Paging Ivan Reid

In a word: perception.

 

Well she's usually whingeing or justifying the prices of her work with
lines like, "but I studied at art college, therefore my work is
good..."
--
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 ... -----

 

burbled:

How is a tent, with the names of some 100 people daubed on the inside,
supposedly tose of everyone Tracey Emin has ever slept with [1], in any
way, shape or form "art"?

[1] Yeah, right. With that face? A work of fiction, perhaps, but art?

 

How is a Picasso "art"?

 

Because she says it is. What more is there to understand?

Slept with. Not shagged.

 

Now on that we agree. Totally over-rated waste of space if ever there
was one.

 

OK, let's make it a little clearer: How is anything art?

 

Or, to use the same argument in reverse: How isn't anything art?

 

Quite right, old son.

 

It was somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember Darren Robinson

In the words of the late and great Fyfe Robertson, it's Phony Art, or
PhArt as he called it.

He was a great man for identifying pretentious wankers, and that was
many decades ago.

--

Dave

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

 

I just seem to have a bit missing from my brain (okay, one of many,
although in this case I don't consider it a loss) which would otherwise
allow me to appreciate the inherent artyness of abstract or other (for
want of a better word) "modern" art. If it isn't a picture or sculpture
of something, which looks like the thing it purports to represent, I
don't get it. I admire those artists whose work looks as if it's a
photograph, capturing a scene exactly as it was.

 

The key words here, IMO, is reproduce (as in capturing a scene exactly as
it was) and represent.

Reproducing an image isn't necessarily art. Representing an image is.

Where one defines the border between reproducing and representing is
another debate altogether.

I suspect, and I don't mean to be rude, you don't understand art. That,
however, doesn't preclude the art from being crap.

 

Ginge says...

The Greeks only have one word for both 'art' and 'design'.

 

Darren Robinson says...

AOL

 

I presume it's symbolic of something. I don't understand it myself
*but* I don't profess to be an art expert.

Harsh.

 

I think I have to fully admit that. It's probably because of that fact,
that I don't actually consider it in any way to my detriment. Form
should follow function, and all that. What is the function of art?

 

On Mon, 31 May 2004 00:24:50 +0100, Owen wrote

You can probably make a better curry out of a kilo of dead dogs.

--
Elly - a happy Pixie
Uzi - a CBR600F Sport
Spike - FZ400 - firing on 3 cylinders
MRO#32 ibW#25 BoTAFOT#46 BoTAFOF #46 GP#1 UKRMRM#00 TWA#3
http://www.garagepixies.co.uk
"Angel in the kitchen ... "
elly at garagepixies dot co dot uk

 

I think I'm going mad.

 

Are you seeing white rabbits yet? If so, the circle is complete.

 

Darren Robinson wrote in

To make you think?

Even if your response is, "WTF?" At least you had to think about it.