Jeff Koon’s is a sculpture artist who causes a lot of friction in the art world for his controversial artwork. Most of his artwork would fall under kitsch because it doesn’t create any deep thought while analyzing it, any conversation around his work usually revolves around the head scratching question of how he makes millions of dollars from his art. Even worse is his Made in Heaven collection which has pieces that are basically pornography. The only reason I wouldn’t say it is porn is because his pieces are made by hand and it isn’t just photographs and videos, but it still has a shallow meaning. I think any one with half a mind and a simple background in art can ascertain that Jeff Koon’s artwork is very shallow. It lacks any sense of what makes art important. It doesn’t tell an important story, or give some unique perspective of the world. It looks very cool and that’s about as deep as his art is.
Plato and Aristotle are two Ancient Greek philosophers who wrote about art and its place in society. They both accepted art as an imitation of the real world, however had divergent thought on its value in society. I believe they would both have a tough time accepting Koon’s art.
Plato didn’t like the idea of realism in art since it is removed thrice from the ideal image. 1) the ideal image created in the mind, 2)the actual creation of the object, 3) the recreation of the image through. In Plato’s ideal world art “must be subjected to critical scrutiny” (Barrett p.24) before we allow into the world since it has an impact on us and can effect us psychologically. That being said I believe Koon’s art is basic and doesn’t have a negative theme or topic, if it has one at all, so there’s a chance it would be accepted in this ideal world. You have to look past the centuries of difference between the two artist, and one quote made me realize Plato would accept Koon’s cookie cutter creations, “There are correct values, to which works of art are subservient, and it is not the role of the artist to invent, critique, or alter them” (Barrett p.24). It is very possible Koon’s work could be shown in some children’s museum for beauty appreciation as Plato suggested.
Aristotle however valued art much more as a representation. Believing the representation of art is positive and is an outlet, “Aristotle, however, disagrees and argues that such experience are good because they offer us vicarious satisfactions of our own antisocial tendencies and make us less likely to act out what we experience in art” (Barrett p.25). Aristotle’s less exclusive view on art may seem more accommodating to Koon’s work yet I would disagree. Aristotle was focused on the beauty of art and the ways it can enrich our lives. That being said I don’t think much of Koon’s work displays innate beauty. Maybe you could make a case for the beauty in the perfection of some his works like the metal balloon dogs, however, the Greek idea of beauty doesn’t seem to account for perfection since it is not natural.
Citations:
Barrett, Terry. Why Is That Art?: Aesthetics and Criticism of Contemporary Art. Oxford University Press, 2017.
Ryan,
I 100% agree with your writings stating that Jeff Koons is a controversial artists. I also find your perspective for Aristotle’s opinion really interesting, I hadn’t given it that option as to why he Ould like the artwork. I personally don’t think that either of them would really go for this type of art.