On the Loss of Art's Originality and Spirituality

Unfortunately, our young artists engaged in art are less concerned with seeking original expression and instead follow the footsteps of Western painters, imitating their styles exactly. They believe they are producing original works, but unfortunately these pieces are soulless and identity-less copies. Artistic creation gains meaning not merely through technical skill, but through profound thought, intuition, and spirituality. Yet the number of people who critically examine Western synthesis remains very small. As a result, young artists only realize too late that they are merely repeating others and have not produced any individual expression.

While we expect art galleries to recognize these young artists, the first step in this selection process actually lies with juries. When juries choose derivative works they mistake for originality, they reveal a serious deficiency in their understanding of art’s quality. In this context, gallery owners must question the juries, and selection committees must critically examine their artistic perspectives and criteria for value. Otherwise, the same mindset reproduces itself annually, flooding the market with similar, shallow works devoid of depth.

Unfortunately, spirituality has been largely withdrawn from the core of art in Türkiye. While the spiritual perspective should guide the artist’s creative process, today this dimension is nearly nonexistent. Painters, sculptors, and all those engaged in any art form must question themselves not only in terms of technical development but also in terms of inner growth, intellectual depth, and moral stance.

Collectors, art publications, and gallery owners are also asleep in this context. They continuously support the same artists and the same kinds of works, perpetuating the same cycle. This cycle merely begins again under a different name, but the outcome remains unchanged: productions that are soulless, devoid of emotion and originality.

We can trace the roots of this situation in the past. For nearly 170 years we have been painting in Western styles. Master figures such as Abidin Dino, Nurullah Berk, Hakkı Anlı, and Neşe Erdok were also influenced by this approach and sometimes produced works based on direct borrowings. Therefore, it may not be realistic to expect absolute originality or high moral integrity from today’s young artists, because the roots of this moral deficiency were planted in the past and are now being reinforced.

At this point, art writers and critics bear great responsibility. They must be principled, honest, inquisitive, and guiding. Everyone who picks up a pen must awaken and articulate the blindness within the art environment. Young people do not read because the texts presented to them are either inadequate or disconnected from context. Yet the failure to develop a reading culture is not merely an individual preference—it is a systemic social problem. This difficulty is deeply felt across all fields, from education and the press to art and political culture. This entire system requires a comprehensive transformation.

Art students cannot be original because educators transmit Western artistic concepts directly to students without subjecting them to critical scrutiny. Reproduction exercises should be used as technical tools, designed to teach students formal analysis and technical skill. However, these practices must not suppress or restrict the student’s courage to produce original work or their spiritual depth.

We ourselves experienced this process as students. While trying to find our own voice within Western-imposed molds, we often lost our way. But this experience now clearly shows us: art is not merely technique. Art is also an act of conscience, a work of the soul, a matter of ethics.

The duty of our new generation of artists is not to repeat the past but to turn toward the original language of the future. And we—educators, critics, collectors, and gallery owners—must genuinely support them on this journey.