Sensei

Anyone, want to buy some of my "art"? Thought I would ask, before going to the dump.

JudyL Loc: Indiana

Well, this looks as good as some of the "art" I've seen in some galleries that command a high price.

English_Wolf Loc: Near Pensacola, FL

This is where reading the article becomes interesting. The reasons for the 'artwork' here seems to be all pretense. In short if only a small percentage of a fraction of a so called 'informed' art collector is interested, what is the point?

Same as what is the point of owning great artwork and hold it in a vault just to brag I have it?

In all cases the art is dead when it should be a living thing.

I see more beauty and 'art' in my dog living his last days 15 and half years so far). I see its efforts to get up, sometime the pain but also I see its gratitude when I bring it its food or scratching where it cannot anymore.

Art needs to live, just like a dog or a cat or even you!

JacLee Loc: Chico CA

Thank You so much Alaska Frog. Now I see what every one is talking about, What a pile of trash!! I really do appreciate you for showing me what this is all about. JacLee

Sac-Jack Loc: Sacramento, Ca

I'm sorry but I think it is trash. I like something more constructive personally.

LittleRedFish Loc: Naw'lens (New Orleans)

I personally think that this person made something out of trash, like it or not, he got displayed. Which is more then I can say for myself.

Yes, it's trash, but it's a unique and artistic way of looking at trash. Which means, he was successful in work. He got us all to look at it, make comments, and feel passionate about it. Hate it, love it, you got to say he did something different that got him noticed.

Like I said before, One man's trash is another man's treasure, and he made a treasure out of our trash and got people talking.

Sac-Jack Loc: Sacramento, Ca

Ok, I will go along with that and I guess it is all in the way you look at it. I guess I will take back my comment of it being trash.

Lmarc Loc: Ojojona, Honduras

You're right, Rachel. He's at least in the same league as that other guy with the green and grey......river thing. It's hard to knock $4.3 million! Both have mastered the art of self-promotion to a degree that would do P.T. Barnum and Mordecai Jones proud! :twisted:

Big Daddy Loc: Near Cleveland

I think some of you are missing the point? All you people that are saying this is garbage are proving the point. Whether it is good art or bad is in the eye of each person. If you question why the artist thinks his idea is an important one is all that's important. An artist doesn't necessarily need "your" approval for it to be art. Just as your pictures that you think are great another can say they are not. What he has created has obvious it made you think even if its negative. I live in Cleveland and at the Art Gallery here there is a painting that's been hanging there for years. Its a big white canvas and all it has on it is one little red dot. It is hailed as brilliant by art critics all over the world for its simplicity. So on the same note is ancient cave art considered art? Yes it is. It was obviously some early Indian or early cave mans way of of getting an image/idea from his head to another persons. Is a child's finger painting art? Yes it is in the same way. Also I do not believe there are a million pictures here. I would guess that it has a fabric support under it and a small amount of photos are attached to it to make it look like a million. Either way it is art. Good art or not again is in the eye of each person.

IvanF Loc: New York City

I still remember the days when people were heatedly arguing whether photography was an "art." Probably some still do.

Starz Loc: Hayward, CA.

I agree 100%.

Starz Loc: Hayward, CA.

I'm way new to this site, why is it that when i hit reply it puts me at the end? confused!?!?!?!

LittleRedFish Loc: Naw'lens (New Orleans)

ya need to go to "Quote reply" when you answer so the person knows you are talking to them. Make sure you scroll down and go below thier guote so it comes out on top in a highlighted area.

tvsnan

I think you should go back and read the rest of the article. The photo of the photos is not intended to be art, nor is the display of photos all over floor intended to be art. He and four others were given a theme: "The Future of Photography" and asked to display their own interpretation of what they think that is. I think his display does just what he envisioned and makes you think about what the future of photography is. Also, the gallery is trying to allow patrons to be interactive, as the other photo shows of the child lying in the pile of photos. I agree with some of the other posters here, that he did what he set out to do -sort of - it certainly created a lengthy discussion, but some of the comments were off the mark of what he was trying to say with his exhibit I think. Now, would I go and walk around on other people's photos, or lie down on them NO, but I get what he was trying to say. I also think that sometimes "artists" are the first to criticize another "artist's" visions, and I think that is a shame. And we all know that art to me is not art to my neighbor.
Just my humble opinions here, not meant as darts at anyone!

Starz Loc: Hayward, CA.

O okay I see, you've been much much help, ty