Last week, I mentioned the possibility of writing an article about the Albright-Knox gallery. I'm still thinking about it. But something interesting did occur to me on the subject.
It seems to me that pop-culture, at least in visual aesthetic, is closer to an older western sensibility than modern art is.
Take these three images: a landscape painted by Albert Bierstadt in the 1800's, a painting by Jackson Pollock, and a search result for "Shadow of Mordor wallpaper" on Google.
The first two are paintings by highly regarded artists. The third depicts a character and a setting from the story-line of a video game derived from a seminal work of high fantasy - the pop-culture is several layers deep there.
And yet, which of these three is not like the others?
Something being popular doesn't necessarily mean it's good. But, something being esoteric or unpopular doesn't necessarily mean it's good either.
Jackson Pollock's paintings hang on gallery walls, but millions and millions of people enjoy The Lord of the Rings and play video games that look like that third picture there. I mean hey, guess which one's my desktop background?
I've made some good progress hammering out the first section of the book using large swaths of text from my already existing articles. More to do though. I promise I'll have a sample or something for you next week, k?