Filth and Contemporary Art

I really enjoyed watching John Waters’ interviews- namely “some of the best art is deadly” and “why you should watch filth”. In these videos, he deals with the “shock value” of contemporary art that has been difficult for society to digest. As is often discussed in lecture, we have not yet developed a vocabulary for contemporary art and this difficulty frustrates not only the “lay people” but also those involved in the art world. Adding shock to this seems to further separate the viewer from a logical understanding of a piece, but when deeply considered, as in the films Waters discussed, it adds a interesting interpretation of the work that removes the initial shock and reveals an intelligent response to a contemporary question.

What also intrigued me was Waters statement that many of these artists who do use shock use it to gain attention; “publicity hounds” he calls them. He compares them to the anti-gay extremists and religious fanatics whose sole purpose is to capture public attention through radical acts. By responding to these people, he says, we give them the power they are looking for, we’re taking the bait. Are we, then, to ignore the obscene art that is produced in order to maintain our own power as viewers? Should we write off Waters own art as merely attention seeking?