Kara Walker's art is like a dead baby joke that fell flat. It appeals almost exclusively to white leftists educated in elite schools chomping at the bit to proclaim "we are all guilty".
People who claim that they like Kara Walker understand that it is "the correct thing to do" to describe her art as "challenging" and "disturbing". They tend to conclude with something like "it's provocative, which is what art is supposed to be, right?"
No, art is supposed to be about sublimity. Walker is part of an intellectual movement that has, somewhat satanically, replaced the sublime with the abject. This exchange carries with it the vague implication that if we don't like it we might be racists.
Sure, it's loaded with abject horror, presented humorously. I can't say that I "like" it, in the sense of enjoying it, any more than I enjoy images from more recent atrocities. But I think that it's valuable, in that it makes all that stuff more real. And at least she doesn't do photorealism.
However, I don't think it's useful to use history to demonize the descendants of the perpetrators. As I see it, it's not individual people -- let alone their descendants -- who are evil. It's arguably cultures that are evil, and all involved are arguably victims.
> We do understand that you do not like Walker's art, and seem to be trying to make others feel bad for liking it. Maybe we can just critique the art itself?
My theory is that people don't actually like it, they just understand that they're supposed to say they like it. Also, I did critique the art itself.
> On what authority do you define art for all of us? Why does your definition of art have to be all of our definition?
My comment expresses my opinion about what art is and what makes it worthwhile. I don't want "define art for all of us" or to force other people to conform to my opinion in any way. But I wouldn't mind convincing other people.
No but I think "would I hang this on my wall?" is a fairly good metric for "do I like this". I've been in situations where I lied and said "I like this art" because I felt socially obligated. My argument is that there's a distinction between "what I say I like" and "what I actually like".
> I no longer see any reason to continue this conversation; youre just trying to attack me.
I'm not trying to attack you. I'm sorry it came off that way.