Your Monday movie this week is about Balthus Klossowski de Rola. His work is most well known as controversial. Just looking at his work you may get the impression that he was some sort of dirty old man or even a pedophile. In the first seven minutes of the movie he talks about this very topic. Whether you believe what he says is up to you.
I'm still on the fence, I don't know whether I believe he was some sort of pervert or not but what he says about the critics and art historians is exactly how I feel. They always seem to be reaching and over analysing paintings. So this raises a question, if the viewer is the one who looks at a painting and sees something inappropriate is it the fault of the painter or the viewer? Is it the viewer's own subconscious mind that's putting these inappropriate thoughts in their head? OR is it the fault of the painter for putting it out there? When you put something out there that skates near a controversial issue does that make you an antagonizer, are you simply trying to poke the tiger? Then you have Balthus saying that it's the adult mind who's looking at his paintings incorrectly. This statement I believe. Adults always find ways to pervert things and children simply look at things with innocent eyes. (As it should be).
So if a painting was meant to represent one thing but the audience grabs other meaning from it, who's right? This one's tough. It's much like a tweet or a facebook post. Once you put it out there in the public the public will form their opinion and no matter how much back peddling and explaining you do, their mind is already made up.