The Importance of the Image

The current and prevailing dogma within the visual arts relies on the conceptual nature of work, rather than its visual effectiveness . I feel this approach to be completely ineffectual. Anytime an artist conceives of an image and creates that image, whether presented in earnest, ironically, and or sarcastically, in fact the end result can be labeled as conceptual. Therefore, I feel it is high time to reflect on the visual nature our work.

It is possible to present work that is highly conceptual and visually exciting. When a painting is shrouded in the idea, it looses its potency. Lacking visual interest, the idea can get lost, and left up to only a few to accept the image. This approach is inherently alienating to those outside of the art world.

I feel that art (painting, sculpture, video, film) by its nature deserves a potent visual component. Historical president for this approach exists right here at the school of the art institute of Chicago. The Chicago Imagists approached art in much the same way that I am suggesting. Karl Wirsum and Jim Nutt are prime examples of this creative approach. Their work have highly formal characteristics, as well as, strange and potent imagery. Their paintings are also successful reflections on the nature of society. If one is to take on the difficult task of intertwining the conceptual and the visual, the fruits of their labor may create interesting results.