Correction Llce 1eretle
Correction Llce 1eretle
Correction Llce 1eretle
In a first stage, Grace Amandes prompts us to analyze every work of art may it be “films,
TV, art and music” (l.3) – in the light of history. She states that Hollywood has
changed since the 1950s and 1960s as artists are not afraid to voice their
political opinions. Indeed, she evokes “McCarthy’s blacklist” (l.9) which aimed at
blacklisting artists who did not criticize communism publicly as the Cold War
gained momentum. Now those times are over and “violent unrest, sexual freedom”
(l.4) have forced artists to react. We can think about the Oscars which promote more
diversity and denounced the tendency to whitewash cinema. Documents B and C
seem to epitomise Grace Amandes's tenets. Indeed, the documents illustrate the
tensions at stake. Norman Rockwell entitled his painting “Freedom of
Speech” which recalls Franklin D. Roosevelt's speech “the Four Freedoms” delivered
in 1941 during the war. For Rockwell, a man from the lower class – his clothes tend to
prove that – is the embodiment of this freedom. Document B also defend the
poorest or the victims as the singer criticises the Vietnam War arguing that they
“shall overcome” the war.
However, Grace Amandes declares that artists can denounce our society implicitly. For
example, the TV series Nashville (l.16) – a somewhat conservative show – address
the issue of racial profiling indirectly. The producers included this bit without
analysing it further. They do not dwell on it; it is up to the spectator to understand the
issues at stake. Norman Rockwell also is not a political manifesto per se, it is a work of
art. Indeed, the pyramidal construction highlights the importance of the
working-class man who sharply contrasts with the people from the middle class
around him. Joan Baez also resorts to a song without directly addressing the Vietnam
War. It is merely suggested through the chorus: “We shall live in peace”.
First, Charlie Fox mentions “Ugly art” (l.8) as an artistic genre in itself. Laura
Owens is one of its key painters. She resorts to images drawn from our
daily lives such as Garfield, Kate Moss and dogs (l.1) and to “zany”,
“lurid” elements (l.3) to transform them into “something
ravishing” (l.4), into something beautiful. As a result, the artist seems to be a
magician exactly like “Caliban” (l.10) mentioned in the preface. Caliban
is the son of Sycorax, an evil witch. In Oscar Wilde's preface, ugliness
is clearly associated to immorality. Similarly, Willem de Kooning's
Woman seems to be horrendous at first. It depicts a naked and
shapeless woman who surprises the beholders. Willem de Kooning
and Laura Owens see eye to eye when it comes art: art is meant to
shock us, to unsettle us “when critics disagree the artist is in accord
with himself.” (l.22, doc B). Then, we can safely assume that these
artists question what is deemed to be moral. According to Oscar
Wilde, a work of art is neither moral nor immoral
“There is no such thing as a moral or an immoral book.” (l.8). The world
of art seems to be beyond the social world and thus does not obey the
same rules. Woman IV also illustrates these tensions as the painter
refused to embrace social norms by painting such a body. Therefore, Charlie
Fox states that “ugliness is also a way of responding to the difficulty of
being a painter now” (l.19-20). Modern art accounts for our world
which can unsettling, appalling, disgusting, poorly shaped and hardly
ever beautiful. “Ugly art” is then a way to criticize today's society, hence art
imitating life in Wilde's preface
To conclude, “ugly art” is not an oxymoron. This new genre reflects on the
differences between normality, morality and art. Art does not obey any
law defined by society. Oscar Wilde embraced its uselessness, while
Kooning and Fox embraced their unique ugliness.
« C'est le spectateur, et non la vie, que l'art reflète. Les opinions diverses suscitées par une
œuvre d'art démontrent que cette œuvre est nouvelle, complexe et vitale. C'est lorsque les
critiques n'ont pas le même avis que l'artiste est en accord avec lui-même. Nous
pouvons pardonner à un homme d'avoir fait une chose utile aussi longtemps qu'il
ne l'admire. La seule excuse pour faire une chose inutile est de l'admirer avec
intensité. Toutes les œuvres d'art sont totalement inutiles. »