The New Aesthetics

The origin of the New Aesthetics can be traced back to an art summer school held in Irsee, southern Germany, in 2007. During this summer school, English artist Clive Head and Anglo-Cypriot writer and art theorist Michael Paraskos. conducted a joint class. Head and Paraskos had previously taught together at the University of Hull but had pursued their own paths after leaving academic teaching in 2000. The reunion in Irsee led to the publication of a small pamphlet called "The Aphorisms of Irsee."[1] This pamphlet presented a series of seventy-five aphoristic sayings on the nature of art.

While some of the sayings in the pamphlet were intentionally humorous, such as "Beware the Swiss bearing sausages," the majority of them conveyed what the authors considered to be the essential elements of artistic practice. Some sayings were deliberately provocative, such as aphorism 38: "Performance is not art: it moves too much and so adds to the flux. Art is always a longed for stasis." This saying can be juxtaposed with aphorism 37: "True art fixes the flux of chaos. That is how we cope with chaos, and that is the purpose of art."

Other aphorisms provided insights into the content of the class taught at Irsee. Aphorism 47 stated: "One should choose whether to make tables or bake cakes, and not be a carpenter of cakes or a baker of tables." This aphorism seems to connect to a fable-like story published by Paraskos in 2008, where a carpenter believes he is a baker because he can make tables. Paraskos mentioned that he wrote this story in 2007, just before the summer school in Irsee, while he was teaching at another art summer school at the Cyprus College of Art. In the introduction to the story, he mentioned that he "performed" it while in Irsee.[2] "The Aphorisms of Irsee" is subtitled "Part One of the New Aesthetics," which appears to be the first use of the term.

Although some of the ideas associated with the New Aesthetics can be observed in the earlier works of artists like Clive Head, among others, the concept itself gained significant traction with the publication of Michael Paraskos's booklet "The Table Top Schools of Art" in 2008.[3] Subtitled "Part Two of the New Aesthetics," the booklet presented a clear opposition to Conceptualism in art and advocated for the development of a "new aesthetics" centered around the physical engagement of artists with the material world.

Paraskos argued that the essential components of this new aesthetics are the artist's active interaction with materials, the artist's material response to that engagement, and the viewer's subsequent engagement with the materiality of the artwork. He expressed criticism towards centuries of what he viewed as misguided discourse on art by philosophers, literary critics, and others who lacked an understanding of the significance of physicality in art or who held a disdain for it. Paraskos asserted that these perspectives, often stemming from non-material philosophical or critical traditions, should be replaced by a philosophy of art grounded in the practical experience of creating art, which he believed would better serve the needs of artists.[4]

This standpoint inherently rejects Conceptualism, as conceptualists not only adhere to a non-material philosophical tradition but also prioritize immaterial ideas over the material object. Paraskos's emphasis on the materiality and physicality of art challenges this hierarchy and proposes a shift towards a more artist-centered approach.

The third publication addressing the New Aesthetics was Michael Paraskos's collection of journalistic writings on art titled "Is Your Artwork Really Necessary?"[5] This compilation, subtitled "Part Three of the New Aesthetics," explores various contemporary and historical artworks as well as touches on political issues. Consequently, its definitive connection to the New Aesthetics becomes less straightforward. However, throughout the introduction and several articles, there is a reaffirmation of the significance of material engagement in art.[6]

One notable instance is found in the article on Clive Head, where Paraskos argues that photography poses challenges as an art form due to its immaterial nature and the intermediary role of the camera, which prevents direct physical engagement with reality.[7] A similar emphasis on materiality is evident in the articles on Hughie O'Donoghue[8] and Van Dyck, where the critical analysis centers firmly on the physical qualities of the paintings rather than their narrative or conceptual meanings. Notably, the introduction of the book maintains the assertive stance against immaterial art forms such as Conceptualism, which was previously expressed in "The Table Top Schools of Art." Paraskos even goes so far as to call for an "artistic revolution."[9]

The book's provocative stance and continued emphasis on materiality contribute to its overall impact and distinctiveness within the context of the New Aesthetics discourse.

Although not explicitly identified as part of the New Aesthetics movement, both Clive Head's paintings and writings embody its underlying philosophy. In particular, Head's introduction to John Russell Taylor's book "Exactitude" highlights the importance for realist painters to move beyond relying solely on the camera and instead engage directly with the physical world around them.[10] Head extends this viewpoint to encompass non-realist painters as well, reflecting Paraskos's inclusive approach within the New Aesthetic framework. For both Paraskos and Head, this direct engagement with the physical world is seen as the only legitimate way for art to be relevant in the contemporary context. They use the term 'actuality' to describe this concept, emphasizing the importance of physically doing something in the present moment as a means of engaging with the here and now. This stands in contrast to the mere representation of past philosophical or critical concepts, or the replication of past imagery, such as in photography.

Alan Pocaro's formal involvement in the New Aesthetics movement began in 2010 through correspondence with Paraskos. Their collaboration was further solidified through a joint teaching session held via internet video link in early 2011, where Paraskos and Pocaro instructed students at Miami University.[11] Alongside his teaching position at the Art Academy of Cincinnati, Pocaro had already been writing articles for the Cincinnati-based art magazine AEQAI, in which he developed a parallel philosophy of art similar to the one proposed by Paraskos and Head. This is evident in several of his writings for AEQAI, including his assertion that the discourse of art is not an unrestricted realm where anything goes, but rather, as Paraskos suggests in his book "Regeneration,"[12] an activity with specific parameters.[13]

Robert Neffson is an American painter who has engaged in a longstanding correspondence with Clive Head regarding the role of realism in contemporary art. Their letters cover various topics, with a particular focus on the creative process and the emerging concepts of the New Aesthetic. A selection of these exchanges was published in "Clive Head and Robert Neffson" (London: Marlborough Fine Art, 2007). Neffson has also discussed ideas related to the New Aesthetic with Michael Paraskos. Neffson's artwork reflects many of these principles, notably his personal involvement with the depicted spaces and his expressive perspective. His paintings capture reality while also extrapolating elements to evoke specific emotional responses from viewers.