Futility of Cubism in a nutshell

[sigh] So, another visual discovery…

Cubism has purpose within its own boundaries. When judging Cubism along the innate rules of Cubism, then indeed it has a point, an intent.
But what is the impact of Cubism on the common man? Had Cubism utilized it’s strength of disintegrating visual perception and reality in order to convey deep and meaningful messages that are of interest to all of us and not only to a handful of artists that deal with Cubistic paintings, it would have probably been of more significance to the greater good.

To the ordinary housewife, what is the difference between Cubism and Expressionism or Realism if the subject matter is of no relevance to anything involving her day to day life? The technique itself, whatever it is, is of no importance to the viewer who seeks identification and answers.

“Yo, Danny-boy, you hungry?”

Take the Portrait of Daniel-Henry Kahnweiler by Pablo Picasso and paint it again using any artistic technique you want, OK? Who cares? Who is he anyway and why should I care to look at his portrait if it has no relevance whatsoever to my own self, my goals as a human being, my fears, my passions, my pain, my life, my death?

The subject matter of art is to me, the most significant element and has utmost importance in the relevance of the artwork to anything relating to the day to day reality of all of us.
That is why I use any technique I feel like regardless of any artistic consideration in order to convey the message I want, and if I have to make up something that does not exist than so be it. See? It doesn’t make any difference – only the issue does.

Techniques of art, trends, artists – they will all die, but the essence of art and the existential suffering and all that involves it, are common to us all, they are facts of life to remain for eternity.

Utilizing the futility of Cubism

Now you might think to yourselves: “OK, we got the point, you don’t like Cubism or you think it’s futile and worthless. Than do something about it and use the damn thing for your own purposes – you wanna convey a damn message and Cubism might help you do that, than do it.”
Good. So indeed that is actually the point of the essay, you figured it out. But have the art establishment understood that as well? Have all those shallow kiss-ass, trend-possessed fashion-clerks of art saw that the essence of Cubism, if any, is to serve as a tool for higher purposes, artistic and philosophical and perhaps even existential when they were so damn busy hailing Picasso for his new toy?

Do other artists understand that as well, or are they possessed by the consensus and blinded by the esteem of those who perceive art as a toy to mess around with, but are still blathering lectures about integration with people and harmony of nature? Do they?