Anika Toro

Thoughts about making, ideas, what came before, and how we relate to the past now…questioning why it’s taboo to brainstorm those thoughts in public.

In The Ways of Seeing John Berger writes about the idea that it’s impossible to look at any art and not think of it in terms of confluence. Not just the actual artwork in terms of my present day surroundings but the artwork itself. In terms of history, what was it then? What does the artwork mean now? Why is a particular work still a part of the conversation and why is that particular work, after all this time, still held in such high, precious regard? Has the piece shifted in meaning from what the artist originally intended? Is any of that important? I have started to wonder if the placeholding we are doing is too stagnant for a piece of art- that art by its nature, an IDEA, wants to evolve, to become… Berger discusses how the instant artworks are displayed, their meaning is adapted - the way it is displayed, discussed, its accessibility/inaccessibility, it’s monetary worth - it all translates into its power. But art has most always been to communicate truths about a particular moment, about a feeling, communication. Holding such pristine levels of honor for the work itself becomes skewed… The elite presence often shifts the work into something unintended by the artist.

So, I have been exploring this idea; the idea that an idea is a living entity. Take a moment to imagine “What if____”. There are plenty of examples if you need artists of the past to exemplify this idea, plenty of quotes from everyone from Picasso, to Elizabeth Gilbert, from DaVinci to Questlove that have spoken about this idea, of Magic.

Lately, there have been a lot of courtroom discussions about copyright law. About the sanctity of ideas… I have been on both sides of copyright infringement - not to the levels of “high art” legalities but in art school, in my own community. Looking back on history, we can correlate times when art became held at a standard inaccessible to the masses, something special rather than something that we can all relate to, embrace, or attain. But reflecting on how some of these works were made and with quotes by those artists about how they made each image is in direct conflict with how their works are thought of now. I understand the seriousness of the question; I 100% believe in giving credit where credit is due and the acknowledgment of who birthed an idea from where and when. But I also believe in the magic of ideas- that they don’t die once a piece of art is made. With good art, successful art, there is an honesty that can inspire. If we believe in the connectivity of the Universe, of people, of inspiration and ideas, how can ideas not exist for the multi-purpose expansion, to continue on living in new ways?

Speaking of that Supreme court decision about to be decided, I couldn’t help but think how a ruling by a few conservative people with their own artistic ideas or preferences, their own personal experiences and ideas will affect not just the future of art making but the past’s. If this ruling is decided in favor of Lynn Goldsmith, won’t museums housing the rest of Warhol’s work have to reconsider if that’s legal? Will Picasso’s reproduction of Valesquez’s famous" “La Meninha” be any less accepted, valued, or shown? There are numerous examples of artists incorporating ideas, experimenting with similar styles or pieces of other works. My work isn’t being sold for hundreds of thousands of dollars so perhaps that’s why it feels strange to have to hide my explorations of ideas that came before me but I can’t help but think that any artist sharing work that has something important to say wouldn’t appreciate those ideas being further explored or even inspiring further ideas to take shape.

In art school, I was always told that as long as I could make an idea my own, that if I changed the original idea enough to make it different that that would be acceptable. But for years I steered away from any idea that I could discern as another’s. Now that I am older, I wonder where to draw that line even more…or rather, now that I am experimenting with ideas, how far is too far to play with another Master? Ideas don’t ever seem to be the problem. Warhol wasn’t starving for ideas when he made the image of Prince being disputed right now. Warhol’s many soup cans were not made simply because he didn’t know what to make. The idea- that’s the thing that wants to shine, right? Now, I am no lawyer. I’m not a world renown artist either. But, I do believe in art and what I desire most out of making and looking at art is to see someone’s honest character come through, a story, an ide Oh, and how about fun? FUN! Can we all remember that making is a fun thing to do and we could all benefit with softening our stance a bit about Art. I like what Austin Kleon has to say about art - that he has stopped calling it “Fine Art” but instead, in order to remind himself what art is really about, he calls in fArt. I also like to think about what Ekhart Tolle says about the idea of thinking someone is above or better than another…by creating a specialness we actually create a divide. I am not naive. But, sharing ideas, collaborating-these things are proven to bring about important ideas, proven to elevate the connections we feel with others. So, I am trying to be a little bit less serious about my making and about all the rules. (Rules!)