Viewing page 30 of 34

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

have been made by the art of the "isms," it succeeded only in being more human.

I doubt that what now seems to be an atomic age, or is in any case a scientific-mechanical age, will ever be greatly distinguished for its contribution to the human spirit. But perhaps later generations, if there are to be later generations, will discover in it qualities which the near view prevents one's seeing.

It is claimed that non-objective art is the perfect expression of such an age, and perhaps that is true. For the non-objective painting claims validity only for its mechanics, for the material with which it is made and the manner of their organization. It rejects man, his life, his visions his philosophies, his future. It is even affirmative in the sense that it asks us to be of good cheer; the machine can absorb our emotions and contain our soul.

[[image]]

Still, I believe that the increasing interest and activity in art is in essence a rebellion against the absolution of science and mechanics; that it evidences a widespread nostalgia for the human touch, and for the personal statement. For so much that we live with and experience today has become devoid of personality. Objects that we handle and use are mass-produced, our clothing mass designed. Our entertainment, in great part, must needs be reduced to common denominators and clichés. Mass communication has stereotyped public information, and with that the personal truth gathering, and truth telling that we have held so essential to our well being. Even opinion must be processed editorially before it may be relayed to the ordinary citizen.

But art is still the citadel of the individual. It is one of the few remaining outposts of free speech - unprocessed speech. The personal touch of the artist's hand remains [[strikethrough]] in [[/strikethrough]]ineradicably upon his canvas. What ever he says or feels