Admittedly, art and its development are more and more vivid, in the process, readers/viewers cannot embrace the ambition to know exactly how the face of art will change, will What makeup classes are there? But, changing layers for that face does not reflect an evolutionary process.
At the beginning of this essay, I have borrowed Picasso’s words, as encouragement for my view, that in art there is no progress. If forced to make art an element of Darwin’s theory of evolution, and believe that like the great history of mankind – in art, the latter will improve, will positively, will complement the other. Before it, every step in the artistic process would be a link for upward development – that would be illusion, I suppose. Because, there is no past or future in art, after all, the art of Antiquity, or the unformed of contemporary art at the present time, “it’s all just an image, at different levels”.
Going back to Picasso’s story of the artist, I thought he must have been tricked into playing a game with mirrors. The artist is constantly looking for a mature image of himself to pursue it: “I have to grow up, my work has to grow”; “There, this is the perfect me, more complete than all the old me before and even the artists who are now slower than me.” No one told him that he had only one, and that the other illusions were only illusions. No one told him: “Don’t grow up”, art is just a game after all, feel free to look at your different images.
That’s why Picasso soberly complained to questions/praises about the progress in his own artistic practice. “I often hear the word ‘evolution’. People always ask about the evolution of my works. Art does not evolve by itself. Only people’s ideas change, and their expressions change.”
Picasso did not think that he could bring about progressive superiority in his works. So it’s as if the big eyes characteristic of 20th century painter – Salvador Dali are still constantly admiring Pablo Picasso. His talent allowed him the right to be arrogant before Picasso: “My feat is marvelous. I might even go as far as to say that the painting is a thousand times more beautiful than all the Picasso paintings combined” (S.D. is referring to “The Holy Mass of the Last Supper”). Dali practiced painting in Cubism, Dada and Surrealism, but he himself cannot deny that, before his own style was established, Dali was strongly influenced by Picasso. So in the end, can it be said that he is more advanced than Picasso as he smugly puts it?
I think that even though Dali wanted to deny Picasso, the dialogue between them could not be a complete break. Art is unable to produce superiority over time, precisely because of that incomplete discontinuity. Even the modernists who have declared that they want to break the existing, I think that the provocation is that they are standing on the opposite side to negate, that is to say, there is nothing to do. complete escapism, even when the new and the old seem to declare war on each other. After all, every step of art, whether embracing the negative or escapist desire, still has to rely on the past, if not in any work of art, there is repetition and combination of existing ones.