|
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
|
|
Introduction Perspective As a fine artist you must be in the lead of your discipline conceptually and by way of craftsmanship. Yet you inevitably have to deal with an audience that does not usually have an appreciation of the struggles you have to resolve. The clients want finished product which they expect to stand up against all of art history, the collective and cumulative result of ten thousand plus years of creativity on this planet. Nothing less will do. Not knowing the difference between art and art history, they default inevitably to buying a piece of art history and most of the time they want that for little money. No allowance is made for your experiments, no sympathy for the pain, no allotment for the intermediate work that failed, no appreciation for the countless hours spent on getting control over your hands or the process. They want instant gratification, now, off the shelf. Many artists succumb and become craftsmen. They end up producing the stuff that brings money. This dynamic was the major facet of FXM's struggle.
He appears to be a simple and honest man who spoke his mind and happened to love his art, a fine artist who would rather starve than compromise his convictions. As is evident from his letters and documents, he often suffered dearth of money. With his extraordinary skill he could have made work to please any audience but he chose to follow his vision in spite of pressure from the Vienna Academa of Art. He knew that his work was quite new and quite special. Observations and Speculation The most significant obstacle to FXM's career may well have been his love for art and perhaps his desire for truth. He spoke his mind freely and was openly critical of the work of his peers; not a good policy if you need approval and endorsement from your fellow faculty. FXM had gained a faculty position at Vienna's Academy of Arts because of his remarkable abilities. The Academy had an incredible stranglehold on its constituents and on public opinion. It maintained its power base by being consistent with the wishes of the aristocracy, which in turn rewarded the Academy with contracts and commissions. To stand against the Academy's party line as a member of their faculty was political suicide.
Conclusion FXM's struggle appears to be timeless and fundamental; it still plays itself out vividly and relentlessly today. In today's academic art industry money is usually sparse and much of what is available comes from donations. What is not earned becomes the political clout of the successful fund raisers. Fierce power plays among the functionaries of the art institutions ensue. Few in this setting speak their mind and criticism is the supreme threat to officials and affiliate artists alike. Order will be maintained by channeling funds to maintain the status quo. What was true in the days of FXM is true today: "you might break the establishment, but will not reform it." There is a price attached to being creative; you will not be greeted with open arms when you propose that the entrenched ways are not the way to do things. It is true that those who afford art should have a say in the appearance of the product, and they do. However, to dictate what is art is to anihilate art; leaving mere craft.
P.S.: "Nihil sub sole novum" "The dreamers ride against the men of action" (Leonard Cohen), against the party line, against all convention. When Akenaten committed heresy in ancient Egypt by refusing to conceptualize his unusual features some 4000 years ago (the similarities in artistic expression are inescapable) he was soon ousted and retroactively erased, fiercely scraped away. History shows many such examples. It took the Vienna Secession movement in 1900 to put a major dent into the strangle hold of the Vienna Academy and still, to this day it is an elite institution of significant power.
©1999 Herb Ranharter |
| |||||||||||||||||
About Herb Ranharter:
An artist, photographer, engineer, and philospher, Herb Ranharter was
born in Vienna, Austria.
Visit Mr. Ranharter's home page at Art2u
|
Comments? originally published on Art2u on April 4, 1999 |
|
| Gallery | Posters | PrintStudio | News Online | Motion Pictures | Books & Music | HotLinks | Home |
Strolling through the galleries of the Lower Belvedere in
Vienna, Austria amidst much art history, you chance upon
some remarkable sculptures: stone and metal heads made by
Franz Xaver Messerschmidt (FXM); sculpture that is reaching
out, enveloping you in its passion with an immortal voice,
free in spite of the agony of eternally permanent
expression. The works are not content to stun with superior
craftsmanship. They transcend the limits of the materials,
blowing the envelope right off the boundaries of convention.
The works were enormously outrageous in their time, they are
outrageous still.
The passions of FXM, his anger and frustration, are as
contemporary and as valid today as they were in his lifetime;
timeless artistic turmoil. Any artist whose love for art exceeds his
passion for money will know what I am talking about and will
sympathize with FXM's dilemma, i.e., integrity in art against the
lure and admittedly the necessity of earning money. Which side can
you afford to be on? FXM knew where he wanted to be and his choice
was unwavering, his very nature propelled him.
Mozart's struggle against the Viennese music establishment as
portrayed in "Amadeus," written by Peter Shaffer, may be a direct
parallel to FXM's struggle against the visual arts establishment.
Mozart's masterpieces "Le Nozze Di Figaro" and "Don
Giovanni" are revolutionary attacks against the unbridled powers
of the aristocracy and received, as such, strong opposition in
Vienna. FXM fits the general time frame well; a new order was in the
offing and he was ahead of the forefront. The distribution of
contracts for sculpture was in the hands of Academy functionaries
through the royal building office; so was the fate of the faculty.
FXM was not a "politically correct" staff member; not with any aspect
of his being. He kept producing the unconventional and refused to
conform to established art convention. He made many enemies among his
peers and among the administration. They used an illness with may
have been lead poisoning to obliterate him. They spread rumors of his
insanity, citing his sculpture and general behavior as evidence. The
image they had conjured up was used to deny him due promotion at the
Academy. If the lead poisoning story is true, the condition surely
served as an excellent opportunity to rationalize the Academy's stand
against him. In the wake of these accusations, the commissions from
royalty and wealthy clients dried up; Viennese high society was close
knit and in fear of rebellion. In spite of his remarkable skills ,the
court of Maria Theresa erred on the side of convention and refused
his appointment. It seems he never quite recuperated from his defeat
and eventually left Vienna.