Paging Ivan Reid

It was somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the

Art, like everything else, is a gamble. Van Gogh only got the price of a
meal for his daubs, because that's all they were worth at the time.

Personally I'd like to see a small levy on art auction prices, say 1 or
2%, to be paid to the Artist's Benevolent Fund or somesuch.

Please, please, help the struggling artists.

Will nobody think of the Artists?

Remember, think once, think twice, think Artist.

It could be an Artist near you.

--

Dave

GS 850 x2 / SE 6a
SbS#6 DIAABTCOD#16 APOSTLE#6 FUB#3
FUB KotL OSOS#12? UKRMMA#19 COSOC#10

 

Not at all. I only said Scotch was shite. It's the Jackson Pollock
of booze. And I meant David Hockney. Doh.

 

It's all relative. Some art is a comment on previous tyles of art, some
questions what art is, some attempt to broaden the perspective.

The mistake that is made is that there is good art and bad art. There isn't,
there's just art. One person may appreciate the lifetime's application to,
say, photo realism. Another may consider that piece a robotic representation
of the subject and is therefore worthless, so subjectivity obviously isn't
the key to appreciating art.

The trick is to appreciate it without recourse to a subjective and ingrained
attitude of what art is. You may well come to the conclusion that you don't
want to pay £25,000 for some mud smeared over a bin liner. That doesn't
change what the piece represents and it doesn't make it bad. Or good.

If you can say it's interesting and provocative then it's got to be
worthwhile. At the bery least it's a reflection of the times and the state
of the art, so to speak.

 

But what pisses *me* off about a large number of works by people like Tracy
Emin etc is that one's viewpoint on the work of 'art' *has* to be subjective
as if, say, I didn't make *my* bed, it wouldn't be bought at all. Therefore
the whole perception of the 'art' itself becomes detached from whether there
has been any artistic effort involved in conceiving and/or creating the
piece and it boils down solely to whose name is attached to it (even when
the named artist hasn't created the work - qv. the later Damien Hirst dot
paintings).

I admit that, in order to become recognised as an artist of merit these
people have, in the past, produced works which, while I may not like them,
definitely show an originality and creative talent which I cannot aspire to.
But they then seem to become lured into a fantasy realm whereby every 'idea'
they have will become art because of who they are - mainly ideas or concepts
which they would not have tried to pass off as a serious attempt in their
own field before they were famous.

Dave

PS. And just to show my full-on partisan colours, I do believe any piece of
work by the Chapman brothers should be destroyed/defaced on principle to
morph it into a new work of 'art' just as they did with Degas' work -
somehow I get the feeling that, should I crayon on one of their pieces of
work I'd be arrested for vandalism and sued for all I'm worth as no-one
knows who I am, but two fuckwitted self-important corporate whores scrawl on
someone else's works? Art, innit!

 

You're suggesting that a piece must have had effort involved to be
considered 'art'. I offer that to be art you simply need a frame, be it a
wooden one, a metaphorical one or any other kind. Ie, to be art you simply
have to present it as such and it is.

That is why it is all equally worthless and equally valuable. If it looks
pretty and you want to stick it on a wall, then that is the kind of art you
like, simple as that.

The likes of Emin have a value because of the desireability of ther names
and the curators that choose to showcase them. The value of a piece is
arbitrary such as the value of gold which in itself is almost worthless
apart from it's conductivity and non-corrosive properties.

 

....or even Goya's...... I've had a hard day, OK?

 

To present something as art is the effort, but to present something as art
but it to only be accepted as art because of the name of the person making
the presentation renders the object itself, in my view, a crude commercial
money making venture designed to extract money from the gullible rather than
'art': "the creation of works of beauty or other special significance; the
exercise of human skill (as distinguished from nature); imaginative skill as
applied to representations of the natural world or figments of the
imagination", all of which require some level of effort....

Yes and no. If you like it and are prepared to pay for it then it may just
be the kind of commodity you like, not art per se.

This I agree with. I don't understand *why* a few dozen chinless idiots
think Emin's work is worth such sums of money, yet it is their prerogative
to think how they wish. Similarly, I don't understand why a few hundred
chinless fuckwits in Wall Street/The London Stock Exchange can decide that
gold is more desirable than, say, dead dogs.....

Dave

 

That definition has no currency (no pun intended) in the real world. If that
is where you're coming from then I can completely understand your ire.
However, it's a ridiculously simplified and exclusive definition and if you
intend to decribe the world with dictionary defintions then I will say good
day to you, sir.

"Like" isn't that useful a word when describing art. For instance, the very
fact that you're up in arms about the bed thing goes to justify its
existence and validates it.

No, you don't agree with me. I was saying *all* art is inherently worthless
in monetary terms (apart from what people are prepared to pay for it) which
is why it is not a yardstick to decide what is and what isn't art.

Consider what I do: I produce effects for tv and film. On a computer I
sculpt in 3d, I paint in 3d and then I animate to breathe life into it. Is
it art? No , it fookin' ain't. Why not? Because I am not presenting it as
art. If it was stuck in a gallery, or included for some reason an artistic
award shortlist it would be art. It wouldn't change the product itself
though. And therefore the whole issue of what is art and what isn't is
completely redundant.

 

Heh, she actually said something sensible for once, on being asked how
she felt about the loss of the Scratchy art collection...

Makes a change for her not to be completely p*ss*d-up and shouting
"B*ll*cks!"
--
O
1 Black, shortly to undergo extensive surgery.
1 Red, undergoing lightweight surgery. -----
1 Blue, for Power-Ranger baiting. | o |
Numbers ... | o |
Stuff ... | ooo |
Life ... -----

 

On this newsgroup there are qute a few artists... ;-)
--
O
1 Black, shortly to undergo extensive surgery.
1 Red, undergoing lightweight surgery. -----
1 Blue, for Power-Ranger baiting. | o |
Numbers ... | o |
Stuff ... | ooo |
Life ... -----

 

Owen wrote (of Emin):

My personal favourite quote so far was from one of the Chapmans, that
his only regret was that he hadn't made his pieces from Asbestos.

 

Owen says...

What did she say?

Something along the lines of "It's ok, I can do another one for 30
quid"?

 

Quite the opposite.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/kent/3761851.stm

 

It was somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the

I've just heard her having a whinge about the difficulties of being an
artist in Britain.

--

Dave

GS 850 x2 / SE 6a
SbS#6 DIAABTCOD#16 APOSTLE#6 FUB#3
FUB KotL OSOS#12? UKRMMA#19 COSOC#10

 

Heh, nice...
--
O
1 Black, shortly to undergo extensive surgery.
1 Red, undergoing lightweight surgery. -----
1 Blue, for Power-Ranger baiting. | o |
Numbers ... | o |
Stuff ... | ooo |
Life ... -----

 

Acshirley, something along the lines of... "I'm rather more concerened
about children dying in Iraq..."
--
O
1 Black, shortly to undergo extensive surgery.
1 Red, undergoing lightweight surgery. -----
1 Blue, for Power-Ranger baiting. | o |
Numbers ... | o |
Stuff ... | ooo |
Life ... -----

 

Hmmm, somehow I think I'd rather own a kilo of gold than a kilo of
dead dogs... Call me shallow, but...
--
O
1 Black, shortly to undergo extensive surgery.
1 Red, undergoing lightweight surgery. -----
1 Blue, for Power-Ranger baiting. | o |
Numbers ... | o |
Stuff ... | ooo |
Life ... -----

 

Well to a point I suppose you have a point, but what is your point?
Not to put to fine a ... well whatever... mirror, signal, manoeuvre...

;-)
--
O
1 Black, shortly to undergo extensive surgery.
1 Red, undergoing lightweight surgery. -----
1 Blue, for Power-Ranger baiting. | o |
Numbers ... | o |
Stuff ... | ooo |
Life ... -----

 

P comes to mind...
--
O
1 Black, shortly to undergo extensive surgery.
1 Red, undergoing lightweight surgery. -----
1 Blue, for Power-Ranger baiting. | o |
Numbers ... | o |
Stuff ... | ooo |
Life ... -----