his paintings felt. He also humanized god, making Jesus and the Holy Trinity more reachable to the people, more humble and even portrayed saints in the state of poverty. Masaccio took on painting from a mathematical standpoint and perfected perspective, which was one of the reasons his paintings appeared extraordinarily realistic to the people of the Renaissance.

Ironically, all though Masaccio achieved so much, the one thing that fascinated me the most about him, above the fact that until this day it is not known where he learned all that he knew, is that he died very young.

Now though, art has become unreachable to many in their opinion. This idea has been perpetuated by art elitists, the kind of people that think they’re the only ones with enough knowledge and experience to tell you exactly what that formless, undecipherable splash of paint on some famous painting means. Its in peoples minds that art requires one to have in depth knowledge of art history, and some kind of ‘symbology sensory’ that allows one to pick up what one brush stroke indicates and another deters. This is a very frustrating mentality that bars me from having any real form of discussion about art with a person (discussions mean I don’t do all the talking) because they just turn off the part of their brain that thinks.

Art throughout history has dipped in and out of the autocracy of art to the feebleness of it (Rene Magritte’s ‘The Use Of Words’ comes to mind). Although it seems confusing and rather random, if you look closely enough one realises that art simply mirrors the cultures, ideals, and situations of those times. It truly was the ‘television’ of times, and as the world got older, it simply showed things to be exactly as they are.

If you’re someone who has never considered taking art seriously, you should really give it a shot. My interest in art isn’t inherent, although now I feel like it runs in my blood. Around me, many of my friends are hardcore music fanatics. They play more than one instrument each, spend thousands on books, notes, lessons, concerts and CD’s. They obsess and babble about all sorts of music things all the time (to which I don’t relate at all), being all “Shit, that day I was play Canon in D, and holy cow, my sister started jamming on the guitar, and I was so pissed, because blahbleelahblah....”. They know names of composers, play famous pieces and know bits and pieces of history. But I haven’t even met one person with a true interest in art. I know people who can paint quite nicely (because they went for art classes for years) but nobody has the bug I have. Truthfully, music and art are closely related, so why is art so unreachable?

When you look at a painting, in your mind you don’t have to be thinking “The use of geometry is very reminiscent of Kasimir Malevich’s ‘The Red Square’, by the method in which it jettisons realism and portends the end of logical comprehension of art in a more seismic and/or generic inclusion of perception.” Hell no! Even I don’t think that. And I can guarantee no art historian or specialist thinks that all the time either. You can admire the colours, interpret it to your own liking. Heck, when I saw a picture of Pablo Picasso’s ‘Potrait of Ambrose Vollard’ (which is a marvel of cubism) all I could think was “Holy shit! That looks like those flashing abstract thingys from Depeche Mode’s video Martyr!”. Yeah, and I’m the optimistic one.

If modern vagueness isn’t your thing, a lot of classical works are a lot more literal. During the quest for realism and humanism, paintings focused on being more realistic while maintaining the mysticism and mystery it was known best for (and no, I’m not talking about the Da Vinci code). Look it up online. Or use it as an excuse to visit the rest of the world.

Whatever it is, art should reemerge from the shroud that is the fog of hippies, optimists and elitists. Go visit some art gallery already people.

And while you’re at it, look up some works of Masaccio. Although I’ve already finished the Renaissance and am now treading through the ornate and expensive (International Gothic, guh), Masaccio sticks with me, simply because he died by age 27. As an artist it disables him from the stream of history, because his life ended, and that was a full stop in the period of Masaccio and his immediate influences. I think it appeals to me because of how we are all left hanging, it makes him an enigma. Who knew what kind of revelations, what marvels he might have created, if he had lived long enough?

I guess that shows its not always about the art.