The art hoax

Mia Fineman writes about the hoax surrounding Marla Olmstead, an itty-bitty girl who created canvases that resembled Abstract Expressionist works. Turns out the kid's father was "helping" her. Still, whether or not the kid's painting was legit or assisted, the child's success reveals modern art for being a grand swindle. Right? Well, a reactionary like Your Working Boy certainly thinks so, but Fineman, who once observed elephants being taught to paint canvases, disagrees:

For those who believe that painting must be about something more than just color and gesture—like craft or technical skill or mimetic representation—abstract paintings by children and animals provide the ultimate refutation, proof that modern art is indeed a hoax. But such skeptics profoundly miss the point of the art they're trying to debunk. Yes, anyone can pick up a brush and slather paint on canvas in a drippy style that evokes Jackson Pollock. But it took an artist like Pollock to step back from his own work, which at the time looked unlike anything that had come before, and say, with bold conviction: "This is it. This is what modern painting looks like." In other words, Pollock taught us how to see art in a new way.

Marla, the elephants, and perhaps even your own brilliant progeny may be terrific painters—but they're not artists. This is because art is not just about making things or slapping pigment on canvas; it's also a way of thinking and seeing. Marla and the elephants are primitives, not prodigies. With no understanding of the issues at stake, there's little chance that their work will push art in any meaningful new direction.

In other words, the only difference between the crap your kid does and Abstract Expressionism is that the Ab-Exers had a Theory. Tom Wolfe was onto these scammers ages ago.