Friday, May 18, 2007

Takashi Murakami

Is he an art star or a marketing genius? You certainly can't deny his success. And you can't deny his likable images either. I look at his art and I really really like it... aesthetically. I feel he uses all the tricks that make you like it. You know, all those things you learn in school about composition and color and how to produce an emotion by using these visual tools. Those things that work in advertising.

But is it good art?

Some say he's popular for bridging the gap between East and West. I came across this interesting statement he made that was in an artnet.com story.

(Murakami) repeatedly laments that Japanese artists don't understand that art-making is, and should be, a commercial activity. "You cannot create an art piece unless you know how to make and sell it."

I'm not sure where I stand on his art. In some instances I think it's powerful and then sometimes I think he's a bit of a hack. Anybody else follow his work?

4 comments:

Byron said...

Isn't it all realative? How can we ask the question is it good art? How does it make you feel? What does it make you think? Isn't that the question you should be asking yourself?

Maybe I'm wrong, but the whole good or bad question is sort of the wrong question we should be asking ourselves.

What sort of commentary does his work say about the current socio-political situation?

His work offers the viewer an opportunity to escape from reality. Seems that is what many viewers are looking for.

Byron said...

It seems that his work does not make you feel apathetic towards it or you would not be asking these questions.

As far as I'm concerned I feel he has been successful if he has at least made you think. Not that you don't usually think :)

To me that's what it's all about.

zac said...

The good or bad question is applied to how well Murakami is expressing his intention. That's an interesting point of his images offering an escape from reality. I agree. Sometimes he has taboo subject matter or monstrous figures, but you still kind'a think, "ah, look how cute." It seems by using a hybrid-style of anime, he can pass along information to you with your guard down. Sort of like receiving political information from a comedian.

I think he is a very important figure of contemporary art and one to study. He is young and sells in the millions right out of his studio so obviously a lot of people think he's doing something right. However, the thing I question about his work is I sense a compromise. It's just a feeling I get when viewing his work that he's made great decisions creating it but then in the final hour didn't base his decisions on the art. This mark (analogy), is this right for the art. But anyway, I don't stay with my judgments long, I prefer to be a hypocrite.

Roman Bradley said...

it's kind of art like kara walker
I think it's strong in statement and easy to look at.

I like difficult work better, or representational work but I'm not big on things I easily encounter.

I've never had this impression where I have to go back to see it. It's pretty impersonal to me. But I'm a strange fellow.

I like paint and all it's attributes, I'm not too big on the application of commercial painting.

But yes, it's selling like hot cakes, this new television centered art, and when I started painting I was as simple as a child when thinking of what I wanted to do. I'd want to be a commercial painter, and I don't know what happened to me to fall in love with
painting like I have.