|
|  |
|
|
|
| |
| Sep 04, 2008 11:40 am |
|
re: re: What makes a Master? |
Cheenu Pillai
| |
"master is a master whether he is recognised or not."
This is a feel good statement. But not a practical one. By this logic, everyone can claim to be a master. When everyone is a master, No one will be a master.
In this very forum Sonali had objected to Subodh Gupta being called a Master. Going by the above logic, what is wrong in calling Subodh a Master ? He is a master whether the world accepts it or Not. right?
This is where I feel a Master is created by external forces. Art may be subjective but there is something called collective recognition, which cuts across not sections of society but across TIME.
A master may create a masterprice which may be lying around in an attic. Whether it gets recognized as a masterpiece or is lost to ravages of time, depends on lot of external forces. The paradox here is we somehow make the simplistic assumption that all masterpieces make it to the podium and the ones that we dont know about were not worth it.
But for Johanna Bonger, we may have never heard of Van Gogh.There may be hundreds of Van Goghs out there who we may never hear about unless a Gertrude Stein, Clement Greenberg, Rosenberg or may be sonalis and Mehuls spread the message.Private Reply to Cheenu Pillai (new win) |
|
| |
|
