Once upon a time in a shadowy cave long ago there was a two-part test to determine art.
I’ve had this interesting art experience in the last couple weeks, as my wife and I bounced in and out of a couple dozen art galleries in Santa Fe and Taos, New Mexico. We paid no attention to biography; it just wasn’t relevant. But we did notice that it all started to run together. There was little differentiating one artist from the next ... except when a rare talent shown through, someone who saw the world or depicted the world afresh. Surely, there must be room for this?
When the artist no longer belongs to the tribe's evolving criticims, or does not tick the appropriate box they are cast out. I've absolutely hated that mentality, but it has not held as much power in the last 20 years because of the Internet. Now that creativity is consumable at scale by the masses, a different form of critic has emerged, which is the algorithm. The end result is the same, which is that no longer adhering to the beliefs or customs of the platform gets you outcast. I would love to believe there is a perfect alternative somewhere. Curation was "in" for a while, but still prone to bias and I haven't seen a better approach anywhere else.