.talking art over beer.

prof: "The irony about art is that you can produce naively produce art if you don’t know about art history. If you know art history, you may never produce art. History becomes a burden."

me: "Because you realize you can never create anything original. Someone else has already done it." 

prof: "Yes. But if you know art history, and yet can still create art, now, you’re somebody worth looking out for."

me: "You can still be commercially successful if you naively produce art."

prof: "Yes, you can sell it to thirty-somethings who just enter the market and doesn't know. But if an expert comes along, he’ll know. I have a friend who knows nothing about art history, and a friend who does. One doesn't care, just take a canvas, splash paint all over, and earn big bucks. My other friend who knows art history is perpetually pissed at the other. [laughs]"

me: “I don’t like it when artists don’t say directly what they want to say. Why can’t they just say it? Words seem easier.”

prof: “No, words, like images, have multiple meanings. It’s okay to have multiple meanings. And most artists think they are obvious.”

me: "They're not. I think should strip everything down to the bare minimum in art. Get rid of all the fuss. The extra stuff. Like writing."

prof: "That has been tried. Minimalism. 1920s."

me: [pauses] "Okay, I think I prefer to naively produce art." 

prof: "[laughs]… Hey, nothing is easy, alright?"