
People like to use words that they think have special meanings and that clarify their arguments, but in effect they are simply mis-employing terms. One is «evolution.» According to the muckety mucks, namely one Charles Darwin and his parishioners, man evolved from a monkey that decided one day that he would walk on two legs, stop eating bananas and instead of living in the trees, moved to suburbia. Well, mister brilliant scientist, you missed the boat because monkeys (like most animals on Earth) are much more adapted to life on this planet than we (Homo Sapiens) are. For one, they do not need governments, they do not pay taxes, they do not suffer from sunburn and they do not have spinal maladies like a lot of us men and women of the world. So if we take your theory with a grain of salt, we can logically deduce that we we are the de-evolution of a monkey. Imagine that!
And what about art you are asking? I will tell you. Art has never evolved. Art, since the first rupestrian paintings in the caves to Egyptian, Roman, Byzantine, Arabic, Indian, Chinese, Japanese, Aztec, Maya, Navajo, has existed completely and fully. It has not grown flippers, lost legs or gained wings. The idea of art evolving is ridiculous at best and at worst a lie perpetrated by those who would like to control art history. Ancient art, Renaissance art, and the art of every epoch throughout history has changed, as it should. Developing new styles, new techniques, new paints, new brushes, new canvases etc, does not mean evolution. Each period in art history has its art and it is still as valid today as it was when mande and if you don’t believe it go to an auction at Sotheby’s or Christie’s and see what people are paying for such masterpieces.
Here I leave you with a short video of art that is as precious (and as complete) today as it was the day it was done. No evolution required. The painter, the artist, or the sculptor needs to grow with the times, capture the spirit of his time and work with it. That is how art develops.
CHEERS
Thank you, Francesco!
Joanna
Me gustaLe gusta a 1 persona
Pleasure
Me gustaMe gusta
This is a great, insightful post. I had never thought about art from this perspective before. Excellent read!
–Scott
Me gustaLe gusta a 1 persona
Thank you so much Scott! I appreciate your words.
Me gustaLe gusta a 2 personas
Well said, Francisco. I suspect misapplication of the term «evolution» to art reflects the foolishly superior attitude of later eras toward those before. By the way, I agree w/ you about the error of the biological concept of macroevolution.
Me gustaLe gusta a 1 persona
Yes, many fail to realise that art is a finished product that needs not improve with the coming era. Each era has its own spirit. There is no “evolution” beyond that of the artists themselves. Thank you Anna and all the best.
Me gustaLe gusta a 1 persona
Interesting painting!
Me gustaLe gusta a 1 persona
Thank you Dawn. All the best to you. And what is your opinion, does art evolve?
Me gustaMe gusta