💭THINKING ABOUT: HOW EVERYTHING LOOKS KIND OF LIKE “ART” IN TODAY’S VISUAL LANDSCAPE AND ITS MAKING EVERYTHING FEEL… SUPER FLAT (pun intended) 💭 
 That visual flatness has consequences: First, it suggests there’s no difference between ads, art & AI (slop or not). They look the same -> we think of them the same -> honestly we literally can’t tell the difference anymore without extra legwork. Very soon we’re going into museums and behaving like we’re in a boutique, like art is just another consumable. 

Second, it suggests that the Art that deserves to succeed is the Art that commands the most attention, even though that’s not what it’s for! Art is not trying to maximize conversion like an ad is, but by overly rewarding those Artists that float to the top in this visual ecosystem we lose a lot of the more interesting, risky work. 

The Art that stays with you is often the stuff that makes you linger, breaks your heart, leaves no easy answers… work that makes you feel a wider spectrum of feelings than just the positive ones (pleasure, entertainment, humor). I think this feeling of loss is what so much of the recent cultural decline discourse is trying to get at. People crave complexity, deep down (just look at the Sinners discourse) and the Art with the power to do that is what actually moves culture forward, not the most viral post on IG. References + further reading if you’re into that:
- “Is This the Worst-Ever Era of American Pop Culture?” by Spencer Kornhaber @ The Atlantic
- “Merchants of Style: Art and Fashion After Warhol” by Natasha Degen - “The Age of Average” by Alex Murrell
- “The Missing Piece in Conversations about Cultural Decline” by W. David Marx @ Culture: An Owner’s Manual
 #culturalanalysis #aiart #trendanalysis #arthistory #popart #conceptualart #takashimurakami #warhol #culturaldecline #superflat