TRAC2014: Roger Scruton and Odd Nerdrum - Contemporary Representational Aesthetics

Contemporary Representational Aesthetics
Panelists: Roger Scruton & Odd Nerdrum
Moderator: Michael Pearce
TRAC 2014 was held at Crown Plaza hotel in Ventura, CA.
The main topics of discussion: Odd Nerdrum's Kitsch and Roger Scruton's Beauty.
Producers of The Representational Art Conference 2014 was Michael Pearce & Michael Lynn Adams.
www.trac2014.org/
nerdrummuseum.com
Recorded by Nerdrum Pictures.
nerdrumpictures.no/

[@fromeveryting29]

I'm an art history student who largely sympathizes with Scruton and Nerdrum. I've seen a LOT of contemporary, abstract and conceptual art through the last years during my fine art schooling. I really tried to understand where they were coming from, and what values they held, and I made a few conceptual works myself that were well received by the teacher staff (who were all artists too). But I took an honest look into what art actually gave me, and I found that I was absolutely and totally bored by the conceptual art. After I graduated art school, I went on a trip to London and visited the national gallery where I saw Rembrandt, Titian and Turner, that made me feel like life was beautiful, meaningful, dignified and justified. The next day I visited Tate Modern, which was ridden with documentation of human depravity, superficial politics and dry conceptual theory. No redemption. I honestly felt like I'd just been and seen disease after exiting Tate modern. I get that all those artists are working hard, and think that what they do is meaningful and interesting, but the values they are working from - I can't get myself to stand behind. They have entered a game, and play it well. A game I don't accept the rules of. While all of this was going on, I painted. I actually am quite good, too. I was top in art school in figurative painting and drawing. But in secret, I made self-portraits, a narrative painting of me and the woman I loved and some dream-like landscapes. None of which I really dared to show off. But those were the most meaningful to me. I contemplated many times if I should have just gone and studied with Nerdrum (I'm Norwegian), but the cult that has grown around him seem to have become bitter and narrow. When I discovered that I had a weakness for religious, sentimental classical and (some) modern art, I figured I'd look deeply into art history and discover, with sympathy, what the past valued, and revitalize what I felt to be important values out of that. You could argue I could have looked into that by myself, and I have, but some of the professors in university really LOVE the past, and can see it in ways that make you see more than you would yourself. It's all about values. No matter what happens, and no matter how hard someone tries to indoctrinate me, I'm confident that I can see through it. Not many art history student practice art seriously themselves, and few people, in general, are honest with themselves. Wish me luck.

[@hairdie]

38:56 “Fake standards can easily be managed and applied but real ones require judgement.”

[@hairdie]

RIP 🌹

[@bzxshor67mpts]

I can relate to what you are saying Odd 100 % behind you. I have the same issues all the time in my discourses in Art. The reason why they don,t allow the good with the bad is because it shows up how bad art really is. I always go to a Contemporary Art Museum Gallery for an hour or so on my Art treasure journeys and then go to see the Old Masters. I enjoy them so much better after seeing bad Art. Privilege to be living in the times with you around. People will be queuing up for hours to see your works in 400 years time long after people like Picasso will be a long lost memory

[@otaviomagnani6622]

A great artist, a great philosopher, and two very entertaining lecturers. Excellent video.

[@macclift9956]

What a treat!

[@sebastianmelmoth685]

Odd's monologue at the end was the most interesting.

[@LebaneseBaron]

He has an interview on Cave of Apelles talking about these qualities in depth: kzbin.info/www/bejne/p3bOn6hjbtiaiZY

[@pasquino0733]

The irony that so called 'contemporary' 'art' has the aim of breaking new cultural boundaries is contradicted by the fact that those in art criticism and the art establishment are so unwilling to criticise it. By contrast, art critics in the Nineteenth century, such as John Ruskin and William Hazlitt wrote reviews that never shied away from the most blatant criticism. It is why we need to encourage more analysis, such as the above, that puts the fine arts - like any other discipline - under the knife of real judgment and constructive critical debate.

[@torenormannsteb8922]

Veldig innteresant og lærerikt.

[@dairmonet9657]

I don't know if painters should talk too much. It is always better to admire their art than to listen to them. The painting always comes from deep reflections that go beyond words

[@iga279]

the same applies to actors; especially Hollywood actors;

[@Ron_Robertson]

If they're a modernist artist, I think it's best not to listen to them, or bother with their works. For one thing, it's objectively garbage. But I found Mr. Nedrum very interesting, articulate, and obviously a serious thinker that takes ideas seriously. So, I have to say I'd disagree with your view here.

[@stevechmilar1215]

As a thinking painter who largely agrees with Odd and Roger, I have to ask questions. First off, being that contemporary realist ateliers do exist, how do we solve the problem that they have brought to light? Namely, as Vincent Desiderio pointed out, these schools are merely teaching safety nets. Formulaic repetition. Was that not the reason that art changed in the late 1800's? People wanted to see something different. Currently, we have all of these different things at once, the existence of so much drivel makes great representational painting more valuable?

[@normanstratford9329]

It is true that art schools are doing their kind of art in England, but to gain entry one has to get pass the panel at the interview, however if the student has private money then he becomes more acceptable to the college. In that sense, we have various places in different institutions for different art and one cannot mix them together. Art is without rules and the closes that I can discover is that man tried to see shadows as a stage of drawing prehistoric times. Art moves on, and has taken the route of freedom. The artist still has to fit somewhere in society and that is not easy. The doors usually shut the creative out, especially the galleries that consider the it to show good art.

[@Oilartnelson]

Painting is in progressive evolution, yet so is Art Critique. Be aware Odd Nerdrum and all artists for that matter. It will not be long before the progress in Art Critique develops at a speed unlike anything seen before. No longer will Art Critique be done by human beings as our minds do not have an intellect powerful enough to provide conscientious awareness to a more efficient and organized objectivity to True Beauty. IVA, or Interactive Visual Analysis in Quantum Computing will be used to analog a Library of information dating to first seashell works by Neanderthal and Hunter Gatherer charcoal works using multidimensional columns of Art History, General History, Psychology, Religious Visual Culture, Linguistics, Genetics, and more if not all data available to process the individualized critique of an artist for an objective visual analysis using all obtained information once it is placed on their known background history information and prior works for analysis in complete critique to analyze what is present. What spits out of computation will be what is discussed in future conference meetings, not what is discussed here. What will be discussed is not why or why is the artwork not seen as Truly Beautiful, but what or what is not seen as Truly Beautiful within the provisions of data since all information in the library is possessed, processed and analyzed using all informed elements obtained since the beginning of time as we know it. Good luck!

[@AA-he4uq]

I don’t agree with Nerdrum’s aesthetic theories, but I find him quite fascinating.

[@emre28oz79]

I don't think artist soul does not cares a bit of the quality of the art it produce. Quality , how important is this or that are decision made by the mind, our mind are the biggest barriers and advantages we have.

[@jackmallory7996]

I don't understand what you are trying to say. I suggest you write in your own language first and then get it translated by DeepL or even Google translate into English.

[@alamedvav]

An INFJ's wet dream, Roger and Odd sitting together for over an hour. Insane.

[@richardfbarber1815]

The Difference between fake and art is the interpretation, as long as it is not a copy that you are selling as your art and Idea That constitutes Fake art but if you are stating that it is a copy after the original artist and signed by the artist as that then it remains a copy. Simularities of pieces of art to other artwork in idea with different structures,is art.

[@EffySalcedo]

1:05:00 face the art

[@rodhidalgo6789]

The examples Nerdrum gives at the beginning of his discussion as great painting: a beautiful ass, an embrace, a sunset, etc, are not in any of his paintings. Odd Nerdrum technique might be those of Rembrandt but his topics are quite contemporary and have that originality he so much criticise. I like very much his paintings very there is something lacking in his thinking.

[@Universalist1000]

I agree. Odd Nerdrum work is very contemporary. We can see influences from the old masters there but he never could have painted like that if he lived back then. There is a lot of expressionism, magic realism, surrealism, in his work. I find him a great painter but I am confused by his theories concerning modern art, since there are also painters who work in a more realist and traditional way, like Andrew Wyeth, Antonio López García and Richard Estes. The problem with lot of contemporary art, figurative or abstract, is the lack of originality. Many artists prefer to follow on others footspets and don`t have an original style. Odd Nerdrum is trying to create an art school, but apparently rejects that concept to claim that he and his followers are kytsch creators, when in fact I find his followers more academic or neo-academic art than other thing, and often miss the originality of the master.

[@transientimages]

@@Universalist1000 I disagree, many of his motifs are very similar to Greek works, especially the statues, and especially depictions of the afterlife. Michelangelo's the last judgement comes to mind. As for the claim of originality, it tends to get confounded with perspective. We can't confuse pastiche and imitation to emulation. We all have our own perspectives, it's baked in. Perspective is our own, but our tools are not. I'm 50/50 as to his followers being more academic than others, because that's certainly true. Though some have developed their own perspective and themes to plunge. Sebastian Salvos series of paintings called "Exodus" comes to mind.

[@sunlogosis]

what really pisses me off is the elitist mindset on both sides. why people insist on saying one type of art is better than the other is beyond me. and both sides get on their high horses and ride those motherfuckers for all theyre worth. i love modern art, i love traditional art. i dont have to pick between the two, no matter what the ego maniacs say. they are both great artforms. for anyone to claim one is not art is the highest standard egomaniacal arrogance.

[@antoniolima1068]

sunlogosis absolutely right, is the a old game, duality, by only having two choices, limits competition and secures power, the same mind frame of politics, all pretence and role playing.

[@plekkchand]

There's a lot of arrogance in your perspective, too. And who cares if you get pissed off?

[@veretendo8207]

I think it isn't about "HAVING to pick" one or the other, as if it were a legal obligation. It is about wanting to choose. We can all think, speak, and act however we want, we have freedom. But SHOULD we? It's about developing our minds and making better choices on a personal level. When we like art that clearly degrades humanity, that cheapens art itself, should we embrace that? I understand the modernist art mindset. I read the books religiously growing up and as an adult working painter. Modernist art for me has SOME positive aspects, but it has SO MUCH that is lesser and even MUCH WORSE. I am free, but I made and regularly make a personal choice to avoid modernist art and the modernist mindset. I am after something beautiful and life-enhancing. I see traditional realist painting as the only way to obtain that. So what and how I paint and look at hopefully reflects that quest. When I look at the artworld today, I see that the pendulum has swung much too far toward modernism. Hopefully it is swinging back the other way.

[@edwidgewhatsosons1727]

You have to be able to see art. Nerdrum is more like illustration.

[@veretendo8207]

Nerdrum's painting looks perverse to me, at least the stuff I have seen. I don't follow him in any way.

[@pippipster6767]

English is very ropey.

[@vulvatronic]

If have to choose between charlatans like Jeff Koons, abject art of Chapman Brothers etc, and their advocates like Danto on the on hand, and second rate imitators of old style who have not the visual intelligence to grasp abstraction, art is doomed. Luckily, there is a third alternative. As for Nerdrum, he is a skilled painter with an artistic vision, but not half as good as the old masters or a modernist like Paul Klee. He is NOT a good colorist and I don't think his themes are any more genuine than those of Chapman Brothers. And what he says about Matisse is ridiculous.

[@viacarrozza]

Well said. Many of the realist painters today create apocalyptic post-modernist narratives so this weird idea that they are holding up western civilization by a thread is ridiculous. Matisse and Paul Klee were very great artists who contributed most exuberantly and optimistically to the canon.

[@wagnergoldberg]

Scruton is a sneaky political dog. In 2002 Scruton had been receiving a fee of £54,000 p.a. from Japan Tobacco International (JTI) during a period when he had written about tobacco issues without declaring an interest. The matter became public when a letter to Japan Tobacco International in which they were asked to increase the payments to £66,000 p.a., in exchange for which "We would aim to place an article every two months in one or other of the WSJ (Wall Street Journal), the Times, the Telegraph, the Spectator, the Financial Times, the Economist, the Independent or the New Statesman."

[@TheCrusaderRabbits]

Not relevant

[@wagnergoldberg]

Imagine a world where Odd Nerdrum determines what art should be. The Nazis with all their vision (FYI, Rembrandt was also Hitler's favourite artist), whom also thought representational art was the highest form and anything else was degenerative. This is essentially his argument. Sad, pathetic and unnecessary.

[@otaviomagnani6622]

+Wagner Goldberg Ever heard of Godwin's law?

[@viacarrozza]

Odd Nerdrum was the one who mentioned Adolf first (:

[@kingsleysaxon9710]

Completely irrational comparisons. Odd does not call himself an "artist" not his pictures art. You don't get it.