The Social Process of Art

The two films that I chose were: Uncertainty: Modernity in Art, and Abstract Expressionism and Pop Art. I chose these films because as a Sociologist and artist, I am more interested in the social aspects of art. “Art” per se, as something that one derives meaning from, does not exist. “Art” is a social construct. Social forces motivate art to be constructed socially. Therefore, I could not bear watching another film on the interpretation of a specific artist.

The first film I watched, Uncertainty: Modernity in Art was phenomenal! It did the one thing that the textbook refuses to do in any chapter: present art within a social construct over time. The film talked about the social forces, some very dark forces, that created a social milieu in the art world. It talked about colonialism, Nazism, the cultural values of western society over time, cultural diffusion, the economics of art in the marketplace, and every aspect that the textbook misses.

In other words, instead of treating art as a “humanity” within the academy, the film intersected art with social science; which is where art truly belongs. The narrator makes the case nicely, without ever really saying it, that art is a social process. There are lots of other interactions that people have with their environment and social milieu that is also a series of social processes; economics, socialization, group dynamics, just to name a few social processes. However, if everything else is a social process, then so must be art.

The narrator almost takes a Marxist approach toward the end, where he suggests that modern art is a medium in which people can realize who they really are, both individually and as a member of society. Marx posed this idea of realizing who one really is as class consciousness. Marx also posed that idea that man had become alienated from himself, others, and “nature” due to Capitalism as it represented itself during his time – the industrial revolution. The narrator also suggest that man has been alienated from nature as represented in modern art.

The film was excellent in placing art as a social construct, and representative of social forces over time, squarely placing art into the social sciences, instead of some abstract interpretive enchanted thing that magically appears because of a random thought.

The second film, Abstract Impressionism and Pop, was completely devoid of anything meaningful, and boring. The narrator took a social construct of “abstract impressionism” and tried to force his own interpretation. The whole point of “abstract art” is that it’s supposed to be “abstract.” He was very technical in analyzing the techniques of various art works. The problem with this approach is that it speaks nothing about a social construct. This film speaks to everything that is philosophically wrong with the fine arts; that it never poses any ideas of meaning for the larger social context.