Pablo Picasso 1935 “Conversation with Picasso” trans. Barr. reprinted in Art in Theory: 1900-2000. ed. Harrison and Wood pp. 507-510
“A picture is not thought out and settled beforehand. While it is being done it changes as one’s thoughts change. And when it is finished, it still goes on changing, according to the state of mind of whoever is looking at it. A picture lives a life like a living creature, undergoing the changes imposed on us by our life from day to day. This is natural enough, as the picture lives only through th man who is looking at it” p. 508
“People seize on a painting to cover up their nakedness. They get what they can wherever they can. in the end I can’t believe they get anything at all Theyve’ simply cut a coat the measurement of their own ignorance. They make everything, from God to a picture, in their own image. That is why the picture-hook is the ruination of a painting – a painting which has always a certain significance, at least as much as the man who did it. As soon as it is brought and hung on a wall, it takes on quite a different kind of significance, and the painting is done for” p. 509
“How can you expect an onlooker to live a picture of mine as I lived it? A picture comes to me from miles away: who is to say from how far away I sensed it, saw it, painted it; and yet the next day I can’t see what I’ve done myself. How can anyone enter into my dreams, my instincts, my desires, my thoughts, which have taken a long time to mature and to com out into the daylight, and above all grasp from them what I have been about – perhaps against my own will?” p. 510
I think these quotes from Picasso are actually really rich for thinking about efficacy, despite Picassos oblique stance on politics – there’s a vague sense of anti-establishement feel in his words, but generally he undermines the basis for traditionally political interpetations of his work.
I think Picasso rejects goal-oriented thinking about the effectiveness of art. In my mind, the first quote echoes the Pink Faries: Do it. Making meaning via art is an active, fluid process, to be effective, you have to do art and act, because the meaning cannot be decided before hand, and analysis only takes you so far. Action should be primary, and the fact of taking action to change the nature of discourse is a kind of effectiveness in its own right, simply because all meaning or change created by art is a product of a time-bound, physical process, and overcoming inertia against change to act is the biggest step towards effective art.
Additionally, his arguments about the incomisurate distance between the mind of the artist and their viewers suggest that an artist has next to no power over how their art is seen – insofar as it is ‘political’ and ‘art’. The parallel between his discussion of his work to more political art is his comment about the ‘picture hook’ – essentially, the process of turning an image into ‘art.’ The hook imposes a frame that encourages intepretation and opinion formation, in the same way that talking about art as politics encourages a discussion about goals, opinion and effectiveness, all of which distance the image from the intent of the artist. Thus, one way to think about effectiveness of poltiical art is how well it disguises its political-ness, and avoids being ‘hung’ on the ‘political’ hook.
Picasso Speaks
Pablo Picasso 1935 “Conversation with Picasso” trans. Barr. reprinted in Art in Theory: 1900-2000. ed. Harrison and Wood pp. 507-510 “A picture is not thought out and settled beforehand. While it is being done it changes as one’s thoughts change. And when it is finished, it still goes on changing, according to the state of mind of whoever is looking at it. A picture lives a life like a living creature, undergoing the changes imposed on us by our life from day to day. This is natural enough, as the picture lives only through th man who is looking at it” p. 508
“People seize on a painting to cover up their nakedness. They get what they can wherever they can. in the end I can’t believe they get anything at all Theyve’ simply cut a coat the measurement of their own ignorance. They make everything, from God to a picture, in their own image. That is why the picture-hook is the ruination of a painting – a painting which has always a certain significance, at least as much as the man who did it. As soon as it is brought and hung on a wall, it takes on quite a different kind of significance, and the painting is done for” p. 509
“How can you expect an onlooker to live a picture of mine as I lived it? A picture comes to me from miles away: who is to say from how far away I sensed it, saw it, painted it; and yet the next day I can’t see what I’ve done myself. How can anyone enter into my dreams, my instincts, my desires, my thoughts, which have taken a long time to mature and to com out into the daylight, and above all grasp from them what I have been about – perhaps against my own will?” p. 510
I think these quotes from Picasso are actually really rich for thinking about efficacy, despite Picassos oblique stance on politics – there’s a vague sense of anti-establishement feel in his words, but generally he undermines the basis for traditionally political interpetations of his work.
I think Picasso rejects goal-oriented thinking about the effectiveness of art. In my mind, the first quote echoes the Pink Faries: Do it. Making meaning via art is an active, fluid process, to be effective, you have to do art and act, because the meaning cannot be decided before hand, and analysis only takes you so far. Action should be primary, and the fact of taking action to change the nature of discourse is a kind of effectiveness in its own right, simply because all meaning or change created by art is a product of a time-bound, physical process, and overcoming inertia against change to act is the biggest step towards effective art.
Additionally, his arguments about the incomisurate distance between the mind of the artist and their viewers suggest that an artist has next to no power over how their art is seen – insofar as it is ‘political’ and ‘art’. The parallel between his discussion of his work to more political art is his comment about the ‘picture hook’ – essentially, the process of turning an image into ‘art.’ The hook imposes a frame that encourages intepretation and opinion formation, in the same way that talking about art as politics encourages a discussion about goals, opinion and effectiveness, all of which distance the image from the intent of the artist. Thus, one way to think about effectiveness of poltiical art is how well it disguises its political-ness, and avoids being ‘hung’ on the ‘political’ hook.