Unquiet Desperation

Unquiet Desperation => The Mob => Topic started by: samuel on May 14, 2008, 12:20:23 AM



Title: "Art"?
Post by: samuel on May 14, 2008, 12:20:23 AM
I study art and I can honestly say I hate almost every other artist I have 'studied' with in my relatively short period of time calling myself an art student. Everyone pussy foots around each others work terrified to upset or god forbid offer any criticism AT ALL.

When I show my work I want people to rip the filthy, writhing, scum-filled bowels out of it and force feed me using a tube and a fucking sledgehammer, I dont need 'yeah that looks ok' or 'I like the colours' I NEED the flaws! I NEED the shit kicking out of it! I NEED whoever the scumbag it is that dare open their mouth to vomit pure, acidic criticism all over my excuse for art so I can better myself and stop being a whiny little bitch that is scared 'not to fit in'

People are to scared to hear actual opinions in case it backfires and decimates their little bubble of paint and chalk spewing truth on their garbage canvases and shit scrawlings. The gap between pussy footing students and pretentious gallery running fucks is far too large, the art world needs a big fucking shake up to get rid of all the non-productive half-arsed shitsacks and stir up some actual GENUINE work and something worthwhile to study... I mean, great I can look at the ancients all day long, yeah they were awesome but what fucking use is it in the here and now? I NEED contemporary artists to push the boundaries of their artistic endurance! I cant learn anything new from a dead artist...

The greatest artistic movements in history were sparked by NEW ideas.. they didnt look back at fucking cave paintings and think 'shit, we should be doing what they did thirty thousand fucking years ago'

WHERE ARE THE REVOLUTIONARIES?


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Ploe on May 14, 2008, 01:13:20 AM
Sam mate, they're scared, scared you're going to rip the throats clean out of their jugulared visions. Scared that if they show distaste to someone, they'll show distaste back. They daren't stand up, hands on their dicks and say "Your work is shit, it looks like something my pet could draw, you're not inspired, you're not an artist, go home, please!". Most "artists" are wimps by nature, too scared to get a real job in the real world, too scared to live, so they sit ion their spaces sculpting, painting and wanking off hard into their bed sheets. If you need brimstone, bring it in yourself, otherwise there you'll never make any progress as artists. Plus it's never shameful to learn something off someone who is dead, sometimes they have it so right...


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Vix0r on May 14, 2008, 01:41:29 AM
I completely disagree about not being able to learn of the old masters. You can learn everything, if you open your eyes a little wider!

In their time many masters were not important or as famous as they are now. they got their status for a reason. They had what it took, they learned and created and advanced their skills to such an extent that they live on in their work.

Look at brush strokes, colours, styles of the era, the mistakes they had, the things they could not do because of social boundaries.

People coming up with new ideas have done so from looking at these paintings and going one step beyond, seeing what would spark attention, what would be exceptional.

Do not diss the old masters. The majority of artists will NEVER have what it takes to become anything like such wonderful artists.

And yes, pussyfooting is the shit. I noticed I do it too, but around friends I don't know so well for fear of causing offence. I am sometimes not the most eloquent of people.

However as an art student myself, it's always wonderful and ego boosting to have praise bestowed upon me, but it would be appreciated to be shown the flaws and given advice. In a nice way.

I'm lucky to know some forthright people who tell me what they think, and it does help. A lot.


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: samuel on May 14, 2008, 02:03:41 AM
 I think you misunderstood what I said about the masters, they are gods in their own right and indeed we have learnt alot from them and we can not forget that we have become somewhat complacent in what we 'see' when we view their work as these guys were at the very forefront of their movements!

 My point is that we can't dwell in the past when there are still many social boundaries still to demolish! Race, sexism, ageism, corruption in politics, religion (though thats a golden oldy), money, drugs, poverty etc. It's no use becoming lazy and thinking that everything has already been covered by these amazing visionaries we still need that energetic push to create new picasso's and new leonardo's so that in one hundred years time they are still pushing the boundaries of creativity!

 I can see what you mean about the ego-boost of being appreciated, it's a wonderful high, but I can honestly say I only achieve that high when someone I actually 'respect' offers the praise. I need to feel that I have deserved the credit, as opposed to the average joe hurling his two cents. Art among youth is in a dire position, I feel that if people were more.. deserving of the praise then there would be a hell of a lot less mediocrity and far more quality...

Though I suppose mediocrity is a necessary evil in order to make the GREAT artists stand out from the purely average

(thanks for the response both of you)


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Vix0r on May 14, 2008, 02:32:56 AM
I agree, these artists pushed their boundaries just as we should. If we so desire, that is. Art will always move forwards as society always changes and innovators will always seek to push it that bit further.

Right now though I am in dire need of a good tabletop easel. I want to become satisfactory at painting landscapes. There is a picture hung upstairs that once hung in the living room that I have admired from as far as I can remember. I love standing close and stepping back to see it all come together to create the amazing landscape that it shows. It's wonderful, and I have a strong desire to learn how to do something like that.

So I guess, whereas you are trying to move forwards, I am trying to go back. I can't see it as something bad though, as it's such a talent to be able to create beautiful things like that even if it's been done for centuries.

I think we both strongly agree on the being honest about flaws of work though. It's crucial to development and improvement. It also shows a person respects you enough to be honest.


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: hopeless zygote on May 14, 2008, 03:04:17 PM
I think we are all here because we are angry with something and want to change to world for the better to some degree.  Anger is a very constructive emotion, but don't confuse politeness for banality.  Revolutionaries are everywhere fighting the good fight.  They may seem few and far between with our supreme tyrant more predominant than ever, but they are still out there.  As artists, I don't think we can demolish boundaries in social issues, but we can show their absurdity.  The racist and the artist will die, but the racism and the art will battle forever.  I'm not sure where I was going with that...something about the eternal war for our collective unconscious.       


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Will on May 14, 2008, 04:40:19 PM
Quote
People are to scared to hear actual opinions in case it backfires and decimates their little bubble of paint and chalk spewing truth on their garbage canvases and shit scrawlings.

I agree and think I've been guilty of this myself.  Not wanting to sound cliche, but honesty is the best policy.  I find that I also enjoy it when I get actual criticism from someone who actually read my work and thought about it. 


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Vix0r on May 14, 2008, 07:49:53 PM
Not all artists have to be revolutionaries, and not all of us are angry =p

There is a pride in being good at what you want to do whether other people see it or are shocked at it or even like it.

I adore art. I love to spread the paint with a good thick brush or smudge the charcoal with a wee smudgey stick! The creation is thrilling and it's a lovely feeling. I'm not an angry art student. =p


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Ploe on May 15, 2008, 01:03:03 AM
There should be revolutionaries in art. Art is for the people, we are the people. My proles we shall rise up and take all art from the upper classes and make it ours. Too long has art been looked at through the veil of fine snobbery! Shoot the fuckers down! Yes?


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Vix0r on May 15, 2008, 01:29:35 AM
Art is for the artist! Art is a way of expression, it should satisfy the artist and bugger everyone else.

I didn't ever say there shouldn't be revolutionaries as they are essential to development in all aspects of life, but I was saying not all artists should be so.

I don't want to be a revolutionary. Many others don't either. We want to produce work we are satisfied with and learn until our hearts explode.

You lot go be "revolutionaries". I'll stick to learning and creating what makes me happy.


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Ploe on May 15, 2008, 01:39:17 AM
Then shouldn't every man be an artist? That way the plebs can't be elitist and think that only those with talent can commit themselves to art. If art is expression like you say, then shouldn't everybody be entitled to that? They might not want to, but for many it may be the therapeutic soul booster they need, and it just hasn't been presented to the masses. How Christ brought Spirituality to the poor and sinners, somebody needs to bring them their hunger for art!


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Will on May 15, 2008, 01:42:52 PM
Quote
Then shouldn't every man be an artist?

Isn't every man an artist?


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Vix0r on May 15, 2008, 02:03:11 PM
^ That.

Ah, Ploe. You misunderstand me again. Art is for the artist, but you seem to think that I'm seperating those who are already considered artists from everyone else. I mean that art is for the artist that created it, but anyone can be an artist. It's for them.


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: samuel on May 15, 2008, 05:28:20 PM
what is an artist?

to me an artist isnt someone who necessarily creates 'art' an artist is someone with an idea, and someone with the sufficient talent to express this idea through any means necessary.

the art world needs passion.. too many people without a purpose doing things for the sake of doing them.

I agree with ploe, kill the snotty nosed bastards and de-throne the pretentious fucks that tell us what art is! Art is for the people!

(why do I suddenly feel patriotic like I should be holding a hammer and sickle firmly in each hand with a stern jaw and piercing gaze of pride, surrounded by equally proud, half naked, glistening men covered in soot and ash from the burning capitalist buildings in the background?)


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Editor on May 15, 2008, 05:44:21 PM
(why do I suddenly feel patriotic like I should be holding a hammer and sickle firmly in each hand with a stern jaw and piercing gaze of pride, surrounded by equally proud, half naked, glistening men covered in soot and ash from the burning capitalist buildings in the background?)

A shiny red apple for the first person that comes up with a UD poster in this style! Such a thing would be made available for our proletariat to download and post around their towns and factories...

Carpe diem,

Mike,
Editor,
Unquiet Desperation.


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Vix0r on May 15, 2008, 09:15:14 PM
I like the snotty nosed pretentious bastards. Who would I have to laugh at if they were not there?

Besides, is it really important? They can't affect you if you don't let them. Ignore them.

Posting posters around is a bit pretentious in itself, no? "Look at us. We're a spiffy forum. Come join us because we're totally awesome. Yeah." Whatever happened to word of mouth?


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: samuel on May 15, 2008, 09:37:16 PM
I dont want to ignore them because I want change! Thats my point, if we just sit by and are ruled upon by these tossers with paint brushes up their arses then how far will this system of arrogance and preference go?

on a lighter note:

(http://spn.scrotu.ms/inkmansmall.jpg)

I tried drawing the naked guy thing but a) I was far too aroused b) never try and look for reference pics containing naked men... google is not your friend!

gave me a chuckle anyway


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Ploe on May 16, 2008, 01:47:06 AM
Posting posters around is a bit pretentious in itself, no? "Look at us. We're a spiffy forum. Come join us because we're totally awesome. Yeah." Whatever happened to word of mouth?

You forget dear woman, Unquiet Desperation is first and foremost a magazine.


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Vix0r on May 16, 2008, 01:47:38 PM
I didn't forget at all.

It just annoys me when I see posters and stickers plastered all over for some wee magazine or club or band or gig. They all look the same (shite) and you know what sort of people will have put it there.

No other effort is made to improve the whatever it is and mucking up the street with all the paper crap that disintegrates and looks scabby on a wall is thought a great idea.

I suppose I have not had very good experience with posters and the like and consider them a waste of space.


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Will on May 16, 2008, 02:03:13 PM
No other effort is made to improve the whatever it is and mucking up the street with all the paper crap that disintegrates and looks scabby on a wall is thought a great idea.

So if a band puts up a promo poster, you're saying they also don't practice to try and improve the show advertised by the poster?  I would have to disagree.

However, I do agree that in some places they are like litter and can look trashy.  I still enjoy looking at them though.  Maybe if they're tastefully placed.


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Vix0r on May 16, 2008, 02:36:57 PM
If I don't like something I'm not going to flatter it or even attempt to be truthful.

The world is full of shitty little bands and magazines and gigs and clubs and so on, all trying to throw themselves in your face. I don't like it and I'm not going to pretend I do. I want my face free from such things so I can actively seek out what I want to enjoy.


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: keysersose on May 16, 2008, 02:54:57 PM
never try and look for reference pics containing naked men... google is not your friend!

Unless you're looking for pictures of naked men for less salubrious reasons, of course.

The world is full of shitty little bands and magazines and gigs and clubs and so on, all trying to throw themselves in your face. I don't like it and I'm not going to pretend I do.

This may be, but have you ever considered that it's time to stop standing at the side throwing stones and go and build something yourself? I happen to think that some of the time your aim is true - and have cackled evilly at some of your direct hits - but would like to see what you can do. These may be shitty bands and magazines and gigs and clubs, but at least they're having a go...

Oh, and before anyone states the obvious I'm aware of my lack of posting actual poetry or art on here. I aim to rectify that, and until I do I'm going to attempt to practice what I preach and temper my sarcasm. It's going to be soooooooo hard. :(

Keyserrrrr.


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Will on May 16, 2008, 02:57:57 PM
I want my face free from such things so I can actively seek out what I want to enjoy.

You shouldn't let eyesores keep you from actively seeking things you want to enjoy.  Maybe a trip out of the city might help.  It always helps me (even though my city is more of a gas station along an interstate).


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Will on May 16, 2008, 03:00:32 PM
These may be shitty bands and magazines and gigs and clubs, but at least they're having a go...

You never know
'til you have a go
perhaps yes
perhaps no

at least when I'm vegetating on the couch I feel as though at some point I did something worthy of something


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: GhostofKidneyStonesPassed on May 16, 2008, 03:31:13 PM
When I show my work I want people to rip the filthy, writhing, scum-filled bowels out of it and force feed me using a tube and a fucking sledgehammer, I dont need 'yeah that looks ok' or 'I like the colours' I NEED the flaws! I NEED the shit kicking out of it! I NEED whoever the scumbag it is that dare open their mouth to vomit pure, acidic criticism all over my excuse for art so I can better myself and stop being a whiny little bitch that is scared 'not to fit in'

Maybe your art is so bad that to point out all the flaws would be more work than it is worth, so people just say "yeah that looks ok" so they can be done with you.   ;D

I'm just yankin' ya.  I feel your pain and completely agree.  But I also think if something is good, there's nothing wrong with saying it's good.  If I don't like something that someone has asked to be critiqued, I will be honest.  Sometimes I just don't have any suggestions or criticisms to offer. 


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Vix0r on May 16, 2008, 03:34:17 PM
~sigh~

I'm happy with what I'm doing. I'm getting a website up (although exceedingly slowly), I'm working on illustrations, I'm doing well at uni. I'm pretty chuffed. But it's for me and I don't want to slam it in people's faces.

And yes, I aim to get some art up on here too. I had drawn a really ace profile of my sister in charcoal that, while looking nothing like my sister, I was quite proud of. However, I stupidly handed it in to uni without first taking a picture and now won't get it back until atleast September.....

Don't think I'm taking a dig at UD or any of you lot. I just don't like posters and I don't like that sort of scene. It can't be helped.

Also, I don't live in a city. I live opposite a field and at the end of a country road full of farms and cows and lambs and daffodils and chickens that roam free. It's really lovely. I can even see a windfarm up on the hills in the distant which are slowly turning round in the breeze as I type this. I'm not really a city person. I also get lost far too easily. My knowledge of Glasgow includes two streets, three if it's a good day.

So don't think I'm "sitting by and throwing rocks". I am not. Just because I don't post anything here doesn't mean I'm not doing things myself. It just means I don't want to share it with you lot or am being lazy.

So in conclusion, I still think posters are shit and hate the whole "I'm a spiffy wee <insert thing here> -SLAM- here's our ugly poster for the next thing that you must go to but I won't clean up after myself" thing. It's not going to change.


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: GhostofKidneyStonesPassed on May 16, 2008, 03:42:15 PM
So in conclusion, I still think posters are shit and hate the whole "I'm a spiffy wee <insert thing here> -SLAM- here's our ugly poster for the next thing that you must go to but I won't clean up after myself" thing. It's not going to change.

Have you ever heard the comedian Mitch Hedberg.  He says when people come up to him and hand him fliers or posters advertising something, what they are really saying is "Here, you throw this away."  Maybe you have to hear it to be funny. 


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Vix0r on May 16, 2008, 03:48:38 PM
No, I haven't but it makes a lot of sense =p

Going reasonably back on topic, who do you think have been influential artists then? What revolutionaries do you guys respect for their contribution to the art world?

I'll say Mucha. He said he didn't bring about Art Nouveau but he certainly made an impact and a name for himself. His style is absolutely wonderful, and I can't help but appreciate what he did.

I'll also go for da Vinci. He was a wonderful wonderful man, far ahead of his time. His inventions, his wonderful drawings and paintings, his exploration into how the human body works by cutting up dead criminals...

I'm sure there will be others too! ~gets excited~


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Will on May 16, 2008, 04:27:05 PM
I agree with da Vinci and would add Michelangelo, but more recently Bill Hicks, Nine Inch Nails, Tool, Alex Grey, Dali.  I'd say most importantly Albert Hoffman.   


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Lillie Helvin on May 16, 2008, 06:43:50 PM
The greatest artistic movements in history were sparked by NEW ideas

think about contemporary artists now- take tracy emin for example. she is probably not somebody you have any respect for and not someone that you feel you can learn from, as i have heard many say, but she is doing things that haven't been done, and that's why she has got big. that's why she's got into these pretentious galleries. who the fuck has ever stitched all the people's names into a tent that they've slept with? she took an element of the women's gender cast, sewing, and turned it into her perception of her own place as a woman.

although you may not feel you can learn from that, it is new.


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Vix0r on May 16, 2008, 10:51:14 PM
Though it's not exactly saying alot if all someone can think of that's new is stitching some names into a tent....

Other strange pieces of modern art I have seen: a large block made of white bricks on the floor, masks of heads hanging from the roof, a messy bed, an apple, a large wall with alot of names written on it, a blob of bluetack shaped as a square with a piece of masking tape underneath it.

I bought a tent this week though, it's lovely.

Apparently Michaelangelo only washed once a year and when taking his clothes off they had started to stick to his body. A bit icky, but hey ho! He made nice statues.

However.... was he not also the competitor of da Vinci? If memory serves me well. As such, down with Michaelangelo! Da Vinci forever! ^-^


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: samuel on May 18, 2008, 01:08:01 AM
sorry to go off tangent a bit but I think this needs to be seen.. this is what I'm talking about, new ideas...

Wall Animation (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uuGaqLT-gO4)

I'll edit this post in a bit with something more relevant.. but right now my mind is seaping through the pores in my forehead.


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Ploe on May 18, 2008, 04:40:09 PM
However.... was he not also the competitor of da Vinci? If memory serves me well. As such, down with Michaelangelo! Da Vinci forever! ^-^

Not sure, but rivalry is always healthy. Spurs you on to do greater things.


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Lillie Helvin on May 18, 2008, 06:18:39 PM
Vix0r,, the messy bed was a self portrait.


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Vix0r on May 18, 2008, 11:36:18 PM
Still doesn't make me like it any more than I did before =p


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Ploe on May 20, 2008, 09:52:15 AM
Has anybody else done a poster design yet? I'm eager to see some output.


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: samuel on May 20, 2008, 03:02:19 PM
I'll crack one out in a bit


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Vix0r on May 20, 2008, 03:36:54 PM
Perhaps the poster idea should have it's own topic, no?

I'm really interested to see peoples thoughts, ideas and opinions on all the art things, even if it turns into a thrilling debate about why messy beds are wonderful/awful art.

It's the only topic so far that gets me excited to the point of a huge grin being plastered on my face. So yeah, stop distracting people.


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Ploe on May 20, 2008, 05:40:51 PM
True, but my domain is The Mob, so I can't exactly split the topic to make a poster thread can I? But yeah, let's discuss why there should be revolutionaries in art, and the other lark.


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: samuel on May 21, 2008, 11:58:24 PM
The same reason there should be revolutionaries in any field, without someone pushing the boundaries (not always in the 'right' or 'just' direction depending on which side of the fence you choose to hide) there is no progression, noone to challenge the 'authorities' or the leaders of the artistic hierarchy..

Luckily we live in an age where anyone can aim high and actually achieve their goals, back when leonardo, raphael and the likes were knocking about they were like the superstars of their day with hundreds of people working behind them..

Now we're unlucky enough to live in an age where it's possible to drown in the amount of free roaming unrestricted talent it's hard to make a mark

it's almost a catch 22


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Mr. Goldberg on June 24, 2008, 02:03:38 PM

Not sure, but rivalry is always healthy. Spurs you on to do greater things.
[/quote]


Didn't Adolph Hitler say something similar ?


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Mr. Goldberg on June 28, 2008, 01:44:53 PM
Did Stone Age man take art as seriously as we do ... did he need to ? Once he'd got through the day spearing the beast and feeding the kids...scrawling it on the wall was probably last thing he did before he got his head down...nothing else to do if the shops were shut or nothing on TV. Rather like golf which began as a crude game played bewteen shepherds to pass the time with any old bit of wood and a few pebbles...it is now a sophisticated pursuit played with carefully calibrated irons and woods to rich fat Sunday Golf cOurse types


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: samuel on June 28, 2008, 08:06:38 PM
Often alot of the cave drawings had alot more meaning than just scribblings on the wall, in some cultures they were/are used with a 'sign post' type function and quite alot of cultures believe that they actually possess a form of power and use them to 'keep in touch' with their ancestors and history...

of course a lot of it is speculation, but I think that drawing soley from boredom is slightly obnoxious, could be argued that it was more for documentation/decoration with a function..

just my thoughts though..

edit: I remember watching a documentary on the art of the aboriginal people in australia, and cave art/paintings have always been an integral part of their culture, almost as important as feeding your family in fact..


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Ploe on July 01, 2008, 12:54:14 PM
Artists are no longer documenting, they're simply creating. Excreting mindless dumps of sound or colour. We the human race, the long term memory of this planet owe future generations better than the bollocks we're suckling on now!


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Vix0r on July 03, 2008, 07:52:47 PM
I completely disagree!

Without life and all it's wonders we'd have nothing to influence our creations. All creations, even if they're awful and far too obscure, are documentation of that individuals experiences whether they know it or not.


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Ploe on July 03, 2008, 08:05:54 PM
All creations, even if they're awful and far too obscure, are documentation of that individuals experiences whether they know it or not.

Precisely, don't we owe future generations more?


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Vix0r on July 03, 2008, 08:30:35 PM
No, if anything, we owe ourselves more. Screw future generations.


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Ploe on July 03, 2008, 08:46:00 PM
But I'm sick of peoples' piss poor songs about bitches I don't care about, photographs of people snacking in fast food restaurants or setting fires in parks. I'm sick of everyone thinking everything is art, because quite frankly it aint. Art is when someone takes something already beautiful, chews it up in their fucked up head and spits it out as something brilliant. That's not happening anymore...


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Vix0r on July 03, 2008, 09:03:45 PM
Look harder.

And without all the shit, how would we know a good piece when we saw it?


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Ploe on July 03, 2008, 09:42:41 PM
Look harder.

And without all the shit, how would we know a good piece when we saw it?

If it weren't for those distracted by the bullshit, we'd not be as special.

Heh heh.


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Mr. Goldberg on August 21, 2008, 11:40:47 AM
Best thing about Samuel's art is his dancing   (see avatar) !!!


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Mr. Goldberg on August 21, 2008, 11:41:52 AM
No, if anything, we owe ourselves more. Screw future generations.

You ever thought of running for the American Presidency Vixor ???


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Vix0r on August 21, 2008, 12:30:24 PM
I have a very strong loathing of that country's government so that would be a negative.

Related to art though I did see a thing in the paper about a town which normally hosts an art show. Someone unrelated to the show had made coloured stickers saying "art object" and a value ranging from a few pence to thousands of pounds. They stuck them to objects such as lamposts and bins, ect. A person was quoted as saying it was a good idea and great how "by putting these stickers on these objects they are now works of art!"

This I objected to. By their definition art is what ever the sticker is stuck to, or whatever someone simply says is a piece of art. No effort, no ability, no creation. Just what they're told. What do you guys reckon?


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Ploe on August 21, 2008, 09:05:50 PM
People don't know what art is anymore. They see the world outside of their eyes, call it beautiful, and because it's beautiful they think it's art. But the world is already there, hard coded and predefined, art is how the artist reacts to the world, and because of that art can be ugly and horrible. Like bath water on an old carpet.


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Mr. Goldberg on August 22, 2008, 04:56:40 PM
Art is for the artist! Art is a way of expression, it should satisfy the artist and bugger everyone else.

...reminds me of a conversation I once had with an actor years ago as to which would he prefer - being seen as a the finest actor by                 a) a member of the audience
                                or        b) a fellow actor



He chose the latter...implying that only an artist can appreciate an artist not the fee paying punter who puts them there in the first place. I'd be inclined to disagree with that as you can be as up-your-own-arty as you like but if no one's getting it from the reader's/viewer's/listener's perspective then surely your "art" has failed. If whatever your shit is fails the universality test it ain't art surely ? 

Bit like that plonker who directed Dr. Zhivago...I mean what is goin' on there..daffodils one minute; tramlines the next, Omar Sharif having an orgasm and hacking down the Russian serfs with swords for a few sacks of grain till we find the Power Station ??? Yer wot ?? Gimme Paul Whitehouse football manager to Director's commentary on that one any day o' the week. Cheesey Peas !??  Marvellous !!

You can toss it off behind a camera lens till the pseuds come home but if it ain't poking the pineal gland then I'm a cake mix.   

Cake...now there's a film not so much post structuralist as....park bench meets priapic pleasure of cake consumption...crumbs, cream the lot..MARVELLOUS !!!


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Vix0r on August 22, 2008, 11:06:36 PM
You've written your message inside the quote tags, making it look as if I've said all that. =/


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Mr. Goldberg on August 23, 2008, 12:47:15 PM
...and I'm sure you wish you had Vixor....no need to thank me.


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Ploe on August 24, 2008, 07:42:49 AM
Fixed.


Title: Re: "Art"?
Post by: Mr. Goldberg on August 26, 2008, 12:36:09 PM
Fixed shmixed baked caked wot's the difference ?