Posted by
admin - Wednesday, August 25th, 2010
Why modern artists uses horror to shock people?
What are they trying to say? Why they do that?
Help! It’s a homework and I don’t get it!
It depends what you mean by modern; are you refering to modernists or to contemporary artists?
If you’re refering to more contemporary works, people like Basquiat created hellish scenes because it reflected their reality. He was a drug addict living the NYC street culture of the early 80′s and it was these experiences that translated to his work. Why it shocks? Because it’s real. Adrian Piper, also coming from the perspective of the 80′s identity politics, dealt with issues of white privelage. Her images, I guess, can be seen as a bit disturbing, and her works shock because of this notion that racism continues to permeate society.
I don’t know. I don’t think this is a very good question. I’m an art history major focusing on modern and contemporary Western art, and themes of horror don’t necessarily come up for the mere purpose of shocking audiences. The only artists I can think of who really did try to create work explicitly for "shock value," I guess, were the Dadaists, but their work wasn’t terror-inspiring.
Maybe look at Dubuffet? His works looks sort of nightmarish, but more childlike really than terrifying. He was a french painter working in what we call the art brut style. It’s base and it looks like feces and dirt smeared on canvas. Essentially, it was a European response to the end of WWII, where they left defeated and broken down. His work, in it’s childlike baseness, reflects this disintigration of hope and structure.
A lot of arists deal with disturbing and frightening subject matter, but not horror directly. I can’t really help you in that respect.