agentJ
February 29th, 2004, 07:04 PM
I foughtmyself trying to post this. I cant d ecide.
Fair warning: this is fundamentally a flame as I see art currently being abused (not by all but by many).
I actually re wrote this many times and for the sake of arguement I will condense into one topic and maybe later on in my life when I understand the problem mroe and have researched it I will make a bigger post :)
The idea here is me yelling at the naked art that is abound. I feel like art has been raped and ransacked with people calling anything done as art. Farting on a canvas and outlining it.. Boom a million dollar gallery piece.
Wtf?
Its not as simple as that I know but thats what it seems art has befallen. I speak now of a local callery showing at Uni South Florida by some University artist in the area (UCF, USF, and Uni Tampa where I go). Essentially al lthe art there sucked. They were just ideas. Questioning the artist (all professors mind you) brought them second guessing and repeating their art was nto done in fact these were just some sketches or ideas etc. They seemed very unprepared. I feel insulted. To see me associated with such lack of creativity in the pieces being an artist, it was nasueating.
Ok sure I'm a student, who the hell am I to judge art? Well its my stab at it to at least understand, because fundamentally, i see art as one thing: giving life. Giving life to a piece of canvas, bringin words alive, moving audiences. Its all art. But with the current lack of dpeht and creativity in the field I begin to quesiton it. In fact movements like minimalism and neo coneptual glitz are appauling to me. The whole idea now of just selling the product and not caring what else happens to it. If people will buy it than why bother going any further? New Unfinished Sugar coated bull.
However I do udnerstand some studios who strive in minimalism (I think I might e confusing the too but I get a connotation of emptiness out of minimalism) to achieve unity, whole, objective work. To reach perfection and infinity, and eliminate everything: what do you get? Nothingness. They seem to have achieved that wholey (the popular big white wall and the blue square in the middle is an example of their work - who they are I cant recall but I do remembver my prof telling me about them).
But at the same time theres this whole another garbage in which the greats liek Frida Picasso and Dali just exploded and their pieces are now being bargained on the black market of art, who can get the most for their prize? Thats it. It feels as if no one bothers further pushing their work, or exploring a deep creativity here. yes this is a whole ntoher arguement: what makes Dali and PIcasso great, what makes them better than the other artist who lived like Polluck etc? But I rather focus on now the people who sell art and how blank it is.
I cant really relate or point to anything here but its just a feeling I get when i see art now and when I saw this "gallery" showing of art. SO dead so blank, just ideas and nothing more, unfinished and brutally horrifying to look at.
One critic: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/2380393.stm
and the current Turner prize winners
http://www.tate.org.uk/britain/turnerprize/2003/artists.htm
Grayson Parry had some decent work.
Then comes the whole other side of digital art. Amazing stuff. As captivating as Dali? W ho knows? Will we see Anry, Mullins and Llewwllyn in the history books? (although kevin does more traditional work). Possibly.
But just take this as me yelling at the current crap of true art, already facing mass ridicule by the world and already an insult for me to be associated with..
There is another side however, some great painters are out there and the work in La Nouba and Cirque Du Soleil (just go to the show and see some of the work they have in the shops they resell) etc. Theres great stuf fthere.
I'm sorry guys i jsut see conceptualism as crap. I understand and respect the exploration of materials ideas and exploration here and using life objects to see them decay as art etc. But for some reason I fight it.
Am I legally abide to? IS this something artist go against? Can I accuse some artist as being fakes? Is that what i'ma llowed to do? I know the repsonse is yo ucan do whatever you want but I'm looking for responses here, your thoughts. I personally think theres tons of fakes with conceptualism as being the crop of the problem. But can I really say that? Maybe I'm just an angry st udent of art who demands beauty in his own right. Each to their own is the obvious response but I want something deeper here.
Sorry for this post. Flame it, burn it, whatever you wish to do I just had to make iit because I saw it as an insult.
Mods delete if necessary
Fair warning: this is fundamentally a flame as I see art currently being abused (not by all but by many).
I actually re wrote this many times and for the sake of arguement I will condense into one topic and maybe later on in my life when I understand the problem mroe and have researched it I will make a bigger post :)
The idea here is me yelling at the naked art that is abound. I feel like art has been raped and ransacked with people calling anything done as art. Farting on a canvas and outlining it.. Boom a million dollar gallery piece.
Wtf?
Its not as simple as that I know but thats what it seems art has befallen. I speak now of a local callery showing at Uni South Florida by some University artist in the area (UCF, USF, and Uni Tampa where I go). Essentially al lthe art there sucked. They were just ideas. Questioning the artist (all professors mind you) brought them second guessing and repeating their art was nto done in fact these were just some sketches or ideas etc. They seemed very unprepared. I feel insulted. To see me associated with such lack of creativity in the pieces being an artist, it was nasueating.
Ok sure I'm a student, who the hell am I to judge art? Well its my stab at it to at least understand, because fundamentally, i see art as one thing: giving life. Giving life to a piece of canvas, bringin words alive, moving audiences. Its all art. But with the current lack of dpeht and creativity in the field I begin to quesiton it. In fact movements like minimalism and neo coneptual glitz are appauling to me. The whole idea now of just selling the product and not caring what else happens to it. If people will buy it than why bother going any further? New Unfinished Sugar coated bull.
However I do udnerstand some studios who strive in minimalism (I think I might e confusing the too but I get a connotation of emptiness out of minimalism) to achieve unity, whole, objective work. To reach perfection and infinity, and eliminate everything: what do you get? Nothingness. They seem to have achieved that wholey (the popular big white wall and the blue square in the middle is an example of their work - who they are I cant recall but I do remembver my prof telling me about them).
But at the same time theres this whole another garbage in which the greats liek Frida Picasso and Dali just exploded and their pieces are now being bargained on the black market of art, who can get the most for their prize? Thats it. It feels as if no one bothers further pushing their work, or exploring a deep creativity here. yes this is a whole ntoher arguement: what makes Dali and PIcasso great, what makes them better than the other artist who lived like Polluck etc? But I rather focus on now the people who sell art and how blank it is.
I cant really relate or point to anything here but its just a feeling I get when i see art now and when I saw this "gallery" showing of art. SO dead so blank, just ideas and nothing more, unfinished and brutally horrifying to look at.
One critic: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/2380393.stm
and the current Turner prize winners
http://www.tate.org.uk/britain/turnerprize/2003/artists.htm
Grayson Parry had some decent work.
Then comes the whole other side of digital art. Amazing stuff. As captivating as Dali? W ho knows? Will we see Anry, Mullins and Llewwllyn in the history books? (although kevin does more traditional work). Possibly.
But just take this as me yelling at the current crap of true art, already facing mass ridicule by the world and already an insult for me to be associated with..
There is another side however, some great painters are out there and the work in La Nouba and Cirque Du Soleil (just go to the show and see some of the work they have in the shops they resell) etc. Theres great stuf fthere.
I'm sorry guys i jsut see conceptualism as crap. I understand and respect the exploration of materials ideas and exploration here and using life objects to see them decay as art etc. But for some reason I fight it.
Am I legally abide to? IS this something artist go against? Can I accuse some artist as being fakes? Is that what i'ma llowed to do? I know the repsonse is yo ucan do whatever you want but I'm looking for responses here, your thoughts. I personally think theres tons of fakes with conceptualism as being the crop of the problem. But can I really say that? Maybe I'm just an angry st udent of art who demands beauty in his own right. Each to their own is the obvious response but I want something deeper here.
Sorry for this post. Flame it, burn it, whatever you wish to do I just had to make iit because I saw it as an insult.
Mods delete if necessary