One of the DAS members - Michael Cunliffe - wrote an essay discussing ‘What is Dark Art’, and I loved so much, I asked him if he was cool with me sharing it.

It was originally posted on the Dark Art Society forum. To access it you need to be a part of the Dark Art Society Patreon run by Chet Zar, so that’s why I’m posting it here publicly for all to see.

If you are a lover of arts and artists of the darker variety, I encourage you to consider joining DAS.

You don’t have to be an artist to become part of the community.

The members are incredible human beings that I have had the privilege to get to know over the pandemic via the weekly zoom meet ups, it’s been pretty life altering in all honesty.

Thanks again Michael! Without further ado, here is the essay:

What is Dark Art?

It seems on the surface, that a definition of Dark Art should be relatively simple, since those that purport to create it share many traits as artists and interests as individuals. However, it cannot be said that all paintings of skulls are Dark Art, and since the presence of ‘dark’ themes are a constant in creative work throughout history, we must find a way to reconcile this with what is a relatively new field of work.

A history of darkness

There is no doubt that themes associated with dark art – monsters, death, decay, and literal darkness, are a part of creative pursuits stretching back into prehistory. Some of our earliest records of human artwork consist of scenes of fearsome and killed animals. Much of the religious creations of early and indigenous civilisations included forces of destruction that must be kept at bay, entities which personified predators, and psychopomps to be revered and bargained with.

Echos of the concepts and iconography of some of these mythological and cultural arts can be clearly seen in contemporary work, but it seems an act of hubris to claim these universal motifs as belonging to Dark Art.

Similarly, we can find numerous artists and artworks through recorded history that would seem to fit neatly into a category of Dark Art. Numerous depictions of the Crucifixion in the 15th and 16th centuries accentuated gruesome details and pain-wracked anatomy, while Caravaggio seemed determined to pack darkness, gore, and personal suffering into every piece he could. The Vanitas, contrasting wealth and power with the ephemeral nature of life and the inevitability of death (most often represented by detailed depiction of skulls) emerged in the centuries that followed and the use of skeletal remains became a standard form to study in arts education.

Moving into modern, and post-modern times we find Goya, Bacon, Bourgeois, Hirst and countless others producing work that would not look out of place in an exhibition of Dark Art and yet it is certain that these artists would not have considered themselves within the grouping of work we are discussing.

Begin at the beginning

So, if we can find the roots of Dark Art throughout history, where do we find a true starting point? There seems to be a common agreement that Bekinski and Giger are, if not explicitly part of Dark Art, then certainly represent its forefathers.

With both of these artists rising to prominence in the 1960s and 70s, we are well served to look to other cultural changes happening in the west around this time. The rapid expansion of counter cultures in this time period (notably the freak, hippy, and punk trends) were rooted in questioning of authority and saw collective cultural fear, which is most readily identified by studying the production of horror movies, shift from the terrors of mad science, to fears centred in society itself. Depiction of possession, cults, serial killers, and zombies started to rise as the monster became an invading force from within.

Alongside this shift in cultural anxiety, a new attitude to sensationalism begins to make itself known as media reflects more permissive sexual attitudes, and reported rises in violent crime. New technology and craft within the visual effects industry helps to push the envelope of shocking audiences, and we would be remiss not to mention the impact of the Vietnam war and the work of Savini.

I am dwelling so much on the influence of cinema, and horror movies in particular for three reasons. First, the significant impact that horror movies seem to play in the influence of current creators of Dark Art. Second, the overlap between those that work in the visual effects industry and create Dark Art. Third, the movie Alien.

If we accept that Giger’s work is at least Dark Art adjacent, then Alien represents the most common point of contact between western culture and Dark Art. The xenomorph design, and the sexual body-horror of the face ‘hugger’ and chest burster, are sufficiently cemented in popular culture that they are obliquely referenced in books, tv shows, and even children’s cartoons, on the assumption the adult audience will understand.

With this movie standing as a kind of ouroboros of Dark Art, both inspired by and inspiring artists, should we consider the movie itself a work of Dark Art?

Dark Art Culture

There is without a doubt, a culture and community that surrounds Dark Art, which includes horror imagery, movies, and novels, metal and punk music, tattooing and body modification, and all manner of other ‘dark’ sub-cultural identifiers. However, it must also be clear that none of these elements is a signifier of Dark Art, or an indication of whether an individual can or should be associated with it. Such interests and identity markers relate to individuals, not the work that they create. Although ‘Dark Artist’ may be a useful marketing term, I put forward that Dark Art is not all work created by specific artists, but that works of Dark Art might be created by anyone, regardless of their normal artistic affiliations or interests.

The Dark Art genre

In writing this piece, I took a quick survey of the Dark Art Society Facebook Group. As unscientific as these polls were (influenced by low and uneven numbers of respondents, the limits of timeline and algorithms, and social desirability), they seemed to indicate that the artists were making work that happened to be ‘Dark Art’ rather than trying to make work that was deliberately scary or creepy, but also that they considered Dark Art to be a genre rather than movement.

If Dark Art is a genre then it would allow us to include those elements of historical work that seem to fit within it, absorbing Mayan death gods, Munch’s The Scream, and Bosch’s Garden of Earthly Delights.

I contend that we must view Dark Art as a movement, as we do Surrealism, Expressionism, or the Pre Raphaelites, and that to do this, we must define the attributes of Dark Art that set it apart from other aesthetically similar works.

• Dark Art is post-modern

Dark art does not hold with the idealist visions of modernism, and holds interest in subjects and subjective reality, rather than exploration of materials. It is often anti-authoritarian, aware of its own place within wider culture, and sometimes humorous and self deprecating. As such, work created during and prior to the modernist movement, does not truly belong to Dark Art.

• Dark Art is a Fine Art.

Answering the question of whether Alien is Dark Art, I would suggest a firm no. Although much of Dark Art is influenced by pop culture and illustration, and the same imagery and style might appear in creature designs and album covers, Dark Art exists when the work is created as Art first and foremost, with no other purpose in mind.

• Dark Art is not horror art

This attribute may feel difficult to define, since it relies largely on intention. Dark Art certainly shares iconography and stylistic elements with horror, but it’s primary purpose is not to scare or shock the viewer.

• Dark Art values beauty and craft

This is by far the most controversial attribute that I suggest, but I see a clear thread of very pre-modern interest in quality production of artwork. Even when the subject matter may include dead flesh and gore, there seems to be a desire to make the colours balance, the brushwork flow, and the textures provide a believable detail.

• Dark Art is…. dark

Although it sounds utterly redundant to say, the point must be made that Dark Art conveys something dark to its audience. A Dark Art sculpture of a wilting flower is not conveying a sense of Wabi Sabi, a seascape is not providing a sense of majesty or adventure, a beautiful portrait is not simply a faithful reproduction of the sitter. What this ‘darkness’ is remains a complex question, although I personally lean towards a psychological framing, with anxieties, desires, and implications of the ‘Shadow’ being reflected through the cultural focus of the monster, and unconsciously communicated through colour, composition, and mark making.

Dark Art as a Movement

Setting aside the absurdity of referring to ‘Dark Artism’ or the more painful and somewhat problematic ‘Darkism’. We must consider the question of a Dark Art movement. I hear the term used regularly, and there is in fact an organisation named that (attached to the British Macabre Gallery among others). However, in the absence of a ‘Manifestoes of Dark Art’ what does such a movement intend to achieve? Certainly the promotion of Dark Art is a cultural and commercial objective for all of us, but to what end?

Do we intend to show those who feel drawn to the Dark that there is a genre of art to feed that need? Is there a desire to show the world that there is a beauty in things they might normally shy away from? Are we intending to force the world of high culture to recognise the value of themes and ideas previously relegated to popular culture?

Answers to questions such as these have the potential to direct and focus those who make Dark Art beyond the creation of their next piece, or may conclude that such questions are irrelevant and we simply want to stand together to support the making of monsters.

Afterword: Excluding the Other

A trait that seems common amongst the artists interviewed on the Dark Art Society podcast is that they have felt like outsiders. It is clear that in recognising Dark Art as a distinct entity, it creates a psychologically valuable sense of belonging. The value of this can create a desire to include all things held creatively dear to the artists involved, or to ensure that all artists interested in Dark work are included within the category. However, definitions are vital to the discussion and development of a subject, and definitions are created by exclusion. To define what Dark Art is, we must be clear about what it is not.

My intention is not to exclude individuals (either artists or artwork), and neither am I concerned with negotiating the exact boundaries of Dark, Macabre, and Morbid art (anyone who has been subject to a debate about doom/dark/death metal can attest to the value of such conversations). Nor by writing this, do I consider myself the arbiter of what is and isn’t Dark Art. I am merely setting out my views on the topic, in order to begin a debate that might examine the work from an academic or intellectual perspective.”

Written by Michael Cunliffe

I have a blog in the works which is basically my thoughts and feelings around dark art, and its role in our current culture. Ultimately for me it’s about giving people a safe space to process their shit.

If you enjoyed that or even if you hated it…share in the comments below your thoughts!! You don’t have to sign in to comment or like, and I’d love to stir up conversation around this topic.