"Hence in one way the childlike
world of the ancients
appears to be superior;
and this is so,
insofar as we seek for closed shape
form and established limitation.
The ancients provide a narrow satisfaction,
whereas the modern world leaves
us unsatisfied, or,
where it appears to be satisfied
with itself, is vulgar and mean."
These words from Marx, comparing
the modern world with the ancient world,
the world of capitalism with
the world of antiquity,
contain the key to understanding
all modern art,
which in the 20th century
differs from everything
that was created by humanity before it,
above all, because it destroys
any sort of closed or finished shape.
We live in a world that
leaves us unsatisfied, Marx writes,
and where it appears to be satisfied
with itself, is vulgar and mean.
This is a problem faced, above all,
by the fine arts.
You cannot create
a harmonious image of a world
that leaves us unsatisfied because
the point of art is to depict the world
in a closed and finished form.
A world of forms, a world in which
the contemplation of forms
brings people aesthetic pleasure.
And contemporary art
solves this problem
in a radical way, by destroying
various traditional forms.
But in Marx's words
we can find criticism of
all contemporary art.
The thing is that in creating
destroyed images and forms,
contemporary art now receives
a new level of satisfaction from
this very fact of destruction.
And in such a way brings back
what Marx refers to as:
“where it appears to be satisfied with itself,
[it] is vulgar and mean.”
I think Marx, in relation to
all modern art
that solves this problem...
of the lack of satisfaction of
the modern world and its state,
would judge it and call it
rather vulgar and mean.
