The Eric Metaxas Show - Michelle Kamhi

Episode Date: August 24, 2020

Art critic Michelle Kamhi scrutinizes the current state of art in the postmodern world touching upon ideas from her new book, "Bucking the Artworld Tide: Reflections on Art, Pseudo Art, Art Education & Theory."

As the announcer of this show, I sometimes ask myself, to what shall I compare Eric? Shall I compare him to a summer's day? Rough winds do shake the darling buds of me. But not Aaron. I'll tell you nothing shakes this guy. And now here he is, wearing green leotards and a gestures coxcomb, Eric Mataxis. Exiton, stage left. Hey, folks, I've got something really special for you right now.

My friend, Angel Aloma, my hermano, Angel. How are you, my friend? Very bien, Eric. How much that's too? We get to do great things together. When there's terrible need, and right now, the reason I have you on is because there is a staggering need. We get to participate in God's purposes to do something about it. And obviously right now, I'm inviting my audience to participate.

It's kind of amazing what we're able to do in America with very little money. Now, I want you to tell us, first of all, we're doing a fundraiser for food for the poor. You're the executive director of Food for the Poor. What is going on? There's a particular emergency. There's a reason we're doing this right now, and I want my audience to tune in very carefully. So please tell us, what is this emergency right now? Well, Eric, with the coronavirus, as it is, and here in the United States, you have seen how it has created an upheaval here.

When I came to this country, I never thought I'd end up standing in line for toilet paper, or only given one pack of meat. per person when I went to, but those are just inconveniences. When this happens in developing nations, it becomes tragic. Because we thought at first when the coronavirus started that our countries would be asking us for PPEs, for masks and medicines and stuff like that. Every single country has begged us to send more food. And so we have pledged that we are going to send from 10 to 15 million more dollars worth of food to them because the need has gone from extreme hunger to starvation. And that's from very

serious to tragic. We have to be clear. You're talking about actual starvation. Starvation that kills children and adults too, but children more so. Sometimes we get very real. This is very real. pennies that we have can change lives in places like Haiti right now. They need our pennies. Ten cents. Anhell, I heard you talking to my friend Larry Elder. Tell us, break down what you are asking. By the way, people need to go to our website, which is metaxis talk.com.

You'll see the details there. Metaxistalks talk.com, but we need this as soon as possible. Tell my audience what they're. their pennies will bring into this situation? Well, 10 cents allows us to buy, ship, and distribute a meal, rice and beans, which is basically the mix of carbs and protein and plant protein, which is what is considered actually a perfect meal for poverty in particular. So basically, not only to purchase it, but to ship it and to distribute it.

It gets to the plate for that price. One dime. I just want to make clear to my audience. Do we understand the disparity between our wealth and what is, happening in these countries, one thin dime can feed a child who is starving literally to death. This is no hyperbole, folks. So, so Anhell, I think you said that we can feed a child for six months for $37. This is just two good meals a day for $37 for six months. And it's actually wonderful because at least we have, we have, we have an idea that that child has six months in which maybe the country will change in which you

might be able to get more help to them in which the jobs might open up. So there is hope in that. Now, there are people who might be able to afford to give $370 to give, you know, for 10 children. There are those who might only be able to give 37. And that's fine. It's whatever you can afford, even if it's a little bit sacrificial, because the situation here is tremendously urgent. We are talking about life and death in a manner that is not just something that we're thinking of symbolically. This is life and death physically for these. And every child's death brings sorrow and shame and depression to parents and grandparents. And we want to be able to save them of that also because hunger is one is a physical aspect that is horrible of poverty.

But for them to die of hunger brings so much When we travel to Guatemala, the men usually run away when they see us coming to visit the home because they feel so embarrassed that they can't support their children. They start to lose hope when this happens to generation after generation. And in a situation like COVID-19, they really feel, oh my God, why are we being punished like this? And one thing that is a hope to them, and I saw it alive in Haiti after the earthquake, is that they have this strong feeling. that regardless of their problems, God will send someone to them. God will touch someone's heart that will help them. And that's what we're asking of your listeners,

to allow God to touch their hearts to really bring them, you know, to the generosity needed to save someone's life. If you want to shake hell, you do something like this, whether it's sacrificial or almost sacrificial. I mean, to be able to give money to people who will never be able to pay you back, knowing that God sees what you do. Tell the story about the two boys where one was eating and the other was just watching. I mean, this brings it home.

I can't even believe this. In Haiti, I went into a hut and there was a little four-year-old eating a little bowl of rice. And then his seven-year-old brother was standing there looking at him, looking tremendously sad. So I asked him, Pukisel Pamanjae, which means how come you're not eating? And he said to me in Creole, today it's not my turn to eat. and it broke my heart. I thought of my grandchildren immediately, and I thought how painful it would be for me as a grandfather

or as a parent when my kids were young, if they were really hungry and they came to me and I said, I can't feed you today, maybe tomorrow. You know, that child was suffering, but the mother and father had to be suffering even more emotionally. Listen, I want to make this personal. My mother in Germany right after the war, They went hungry many times.

And my mother told me this story many times of coming home from school and finding my grandmother weeping at the table because she had no food to give her children for dinner. This is real. Folks, it might not be happening in America, but I'm telling you this is real. What is happening in Haiti right now is so much worse than we can imagine that if we don't step up, you kind of have to wonder, God blesses us to be a blessing. If you have a little bit of money, the Lord's given it to you to use it for his purposes. I mean, you're telling me that COVID has been devastating also.

Tell us about the white flags. I couldn't believe that one. Well, it's not even flags because it gives you the idea of something on a stick and, you know, flying in the air. It is T-shirts or any piece of old cloth that they have at home. In El Salvador, they use the white ones and they put it out there because I guess everyone had a white old t-shirt. and they hung it up outside. It was to indicate to passers-bys and to agencies that their had children who were starving.

This situation has become so huge, so out of hand, that, you know, we need every possible help. My one consolation is that the American public has proven themselves over and over again. Once they hear of a situation like this, they always respond. This is not our first rodeo here between you and I, Eric, and you know that your listeners respond beautifully to something like this. You know that the American public, whether it's a broader here,

as long as they hear about it, as long as they know it's happening, they respond beautifully. I have lived in four countries, and none have the philanthropic tradition of this country. It's part of the culture of America. It comes from the Christian heritage of America, that we understand this in our bones. And the question is, who can hear what you've just been talking about?

and say I don't have $37 to give to this situation. I mean, as bad as it is, whenever we do a fundraiser for food for the poor, we are now talking about COVID disaster. Factory shut down, people with no jobs, as bad as it ever was, it's now that much worse. And I want to beg my audience, folks, focus on what we're talking about. This is a very, very dramatic situation. We can't do better than go to food for the poor. the idea that you can take six cents and get a meal and for four cents get it to the people.

I mean, that alone speaks for the tremendous efficiency. We're basically at a time. Anil, I just want to say to you, I'm grateful you all exist because without you, I don't know what I would do. There are people out there that can give thousands of dollars. I'm asking my audience, folks, please go to metaxis talk.com. Do what you can for God's glory. Anheel, thank you very much. Thank you, Eric, and we're grateful for you too.

It's nice talking to you. God bless. Always. Folks, I got some embarrassing news to share with you, but you know what? This is just the kind of a show where I don't care. I'm willing to lay my heart, you know, on the line. Here's the issue. Mike Lindell with my pillow, you may notice that I have a babel head of him near me. He's here to remind all of us that when you,

you go to MyPillow.com, you get whopping discounts if you use the code Eric. Now, there are a lot of people who haven't done that and we have your names here. And Chris Heim's Ann Albin pointed out to me that there's like three pages of you whose first name is Eric. You, you're so, I mean, that's humiliating for me that even though your name is Eric, you're still not willing to use the code Eric. I mean, if you don't want to use it because it's my name, use it because it's your name. But the point is that I see who you are, and I just feel humiliated by this. Please go to go to mypillar.com. It's okay, Mike. It's going to be okay. Go to my pillow.com. Use the code Eric. You're going to get whopping savings and really high quality products. Did I mention that? Thank you.

Hey there, folks. Welcome to the program. As you know, this is the show about everything. you know, pretty much everything falls under the rubric of everything. For example, art. So we really get to venture into art theory. But in the past, we've had on a wonderful guest, Michelle Comey, who honestly, when she talks about art, I have to say, I find myself in violent agreement. And so when I heard that she had a new book out, I thought, oh, yeah, we're going to get her back on. Now, during the shutdown and, you know, with the strange system we have, we don't have a regular studio, sometimes sound is difficult, but I don't care. We're going to try to make it work. The new book, which is just out, it's called Bucking the Art World Tide, reflections on art, pseudo art, art, art education,

and theory, Kirkus Reviews, has. has called it solidly argued, eloquent, thought-provoking. That is a pretty strong rave coming from Kirkus. The author, Michelle Kami, of Bucking the Art Rule Tide, is with me now. Michelle, welcome back. Thank you. It's a pleasure to be with you again, Eric. I hope we can get through this technical stuff.

Can you hear me okay? I can hear you okay. And listen, I just want to know, in a number, nutshell. What is this book? And that was, if somebody says, Eric, booking the art world tied, tell me what's it about. What is this about? You've written other books. What's this one about? What is it? As I said, it's both a prequel and a sequel to my previous book, who says that's art. And it's a critical examination of the dominant ideas in the art world and a debunking of those ideas

and equally important, a genuine appreciation of traditional art because one of the things I think has been lost sight of in the modernist and postmodernist trends is the ability to look at traditional painting and sculpture and really appreciate them. It's amazing. Even our teachers seem to have lost that ability and critics as well. So that's the tide I'm bucking against.

Well, it's the only tide worth bucking against in the art world, and I want to congratulate you for doing so as bravely as you do. It's ridiculous that one has to defend beauty, that one has to defend representational art that one has to defend craft because it takes tremendous craft, not just talent, but to produce great works of art. And that's what you do in your writing. You mentioned craft and your listeners will probably be shocked to learn that a professor of art and art education at Queens College explicitly advocates the deskilling of art, that the decaling of art to do away with the craft, and I argue that that is the antithesis of art because the term art at its root means skill and discipline.

So this is how far things have gone. Although, let's be honest, this goes all the way back to Rousseau, doesn't it? I don't know about that. I'm not familiar with what you're referring to, but... Well, what I mean is that there's always been this idea, but I think Rousseau really brings it into the modern era about 200 years ago. You know, the idea that we want to go back to the state of nature, in other words, rather than assume that we need to go somewhere,

from here, he kind of assumes that if we go back to the state of nature, back to the innocence of childhood, that we need to learn, in a sense, to unlearn. We need to unlearn and forget about, you know, this bourgeois idea of adults teaching children. It's the children that can teach the adults. That to me is what has infected the art world, and it's what has led to a lot of the skill-free art that's been on display in some museums. And I guess that's part of what you're referring to when you talk about. That's interesting. I've never heard that connection before,

but it's a very interesting idea. And it might be at play. I think that the problem, well, I trace it largely to the invention of, abstract art and the rejection of imagery in the early 20th century. And that basically disrupted the connection between the intuitive understanding of art and the work of art. And that really was, to me, the breakdown. Well, the question is, where does abstract art come from?

I think the theory behind abstract art has to do with what I was talking about. It's a rejection. I mean, it's many things, Michelle, but it's a, it's, I would argue, and one needn't argue this, and I'm not saying that you do, but in a way, it's a kind of a rejection of God and God's order and the beauty that God has put into the world. It's this idea that there's something about that which we would prefer to avoid. We'd rather make philosophical or political points somehow and that the aesthetics are less important.

Yes. Well, it's true that art has become thoroughly politicized, and this is happening in K to 12 art education as well, which I devote several chapters to in the book. And as far as the beginning, beginning of abstract art, though, if one reads the treatises that the pioneers of abstraction like Mandrian and Kandinsky and Malavich wrote, they were really influenced by the occultist ideas of theosophy, and they were rejecting, entirely rejecting material, the material

world. They thought that the material world was spiritually tainted and the only way that humanity could advance was into some sort of a realm of pure spirit. And in that sense, there is a political connection because they were also fundamentally collectivist and rejected the reality of the individual. And the idea that that humanity can somehow be fundamentally changed is a profoundly disruptive idea. and it was true in politics as well as in art, the idea that human nature, as we knew it, could be essentially changed.

And I think that was a huge... The malability of human nature, it's fascinating to me how all this ties together, This idea that in a way we're not these sacred creatures, but that we can in a way be used by the state, that the individual is not sacred and that the state can, via social engineering and very cruel social engineering,

manipulate people and change people in fundamental ways. But it's interesting to me that you do say that that's where abstract art came, from. I was I was not aware of that. I must confess. Yes, yes. And I documented in all of my work. And it's a little, little examined fact. And it's interesting that conservative or neoconservative critics like Hilton Kramer passionately defended abstract art and didn't really recognize those flawed premises at its foundation. So that's one respect in which my work is really very essentially different from the typical

conservative take. Most conservatives reject the postmodernism of the installations and the conceptual art, but they defend abstract art. and I believe abstract art was the beginning of the problem. Oh, I think there's no question that you're right. We're going to go to a break. Folks will be right back. I'm talking the author of a brand new book, Bucking, the Art World Tide.

I hope you'll get a copy. Stick around. Hey there, folks. We're talking about art, and I'm speaking with someone who's written many books on the subject of art, Michelle Martyr-Kami. The book where I'm holding in my hand is called Bucking, the art world tied. I think it's very important, if I may say so. The subtitle is Reflections

on Art, Sudo-Art, Art Education, and Theory. Michelle Kami, let me ask you, if I may, when you reference pseudo-art in the subtitle, obviously it raises the question of what is art? So what is art and what would constitute pseudo-art in your estimation? What I argue, Eric, is that visual art is essentially imagery in two or three dimensions, representational painting and sculpture, not necessarily strictly realistic, but representing recognizable objects, whether imaginary or real. And that's how we grasp the meaning. of art through our recognition of things that resonate with our own experience, our own life experience.

And of course, the element of skill is essential to the idea of any kind of art. It's part of the generic concept of art. We talk of the art of cooking or the art of warfare. we mean something that's done with skill and discipline. And as I mentioned, there's now a movement of foot to deskilled fine art, which would be the antithesis of art. And pseudo art are all of the forms that modernism and postmodernism have invented that depart from traditional.

art and flout the essential characteristics of art. So everything from abstract painting and sculpture to installation art to so-called conceptual art. I've always felt that much of modern art, at least the modern art that's most guilty of some of the things we're talking about, and I would include literature, that much of it comes from a kind of contempt for the reader or the viewer. In other words, if you think of the notion of beauty as something not to be bothered with,

you're kind of saying that people who are bourgeois enough to care about beauty, I'm not interested in them. I'm interested in people who, who, you know, think poorly of Norman Rockwell and think highly of Andy Warhol. It does seem to me kind of an elitist point of view. Absolutely. As a matter of fact, in some of my work I've talked about the idea of counterfeit elit elitism because it isn't based on the actual qualities of the work,

but on the idea that there's a kind of special, how should I say, people of special perceptual abilities that are different. The early abstract artists thought that they were a new brand of human being, and they sensed that other people. people wouldn't be able to understand their work, that it required newly evolved capacities that only a few special individuals possessed. And even in latter-day abstract advocates like Clement Greenberg also talked about people who had good eye and a bad eye. And really, you're right to point to the idea of the contempt.

for the ordinary person. It really is quite common among critics. I recently posted a piece on my blog about the Critics Association that I belong to, and I'm needless to say, a lone voice in that organization that is totally wedded to the most, most anti-traditional work that you could imagine, and instead much concerned with politics.

They're much more concerned with political ideas, and of course the correct political ideas are those coming from the left. And the professor I mentioned who advocates the de-skilling of art is an example of that mentality. And it is completely, they are totally disconnected from the ordinary people and the average museum goer. I constantly have people say to me,

what is it with contemporary art? The general public, even art museum goers and art lovers who really appreciate traditional art, find contemporary art impossible. Hang on there, Michelle. We're going to go to a break. We'll be right back, folks.

The book, an excellent book. It's called Bucking, the Art World Tide. Don't go away. Hey there, folks. We're talking about art on the Eric Metaxis show. My guest is Michelle Martyr Kami, and the Encomia for this new book, Bucking the Art World Tide, are impressive. Midwest Book Review says it shakes the foundation of today's art establishment, challenging

its basic tenets. But trust by ample scholarship extensively footnoted, it constitutes a worthy successor to Comey's prior book, merits a place in any collection of books of interest to visual artists, art lovers, and art educators. That is high praise indeed, Michelle, but I have to say yours may be a lonely voice, but it's also an eloquent voice. To be able to explain what so many people feel intuitively, that why does most modern art leave them feeling cold and almost insulted, I think, in many cases, you're able to say why and have been doing so for some time. Let me ask you, how did you get into this in the beginning? We may have covered that in our last conversation a couple of years ago, but what got you started thinking along these lines?

Well, I actually was majoring in geology in college and went to Paris on a Fulbright Fellowship after college and fell in love with art. And when I came back, began to study fine art. and got my master's degree in 1970, which was the period of following abstract expressionisms, ascendancy in the art world, and things like minimalism and pop art were all the rage. And I thought there is nothing, I could not relate to such work.

I did my master's thesis on a great work by Pierro de la Francesca, one of the giants of the early Italian Renaissance. And I looked at Andy Warhol and the minimalist, and I thought there's no connection. I can't relate this. And I set it all aside until about 10. or 15, no, it was more than that. It was nearly 20 years later when I met my second husband and he introduced me to a theory of art that made sense of my rejection of what I was seeing. It gave me a way of understanding why I was right to think that the work that was coming to dominate the contemporary art world was really

not worthy of the name, art, that there was no connection, and began writing on the subject. I want to mention your website. It is Ariost, sorry, hang on a second. I want to go. Aristos.org. A-R-I-S-T-O-S-O-O-R-I-S-T-O-O-S-O-R-S-O-O-R-E-S-O-O.

and your previous book is, who says that's art? I just love the idea that we can really talk about what is art and therefore what isn't art, because you said it earlier that there are some things that they're pseudo art, and they strike me in many cases as being a mockery of art. They seem to be making fun of the very idea of art and of beauty. I think there is an essentially radically antithetical mindset in such work. And it's interesting that all of the early inventors of everything from the abstract to conceptual art

explicitly recognized that what they were doing was essentially different from traditional work. And I argue that it was, in essence, anti-art. And if people want to study it, they should do so as something apart from traditional fine art. As a matter of fact, I have an article coming out in the journal academic questions entitled Art History Gone Amok. And I argue that the way art history has been taught from the early 20th century on, as you say, it's antithetical. It's almost a mockery of traditional art. and it makes for a completely incoherent picture of art history. I would also say that part of the strain that we see in this kind of thing

is an obsession with novelty, the idea that it's not that there is some standard to which I wish to work, that there's some standard of beauty, some ideal, but rather that I have to do something new, I have to say something that hasn't said before. Where did this ridiculous idea come from that novelty is the sumum bonum of creating art? Where did it come from? That's a good question. You're certainly hitting the nail on the head and recognizing that it exists. And I had a conversation with Glenn Lowry, the director of the Museum of Modern Art.

and it was an exhibition of sound art. And you wonder what sound art is doing in the realm of visual art. What was one of the anti-art forms? And he said that some of the work that was being done by the artist was really almost closer to science than art. And I said to him, And don't you think it might be possible that where some artists are going is no longer art?

And he said, I don't think we can ask that question anymore because of Marcel Douchon. Marcel Douchon was, of course, the French charlatan who signed a urinal and submitted it to her to an art show that he was actually a member. I was going to say, all you have to do is go back 100 years or so. We're going to go to a break. We're going to come back. Final segment with Michelle Kami K-A-M-H-I. The book is Bucking the Art World Trend.

We'll be right back. Hey there, folks. We're talking art, and I'm talking with the author of a new book, bucking the art world tied. Michelle Kami, we were just talking about whether one can ask if something is art or isn't. And you said that Glenn Lowry, was it Glenn Lowry, who's the director of the... He's reasonably conservative in some ways. Is he not?

No, no, no. That's a different person. No. Different in Lowry. Well, I guess my question, my question. to you is when he says, you know, you can't ask that question and he takes you back to Marcel Duchamp, I mean, it's a joke. When a urinal is called art, it's calling into question the very idea of art, the very idea of beauty, it's contemptuous, I would argue, of museum goers,

of average people. And we got stuck there over a hundred years ago and we haven't really moved past it. The ultimate irony is that if you read carefully things that Duchamp said, he said he never intended his

ready maids like the urinal and the snow shovel. He never intended them as art. They were just a distraction for him. His bicycle wheel was something he had in his studio. But the post-modern

art world took it up because it suited their purposes, which was to reject traditional art. So the whole history is so fraught with lies and misrepresentations. It's really appalling. I assume you're familiar with Tom Wolfe's book, The Painted Word. Of course, yes, Yes, of course. When I read that book, I thought, holy cow, somebody out there gets it. That's a short book. But, you know, when I found out that he existed and was thinking along those lines and having looked at your work, you mentioned Hilton Kramer.

Would he part company with us in only some things? Is he generally on board with us in some of the... Oh, no. No, that's also the... shocking truth. For example, one of the chapters in my book is an appreciation of the work of Andrew Wyeth, who I think was one of the great artists of the 20th century. And he was, although he was extremely successful at the beginning of his career,

the abstract art world came to reject him and revile him. And Hilton Kramer was scathing in his criticism. of him. No, Kramer was totally wedded to abstract art and he didn't recognize how fundamentally mistaken that he was in championing such work. So it's a surprising fact. One of the brief articles in the book is abstract art is an absurd inversion version of of American values, and it deals with that whole issue of the disconnect between abstract art and the common sense perspective

of that Americans are most known for, or at least were once prided ourselves on. We're basically out of time, But I just want to say to anybody who's listening, if you know anyone who cares or thinks about art, I can't think of a better gift than bucking the art world tide. We need to think about these things. These are wonderful essays, highly praised and rightly so. Michelle Comey, I want to thank you for taking the trouble to write the book and for your time on the program today.

Thank you so much. Thank you, Eric. You bet. and I want to remind people, go to aristos.org, A-R-I-S-T-O-S-O-R-I-S-T-O-R-I is spelled K-A-M-H-I. That ends the program. Thanks for listening. My blog is on my website, M-M-K-A-M-H-I.com.