A Summary and Some Critical Thoughts

As I have been researching artists/photographers in order to draw parallels between more current art and the works of Ancient Greece and Rome, the critic and cynic in me can't help but to ask a few questions in relation to my discoveries.

Nan Goldin and Diane Arbus were both especially interested in capturing photographs of those who were considered to be on the fringes of society.  Both photographers openly discussed the fact that they were captivated by people who broke society-based opinions of "the norm".  I have been thinking a lot and I am really wondering if, by focusing so strongly on those who do not fit the general idea of what is normal, do these figures become idealized as well (though on the opposite side of the spectrum)?  It seems that they too have been exaggerated in some regards.  No, they definitely do not fit the nearly unattainable ideals of beauty instilled by the Greeks and Romans.  Though, what I have been questioning is this: Does focusing on the grotesque and the uncanny create a new sort of idealization... one centered on ugliness and deformity, rather than purity and conformity?

In a way, Willem de Kooning's work brings similar wonderings to mind.  His un-womanly female subjects appear to become an idealization of the ugly.  They are pictures of the grotesque, the strange, the violent, and the horrifying.  However, while they appear to be monsters, they are beautiful in the way that they are so perfectly unattractive.  The unsettling colors and forms cohere in a way that suggests harmony and balance.  Are these not idealized values in themselves?  Certainly similar statements can be made in regards to at least some of the models Goldin and Arbus photographed as well.

Are certain curiosities of nature actually so strange and unfamiliar if they have been photographed, painted, or sculpted by a variety of artists through the course of history?  I am somewhat inclined to say that the answer is "no".  These artists work with images and subjects that we as viewers have actually seen before.  As I have pointed out, unattractive and abnormal figures have appeared in art even as early as in classical antiquity really.  Maybe we do not see ugly figures as often, but it most definitely is not new subject matter.

It seems to me that idealization in art occurs often, in both positive and negative respects.  Perhaps as artists and viewers we are drawn to things that are obviously exaggerated yet in many ways, are able to remind us of life at the same time.