I remember watching historical fiction movies about many artists of the past in my sixth grade art class. In a movie I saw about Van Gogh, most outsiders really would not appreciate what he has made, and even now, it feels that way.
His โSunflowerโ painting, which is exhibited at the National Gallery in London, recently had soup thrown at it by a couple of people who were trying to spread a message about saving the environment.
I feel like itโs a recent trend to just hate artists, old and new.
Artists now have to deal with robots taking over their jobs. Artists of the past are not safe from people who do not respect their legacy and history. Marilyn Monroe and Bob Ross are also two names that come to mind.
Itโs sad that the dead canโt be left alone, even when they are gone.
People can take their items, such as a sparkling one-of-a-kind dress or an artwork, and do whatever they want.
Along with that, people will say, โItโs just an item,โ like there wasnโt any meaning to it before. Itโs not like people are making anything new with said items, even as inspiration.
They are just being ruined for no reason or failing to spread a message with it being overpowered by the act itself. Was the message really effective if nobody truly understood the point?
I see this type of conversation in the doll repainting community about removing the faces of rare dolls and I understand why itโs an issue, as a collector myself. The original base doll can be considered a piece of art itself.
Designers and artists had to come up with the look of the original figure but in my eyes, I think it is more worth it for someone to use it to make their own art. They are making new art with the past art. When it comes to what happened with Van Goghโs painting or Marilyn Monroeโs dress, I canโt really say the same.
I hate that the conversation went to trying to defend the action because who cares about the past and we should focus on what happens now because it just seems very dismissive. We are supposed to learn from the past to avoid the same mistakes. People can care about two things at once and one doesnโt have to be ignored. Itโs valid to talk about current issues from this incident but it comes off so wrong to me.
The way that people just donโt care at all genuinely bothers me. From what I understand, Van Gogh is not even a bad person. I would understand this attitude if he was a terrible person, but it doesnโt feel like the case.
Is it just the cool thing to not care when something like this happens? Is it shameful to feel any kind of emotion, over, at the end of the day, an object? It probably is, but I like to think it means that the person left an impact on people, to become an inspiration to others that some people care if something happens to their work.
Van Gogh put passion into his work and even if he didnโt, he still put a lot of energy into making them. As an artist, I feel like we should remember that when looking at art. There was value to it even before the artistsโ death.
