(Googled Mini Monet, Photo: Albanpix)
Mini Monet is an 8 year old artist / painter who earned £150,000
when he sold 33 pieces of work.
For his age his work is exceptional, but the work itself is
not better than that painted by a good adult painter and this brings me to the
question: “What is it people are paying for?”
I believe the answer lies in that Mini Monet is in him self
a one of and he has a talent that suggests a connection with the divine. Hence
I believe it is the child that sells the work not the work it self. If this is
the case he will face a great challenge, as he grows older.
The beautiful thing about art is its indefinability and the
many trap doors to fall in to when trying to define good art. One trap door to
fall through is to measure good art on the basis of how much it sells for. My
point is that Mini Monet might become a better artist when he is an adult, but
sell less because he no longer is a child genius.
Measuring technical skill is another trap door. Take art
forgers for example, they have superb skill and are often able to copy many
different artists. Some of them might even say that they made a forgery to
reveal the false ness of the Art world or as in Han van Meegeren’s case who
wanted to prove to his critics that he had as much talent as the likes of
Vermeer. But I would like to maintain that what they actually showed us was a
lack of originality and that their work has next to nothing to say that has not
already been said.
This question around technical skill is highly relevant in
regards to photography and video. Both forms can make endless reproductions,
one cannot see the artists brush stroke and the tool it self does half the
work. These facts do not make such work better or worse than say painting, but
they do reduce the value for the buyer, highlighting my point about measuring
works artistic merit in regards to value.
One cannot say that one art medium is better than the other,
because each medium is a tool and a tool is only a means to an end or said in
another way, it is the work that is art and not the medium it was made in. This
means that even video games can be art…
So if art is indefinable, how do we as artists make a
distinction between the exceptional and the ordinary, to avoid making rubbish?
Personally I don’t, I take a leap of faith.
Making art is how I imagine it is to parent children, you
give them a part of your soul, al the love you can and guide them to the best
of your ability. However in the end they are the ones, who go out in to the world,
a select few end up shining brightly whilst most become another brick in the
wall.
Why does it have to be difficult to define good art? By
having a definition it would make art bad. For example, if you have a recipe
for a good meal, each time you make it, it will be good, but the same. The
first time you taste it you will be blown away, the second time it will be
pretty good, however if you start to have it every day you will soon be bored
of it. It is for this reason I think the nickname “Mini Monet” is a highly
unfortunate name; it suggests that the artist is following a recipe of a dead
master. Since he is only 8 it is not a disaster, but if he is to find his own
voice as an adult, I would advice him to shake of that name sooner rather than
later. Mini Monet has great potential and a good foundation to build upon.
Mini Monet: dailymail.co.uk CBS and reuters.com
Han Van Meegeren: denisdutton.com and essentialvermeer.com
Can video games be art?: newscientist.com