Roberta Smith, the New York Times respected senior art writer, has a great piece in today’s Times. She says essentially what we and many others in the art world have been saying for years. Namely, that the distinction between abstract and representational work is very “20th century”. It was necessary for the modernists and their followers to storm the gates of conventional representation in order to shock viewers into understanding that there are different (and equally valid) ways of representing the world and experience. But it is also true that former models of representation remain valid.
Smith writes about a new breed of painters who are rediscovering representation and combining it with aspects of abstraction. This mash-up is as welcome as it was inevitable. Enough already with picking sides and defending a particular “ism” as if it were holy writ. Enough with feeling guilty when we are drawn to art that isn’t fashionable or something the “art mob” hasn’t ordained. Good work is good work is good work.
DNG has always shown a variety of artists who work in a variety of styles, believing that it is more about the artist’s talent and sincerity than whatever happens to be hot this year in Soho. Good on you, Ms. Smith for saying something that should have been said long ago. Let the truce begin. War is over if you want it.