Is this art or just a pile of expensive trash?
Nov 17, 2011 10:35:46 #
alaskanfrog
Loc: Alaska
just because some people have exorbitant amounts of money and do stuff, doesn't necessarily make them artists. I see a lot of crap that people choose to call art that I wouldn't even consider worth keeping. I have seen old rusty rakes nailed to old boards with old rusty tin cans that is called art and I would barely qualify and quantify it as landfill garbage. Yet amazingly there are people with an equal amount of exorbitant expense accounts that actually go out and pay for crap like that.
The link attached to this forum shows and illustrates my point exactly. As far as I'm concerned, it's just a very expensive hobby gone array and the person who created it may actually be an artist gone astray. Creative people sometimes do that. But then again it might not be an artist at all...
Success sometimes destroys creativity by allowing complacency to set in and artistic people become satisfied with their work and never go beyond a certain stage of development as a result. Look at the person who spent thousands of dollars just making print copies of all those pictures that were uploaded to the web either by the person calling himself an artist, or uploaded by other people. Look at the hundreds or thousands on just the paper alone. When you start factoring in the cost of replacing the inks to make the prints, the financial numbers can jump exponentially. At the very least something like this might actually fall into the realms of an emotional or psychological disorder that lead to an obsessive compulsive disorder to do something like that.
As far as I'm concerned and short story long, this is nothing more than an exorbitant waste of money for someone who calls themselves an artist but might not be artistic at all... It's more like someone saying, look, I have lots of money to waste and here is what I wasted it on.
I consider myself an artist. I'm a little bit musical and I can draw, paint do photography and carve. I'm driven by a compulsion to create things and I am never satisfied with my work when it's finally completed. I approach my love of photography the same way. With videography it's slightly different. I have a specific goal in mind when filming, but it requires the same amount of energy, creativity, skill, dedication and even more determination to fulfill the goal of achieving and filming a video. Yet for all I do I'm never satisfied. I suppose that could be deemed an emotional or psychological imbalance, but that is what drives me to be creative... I believe that these traits or flaws, whatever they may be, are what makes me an artist... I don't know, I could be wrong. One thing is very certain and I'm the first to admit. I am very opinionated as I'm sure some of us are...
The link attached to this forum shows and illustrates my point exactly. As far as I'm concerned, it's just a very expensive hobby gone array and the person who created it may actually be an artist gone astray. Creative people sometimes do that. But then again it might not be an artist at all...
Success sometimes destroys creativity by allowing complacency to set in and artistic people become satisfied with their work and never go beyond a certain stage of development as a result. Look at the person who spent thousands of dollars just making print copies of all those pictures that were uploaded to the web either by the person calling himself an artist, or uploaded by other people. Look at the hundreds or thousands on just the paper alone. When you start factoring in the cost of replacing the inks to make the prints, the financial numbers can jump exponentially. At the very least something like this might actually fall into the realms of an emotional or psychological disorder that lead to an obsessive compulsive disorder to do something like that.
As far as I'm concerned and short story long, this is nothing more than an exorbitant waste of money for someone who calls themselves an artist but might not be artistic at all... It's more like someone saying, look, I have lots of money to waste and here is what I wasted it on.
I consider myself an artist. I'm a little bit musical and I can draw, paint do photography and carve. I'm driven by a compulsion to create things and I am never satisfied with my work when it's finally completed. I approach my love of photography the same way. With videography it's slightly different. I have a specific goal in mind when filming, but it requires the same amount of energy, creativity, skill, dedication and even more determination to fulfill the goal of achieving and filming a video. Yet for all I do I'm never satisfied. I suppose that could be deemed an emotional or psychological imbalance, but that is what drives me to be creative... I believe that these traits or flaws, whatever they may be, are what makes me an artist... I don't know, I could be wrong. One thing is very certain and I'm the first to admit. I am very opinionated as I'm sure some of us are...
Nov 17, 2011 10:40:58 #
Nov 17, 2011 10:41:50 #
For a stimulating discussion of modern art, I refer interested persons to "The Painted Word", by Tom Wolfe.
Nov 17, 2011 10:48:14 #
lleach wrote:
I don't believe the photo of the room is intended ... (show quote)
Larry Leach, I agree with you 100%. When I worked in pre-school the children loved to paint. One time for parents day we framed the kids "paintings", picked out a color in their picture and framed the painting with that color. Amazing how pretty they looked!! I do not, and never did like Picasso either.
Nov 17, 2011 10:58:17 #
Nov 17, 2011 11:07:08 #
Nov 17, 2011 11:07:17 #
English_Wolf wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-15756616
We need more guys around like Ansel Adams and friends from past times .....mho
Nov 17, 2011 11:12:04 #
Picasso despite the contrary had a talent: That of controversy yet some of its work is interesting and challenging, other? well had I had a child, I think my kid would have beaten him w/o even trying.
That said, there are many type or art and expression. What this guy did suggest neither.
I remember the criticism toward a very talent painter (S. Dali* that would have been beheaded by the french if lynching was still legal. The reason? He accepted to appears with his long thin mustache in a commercial ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THp6wKy-NSw ). The effect was hilarious but for the french that was an attack on ART (capitals intended). The french are very serious about their 'art' and doing something like that was being a sell out.
Since I am french I can tell the truth about it: they are just plain nuts. Anything and everything is called art and they will get red in the face, throw insults (if not stones) at you if you dare challenging them on it. It's like telling them that they are just the unwanted residue of multiple invaders breeding... - Which they are, there is no Frenchman per say just , cross breed due to the multiple invasions that went through the country starting with the Greeks (if not earlier) - Allons mon ami un peu de tenue! Il y va de l'honneur français!
In short, while being far from being talented in anything they are artistically challenged and (truly) believe that the world is against them and wants to swallow their culture so 'artist' (read anyone) will claim anything to be art just because. - They even made laws about it!!!! -
Just like this guy. 'Just because I made it, it is art'.
To me it is a fire hazard and if there is any conversation about it, it not about 'his feeling or what he wants to show' but about how ridiculous this is. So what he intended failed, back to the drawing board.
* http://lkthayer.wordpress.com/2010/01/10/salvador-dali/salvador-dali-melting-clocks/
That said, there are many type or art and expression. What this guy did suggest neither.
I remember the criticism toward a very talent painter (S. Dali* that would have been beheaded by the french if lynching was still legal. The reason? He accepted to appears with his long thin mustache in a commercial ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THp6wKy-NSw ). The effect was hilarious but for the french that was an attack on ART (capitals intended). The french are very serious about their 'art' and doing something like that was being a sell out.
Since I am french I can tell the truth about it: they are just plain nuts. Anything and everything is called art and they will get red in the face, throw insults (if not stones) at you if you dare challenging them on it. It's like telling them that they are just the unwanted residue of multiple invaders breeding... - Which they are, there is no Frenchman per say just , cross breed due to the multiple invasions that went through the country starting with the Greeks (if not earlier) - Allons mon ami un peu de tenue! Il y va de l'honneur français!
In short, while being far from being talented in anything they are artistically challenged and (truly) believe that the world is against them and wants to swallow their culture so 'artist' (read anyone) will claim anything to be art just because. - They even made laws about it!!!! -
Just like this guy. 'Just because I made it, it is art'.
To me it is a fire hazard and if there is any conversation about it, it not about 'his feeling or what he wants to show' but about how ridiculous this is. So what he intended failed, back to the drawing board.
* http://lkthayer.wordpress.com/2010/01/10/salvador-dali/salvador-dali-melting-clocks/
Nov 17, 2011 11:13:15 #
English_Wolf wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-15756616
one man's trash is another man's treasure. Clearly this guy made our trash a treasure, and got paided for it.
Nov 17, 2011 11:21:08 #
patrick28 wrote:
No, it's photo-journalism.
You're supposed to be appalled at the volume of nonsense that is chewing up the bandwidth.
. . . . patrick
You're supposed to be appalled at the volume of nonsense that is chewing up the bandwidth.
. . . . patrick
That was my first thought - the nonsense using bandwidth, the amount of paper, but scarier still a visual of how "privacy" becomes "public"
Nov 17, 2011 11:21:10 #
Oh well at least the (artiest)has has all us art critics talking about his work socalled
Nov 17, 2011 11:24:20 #
I am not an art critic. I am a common man looking at this, shaking his head wondering where those folks come from with such idiotic concepts. France?
Nov 17, 2011 11:26:01 #
I like it very much. The photographs aren't hung on the wall as expected; it's an installation. Visitors walk through the images and are encouraged to pick them up. It's about how we are bombarded with images everyday. Read his statement. It's very clever. Terrific way to use photography and also make a point about our throwaway culture, our lack of privacy, and how in a sense we stop really seeing things because we see so much images everyday. Art, like photography, isn't about the ability to reproduce an image that looks exactly like its subject matter. It is also about giving the viewer pause for thought.
Nov 17, 2011 11:32:02 #
Thank You
ckcougar wrote:
I got the message but what a waste of paper. Hope he recycles!
Nov 17, 2011 11:35:28 #
In all seriousness...to me...and I'm the one who counts...to me...on rare occasion I see something...it can be anything...that I just like...and...I capture it photographically...and it makes me HAPPY...OR SAD...OR CURIOUS, ETC. and I rarely show it to anyone else because I don't care. It makes me happy...to me...that is art. If I sit here and make something with a paper clip that I really like the form of...it's art...to me and I don't care if you or anyone else likes it. Perhaps that doesn't make sense to anyone else but it does to me and I'm the only one I need to impress with MY ART............
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.