“I don’t get it.”
That’s the number one criticism of modern
art, and it’s a fair point.
Modern art can be impenetrable.
It can be so strange and so unlike anything
else we see in our day to day lives that we
don’t understand it.However, one of the
most liberating things I’ve ever been told
about art is that you don’t need to understand
the “point” of it.
According to Oscar Wilde, “all art is quite
useless”.
In other words, the point of art is that it
has no point.
There’s no purpose, need, or reason for
it.
It just is.This is unlike anything else in
life.
Aside from art, every other man-made thing
that we see, hear, feel, taste, smell, or
otherwise use has some kind of purpose.
Laptops are for accessing the internet or
for writing things, coffee cups are for drinking
coffee, chairs are for sitting on: everything
has its role.
Except art.
Art just exists.Not everyone feels this way.
Plato felt that the purpose of art was to
show us how to live, act, and think.
By being perfect, beautiful, or kind, or strong,
the point of art is to teach us to be perfect,
beautiful, or kind, or strong.
The Romantics believed that the point of art
was to bring us closer to God — or nature,
or some kind of divine truth.
When we read a good poem about mountains,
for example, we get a better idea of why nature
is awe-inspiring and why God is so awe-inspiring
for making them.For the Mexican muralists,
the point of art was to express something
important in a pleasing way.
No-one wants to hear someone rant on about
history, politics, or human atrocity.
However, with art, we can explain these things
to people in a way which grabs their attention.Modern
art, or at least the kind of modern art people
refer to when they look at an odd painting
or sculpture and say “I don’t get modern
art” — modern art, by contrast, is defined
by the idea that art has no point.
If you’re not religious, then this is true
in a very strict sense.
Without God, life has no point.
And, if life doesn’t have a point, then
how can art?It’s no coincidence that the
rise of some of the art movements most associated
with modern art — dadaism, surrealism, and
abstract expressionism — all go hand in
hand with the rise of secularism, science,
and post-modernism.
Without getting too tangled in the weeds about
what post-modernism means, it basically refers
to the idea that there is no such thing as
objective truth.
Everything is pointless, nothing is original,
and everything is just a copy of something
else.Right, so where does modern art fit into
all this?
To answer that question, I want to talk about
a modern artist who has become very popular
very recently.
Not just popular with art critics or high-minded
intellectuals or people (like myself) who
spent years at university studying the arts
and stuff instead of doing a real degree like
engineering or medicine.
No, this modern artist is popular with normal
people.
His work is accessible, funny, educational,
and brilliant.
His name is bill wurtz — all lower case.Most
people know bill wurtz because of his video
“history of japan”.
A video about, well, the history of Japan.
That’s certainly how I found his channel.
However, most of bill wurtz’s other videos
are — different.*play montage of videos*
bill wurtz’s videos are bizarre, people
don’t understand them, they make no sense,
they just — are.
Like I said, it’s classic modern art.
And yet, people love them.
They find them funny, interesting, and addictive
— but they’re not sure why.
Why is that so many people absolutely adore
bill wurtz’s videos in 2017 — “liking”
them in their hundreds of thousands, calling
them “dank”, and helping his most recent
one to get a ridiculous amount of views in
short space of time, but only a handful of
intellectuals really praised Jackson Pollock
in his time?
To answer that question, we need to better
define modern art — because, as we see from
the difference between bill wurtz, Damien
Hurst, Salvidor Dali, and Jackson Pollock,
it’s not all the same.Modern Art, at least
in the way which I like to use the word, doesn’t
simply mean “art that’s modern”.
Breaking Bad, Skyrim, and “Shake It Off”
by Taylor Swift — all those things are art
and they are all modern, but no-one would
call them modern art.
No-one would call Taylor Swift a modern artist.Modern
Art, broadly speaking, refers to four kinds
of art: minimalism, abstract expressionism,
surrealism, and dadaism.
You could argue that there are more categories,
and there are, and sometimes these four categories
crossover.
Still, as a rough overview, these four kinds
will do just fine.Minimalism 
is what it sounds like.
Rather than trying to impress their audience
with over-the-top displays of their skill,
minimalists try to do the most they can with
as little as possible.
Minimalism is popular in visual art, but you
can also hear minimalism in composers like
Philip Glass.Abstract Expression is also what
it sounds like.
Rather than trying to impress their audience
with recognisable shapes and forms, abstract
expressionists simply throw whatever they
feel like into their work.
They are expressing themselves abstractly.
In other words, instead of telling people
they are angry by painting an angry face or
making a loud song with angry words, abstract
expressionists simply feel angry, or sad,
or happy, or confused as they express themselves.
The result is something which isn’t recognisable
as an angry painting — or maybe it is.
We’re often taught that there is no right
or wrong answer or interpretation when it
comes to art.
Abstract expressionists, though, takes this
ideal to its logical extreme.
Like, most people would look at this painting
by Van Gogh and mostly agree on what the painting
is “about”.
It’s a man, and he looks sad or troubled
in some way.
But with this painting by Jackson Pollock?
A million people would likely say a million
different things.Surrealism is also what it
sounds like.
Rather than trying to impress their audience
by conforming to their expectations, surrealists
go out of their way to create stuff which
doesn’t conform to our ideas of cause and
effect or how the world should work.
Surrealist paintings are still understandable
— “look that clock is melting” and we
can pretty much all agree on that — but
why or how that clock is melting?
We have no idea.Finally, you have dadaism
which is not what it sounds like.
Dadaism is, to put it bluntly, a massive middle
finger to the whole idea of art.
I would argue that all modern art has its
roots in dadaism.
Specifically, all modern art has its roots
in one — oh — let’s call it a sculpture.Here
it is.
It’s called fountain and it’s from 1917.Now
I know what you’re thinking.
Mitch, you thinking to yourself, that’s
— that’s a urinal.
To which my response is, “I know it’s
a urinal.
Or rather, it was a urinal.
Now, however, it’s one of the most important
works of art of the 20th Century.”
“Oh, fuck off!”
I hear you say.
I get you.
I really do.
But hear me out.Remember all the way back
at the start of this video when I said that
modern art is defined by the idea that art
is useless?
This is the first major sculpture to epitomise
that idea.
Every time you go to a modern art exhibition
and you find yourself thinking, “What on
earth is this nonsense?” you have this work
to thank — or to blame, depending on your
opinion.As a urinal, this thing had a purpose
— a very specific and important purpose.
It wasn’t the most romantic or special of
purposes, but an important purpose nonetheless.
When you’re running around a public park
desperate for a wee and you find of these
things, you are very thankful for its purpose.
If you’re a guy that is.
If you’re a girl, well, maybe not so much.However,
this isn’t a urinal anymore.
Or rather, it’s not a functioning one.
Duchamp (the artist) detached this urinal
from its plumbing, put his name on it, and
put it in an art gallery.
You can’t pee it anymore because — well
— it would be messy without the plumbing.
So if you can’t pee in it, then it has no
use.
It is useless which, as I argued earlier,
is the definition of modern art.At the time,
this wasn’t everybody’s definition of
art.
Some would argue that it’s still not a good
definition.
However, by taking away the urinal’s function,
signing it, and putting it an art gallery
Duchamp said very loudly that this was art
because art had no use.
It was a reaction to literally thousands of
years of art which aimed to express something
that could be communicated clearly and had
— or claimed to have — a point.By making
the fountain useless, we’re forced to focus
solely on its beauty.
And I know what you’re thinking: “It’s
not beautiful.
It’s a urinal.”
To which I would say, “Not anymore it isn’t.
However, imagine that you’d never seen a
urinal before, imagine that you had no idea
what it was for, wouldn’t you think that
it was quite beautiful?
Its smooth shape, its symmetry, its white
colour: isn’t that quite beautiful?”You
don’t have to answer yes to that question,
by the way, it’s perfectly fine to say,
“No Mitch, it’s a bloody toilet and it
looks stupid.”
And that’s fair enough.
After all, a lot of people agree with that
statement.
Many have rebelled against the idea “Fountain”
even is art by defining art differently.Others,
however, have gone further.
They have said, “Okay, if the definition
of art is that it’s useless.
What if I give this thing its use back?
Would it still be art then?”
In other words, people have pissed in it.
After all, by using this urinal, you are showing
people that it isn’t useless.
As such, you are proving that it’s not art.Maybe
you’re now saying yourself, “I see what
Duchamp was trying to do here, but did he
really have to use a urinal?
Couldn’t he have just cut the middle out
of chair or something to make the same point?”
And I see what you mean, but I think there
are two reasons that Duchamp used a urinal.One:
it is quite a beautiful looking thing.
Maybe you don’t agree but, you know, I think
it is.
Two: dadaists were trying give a big middle
finger to the art world.
They called their work anti-art because they
were trying to upset thousands of years of
artistic customs.
Duchamp could have made the same point with
a chair, or a car, or a phone, or anything
really.
Still, nothing quite says “Fuck you” like
putting a urinal in an art gallery.So that’s
modern art: minimalism, abstract expressionism,
surrealism, and dadaism.
And the reason why I think bill wurtz is so
great, the reason why I think is videos are
so popular, is that they are mixture of all
four.*Minimalist bill wurtz*Bill wurtz's videos
reduce jokes to their most concentrated and
minimal: a feedline and a punchline.*Play
“Snail Time”*
Sometimes, he does this by heading straight
to the punchline by using our expectations
of what a video should be as the feedline.
That all sounds quite pretentious, so let
me show you what I mean.Here’s one video:*Play
“Die”*Here’s another:*Play “Bread”*And
one more:*Play “Shaving My Piano”*These
videos are funny, and beautiful, and kind
of amazing — or least, I think they are
— but it’s hard to say exactly why because
they’re so little to them.
That’s minimalism — reducing art to its
most basic.*Abstract bill wurtz*
Bill wurtz is a musician, and an extremely
talented one.
If you don’t believe me, check this out:*Play
“weather lady”*This is abstract expressionism.
By using a weather report as his starting
point, bill wurtz is able to create music
which is wholly abstract.
There’s no key, no timing signature, and
no rhythm.
It’s as abstract and as unstructured as
a Jackson Pollock painting.
And yet, a lot people respect it more than
a Jackson Pollock painting because bill wurtz
set himself a challenge.
Rather than simply expressing himself abstractly,
he decided to use what the weather lady was
saying to create something abstract.In another
video, bill wurtz makes the fact that what
he is doing is bloody difficult even more
explicit by showing the sheet music alongside
it.
Here, he turns Paul McCartney ranting about
sheet music into, well, sheet music.*Play
“that high class stuff”**Surrealist bill
wurtz*It’s evident that bill wurtz’s videos
are surreal.
Even if you’re not able to say exactly why
you like them, most people are able to say,
“Well, that was — surreal.”
*Play “No Castle”*There’s no plot, no
sense of direction, no cause and effect, no
logic, but it is recognisable.
With Dali’s melting clock, we see that it’s
a melting clock, but we have no idea why or
how it’s melting.
And with bill wurtz?
*Play “Old Macdonald*”Like, I can see
that the farm exploded but, like, why did
the — why did the farm explode?
Let’s look at another video:*Play some of
“Napkins”*
Bill wurtz’ work, and surrealism in general,
highlights the madness of the world we live
in.
The idea that napkins, insignificant everyday
objects, are actually anything but insignificant.
For the people who produce, sell, and market
them as full-time jobs or careers, they are
a livelihood.
There is an economy to them.
This is true of all seemingly unimportant
objects.
That they are, in fact, the result of millions
of years of human evolution and endeavour.
Bill wurtz’s work reflects the Satrean truth
that "life is absurd".
When we are forced to analyse the things we
see as "normal", such as napkins, when you
are forced to listen to the word over and
over again in the song —
*Play more of “Napkins”*
— when we are shown the sheer amount of
internet content and human activity dedicated
to napkins, we realise that there is nothing
"normal" about them whatsoever.To produce
a napkin you need to grow a tree, chop it
down, slice it real thin, dye it white, make
it uniform and perfect, and stuff it into
a packet.
A packet which is then placed on tables in
restaurants so we can clean our mouths.
Is a napkin really that insignificant?
Bill wurtz doesn’t think so, and his surrealist
video shows us this.*Play more of “Napkins”**Dadaist
bill wurtz*
If Duchamp’s urinal was a middle-finger
to what art is supposed to be, bill wurtz’s
channel is a middle finger to what YouTube
is supposed to be.
Step one: have an engaging profile picture.*No*
says bill wurtz opting for an umbrella instead.Step
two: define your channel in the description.*No*
says bill wurtz…
That’s — that’s helpful.Step three:
don’t give your content away for free.*How
about I do anyway?* says bill wurtz.Not only
can you download every song he’s ever made
for free on his website, but he doesn’t
allow adverts on his videos.
That means that, despite racking up nearly
30 million views for his video on the history
of Japan, he has made absolutely no money
from it — at least not directly, anyway.The
way bill wurtz makes money is through donations.
He has a Patreon page, where you can donate
to his channel, and he has an iTunes account,
where you can choose to pay for his music
(instead of getting it for free on his website).However,
you don’t have to do those things, a lot
of people don’t do those things, and he
doesn’t promote this stuff.
His fans do.
And I’m a fan too so I’m telling you now:
if you like his stuff and you can afford to
spare some cash, donate.
I’m sure he’d appreciate it.The guy has
nearly 50,000 followers on Twitter, nearly
two million subscribers, and tens of millions
of views and not once has he asked for a penny.
Instead he asks *“I wonder if they’ll
impeach trump if America gets too great”*
*Conclusion*
I just want to finish this video by saying
— thank you bill wurtz.
Thanks for teaching me the history of Japan
in under 10 minutes, thank you for teaching
me the history of the world in just over 20
minutes, thanks for doing what you do for
free, thanks for making me laugh uncontrollably
when I’m drunk and I watch, like, a 100
of your videos in a row, and thanks for showing
people that modern art doesn’t need to be
about pretentious statements in exclusive
art galleries.
Sometimes it’s just about saying:*Play “I’m
a diamond”*I couldn’t agree more.
Thanks for watching.
