Better don't kiss me, Kate

[Skybird]

http://www.courttv.com/news/2007/1009/kiss_ap.html

A woman goes on trial for having left lipstick on a piece of modern art, or better the carricature of art, a painting that is called "White Star" by Cy Twombling. And as the title suggest, the painting is a whity whiter-than-white White. It is so white that it costs over 2.8 million dollars, and sees the woman being sued for I think 6500 dollars. The ingenious creator of this white White wanted her to pay 2.9 million dollars.

I really wanted to show you what this White Star was looking like, but as a matter of fact it is so meaningless since it is simply a frame surrounding a white White that Google Picture did not give me any results on it - probably never ever has anyone cared to put up this masterpiece, becasue people would think that their monitor is broken. However, if you see these pictures, you certainly will see my argument when I just ask: where is the art?

http://www.iconoduel.org/images-site/content/images06_06/twombly_untitled_1970.jpg

http://www.londonkoreanlinks.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/02/twombly3.jpg

http://www.thecityreview.com/f04ccon1z.jpg

"White star" even does not feature the artist's difficult effort to create lines with his pencil. It only is white on white, with white background and white foreground, all of the same white. I saw it on TV. I think it was a piece of unused empty paper.

The only art here is how to turn that into 2.8 million dollars. This art is old and has a long tradition. It is called alchemy: turning lead into gold.

:dead:

[waste gate]

Didn't Las Vegas promoter Fred Gwinn (not sure of the name) put his elbow through a Picaso or something like that.

[panzer 49th]

How on earth can someone want to charge 2.9 million for that i mean seriously it is not art it is just a bunch of lines.

[The Avon Lady]

She should pay costs of damage, i.e., whatever it takes to restore it. If it cannot be restored 100%, a certain additional value, based on a reasonable assessment of the object's decline in value, should also be paid.

Nobody forced this idiot to kiss another idiots work. Pay the price.

Let me end off by saying that I view much of what's called "modern art" as a farse. :down:

[Camaero]

I would have to say that her lips probably made it more entertaining than it ever was by itself.

[bookworm_020]

I reckon an imprint of my buttocks would increase the value of the artwork in question as well as give my opion of this artwork!:oops::lol:

[The Avon Lady]

I reckon an imprint of my buttocks would increase the value of the artwork in question
Aren't you worried about critics calling it "overshadowing"?

:p

[Camaero]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21211300?gt1=10450

A picture of the woman and of the painting... It seems that I am in the wrong line of work if white paper can fetch $2,830,000!!!:doh:

[Skybird]

How on earth can someone want to charge 2.9 million for that i mean seriously it is not art it is just a bunch of lines.
"White Star" even features no lines! :smug: Delete the word "star" from the title.

[The Avon Lady]

Jerusalem's Israel Museum has its own share of modern art trash. A few years ago, when we went, there was a work consisting of a giant pile of spice cloves piled on the floor in the center of an exhibit room.

My husband crouched down next to it, as if to get a closer look. Then he started to put on an act that he's about to have a sneeze attack.

A-H..... A-H..... A-H .....

You should have seen the guard jump! :yep:

[Skybird]

My hometown just has ended it's "season of sculptures", which saw around 60 of such "sculptures" scattered around locations in the city area. A wastebin here, with a student guard. a random generator producing meaningless words there, with a student guard. A pile or rubbish, with a student guard. Half a dozen of opened umbrellas, with a student guard.

High arts, really. :down: Especially note the high level of craftsmanship. It costed the taxpayer several hundred thousand Euros. I assume it were the fees for the guards reading comics when sitting close to the masterpieces.

[HunterICX]

Modern art,

I recall that as

take enough drugs, then even a pile of dog poo wil look amazing and is worth millions..

[The Avon Lady]

Modern art,

I recall that as

take enough drugs, then even a pile of dog poo wil look amazing and is worth millions..
Yes, but one wonders what the artists are taking. :hmm:

Anyway, over the years the worst and/or extreme of the lot sounds like it ends up in London's Tate Modern. I vividly recall this (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/arts/1641195.stm) from a few years back.

[Tchocky]

Yes, how dare artists be abstract.

I mean, it doesn't even look like anything!!?

[CB..]

you know i reckon folks would have a higher appreciation of more traditional art...
given our fascination with computer game graphics and how often we find our selves drooling over some scene in a computer game...etc...

drag these kids round an old school art gallery..with traditional portraits created by artists with genuine skill and dedication....and nothing no reaction...it's a wonder..even "unknown" artists of 100 years ago created images that leave you rooted to the spot with amazement.."how the heck did they do that"

yet even with computer graphics "introducing" youngsters to the joys of "wow look at that..!!"...thinking and appreciation of a scene ..they some-how can't or won't maintain that same out look when confronted with a traditional oil painting...

apparently traditional oil painting just isn't "clever" enough for them..??
you know something it's actualy weird...a very strange mind set.. kinda selective blindness...entirely ruled by what is "cool"..and who tells us what is cool??

as Skybird said..

The only art here is how to turn that into 2.8 million dollars.

it's Orwellian...how many fingers am i holding up Winston...

they've succesfully managed to put the cart in front of the horse...and in doing so dehumanise us all...

it seems to me that "cool" has become another religion..and religion is a weapon of mass destruction..

[The Avon Lady]

Yes, how dare artists be abstract.

I mean, it doesn't even look like anything!!?
Um, no. Most abstracts look like something. The problem is that so many look like nothing.

The difference is stark.

[Letum]

Art, like beauty is a matter of taste and not of aesthetics.
It is not a matter of how much effort has gone into it or how much it resembles a ideal.
You don't even have to like to look of a art work to enjoy it if it triggers the right
emotions for you.

Yes, the painting is just a white sheet, but what it looks like is not important.

Here's an analogy:
The relic of St.Joe's finger is just a box with 2 bones in it. Every day hundreds come
to see the relic and it is worth several million pounds.

Yes, the relic is just 2 finger bones and anyone could find 2 bones just like them, but
it's not what they are that is important. That said, if it where just any finger bones
in the box, they would not be worth anything.

However, it isn't important that the bones belong to St.Joe. If the church found out
that St.Joe was completely cremated, the 2 finger bones in that box would not stop
being important.

What is important are the ideas behind the bones and feelings that they invoke.

[Skybird]

Yes, how dare artists be abstract.

I mean, it doesn't even look like anything!!?
Well, it does. It looks like children's play in Kindergarten. Arts has many aspects: meaning, or a directing of mind, are just two of them - another of them is craftsmanship, or is that the piece of art cannot be created just by everybody - it is valuable and special last but not least because it is rare, becasue it is not everybody capable of creating it by craftsmanship. I know abstract paintings, some of which I like, due to their colours. Or sculptures, sometimes. But if somebody does nothing (a white square only, remember, or just childish scribbling and doodling in an effort to get the ink out of the pencil in the fastest way), well if this somebody then demands money for that and labels this to be a piece of art, all he - and those fools falling for him and feeding him money - deserves is my mockery and my yelling laughter.

Hell, amateur that I am I am a greater artist, as to be seen from some of my elementary schoolday's "paintings" than this money-seeker will aver be. You may wonder, but for example throwing a paintbrush at a paper and calling the resulting blotch "art", because this random act cannot be recreated, is a bit rich. It's liking spitting on the floor and labelling the form of the blotch on the concrete "art". ridiculous.

when I said "White star" and that it is only a white square as being shown on TV - then I mean it like that. It is what most of us do when ronovating our flats and painting the wall white. seen that way, compared to the small size of "white star", my 58 m2 flat must be worth dozens of millions.

Modern arts, don't tell my father, who was classical musician. Whenever the DSO played modern music (and in the past years, their chief Nagano unfortunately showed a strong interest in that), most musicians suffered from serious headaches afterwards. No joke!

[Skybird]

Art, like beauty is a matter of taste and not of aesthetics.
It is not a matter of how much effort has gone into it or how much it resembles a ideal.
You don't even have to like to look of a art work to enjoy it if it triggers the right
emotions for you.

Yes, the painting is just a white sheet, but what it looks like is not important.

Here's an analogy:
The relic of St.Joe's finger is just a box with 2 bones in it. Every day hundreds come
to see the relic and it is worth several million pounds.

Yes, the relic is just 2 finger bones and anyone could find 2 bones just like them, but
it's not what they are that is important. That said, if it where just any finger bones
in the box, they would not be worth anything.

However, it isn't important that the bones belong to St.Joe. If the church found out
that St.Joe was completely cremated, the 2 finger bones in that box would not stop
being important.

What is important are the ideas behind the bones and feelings that they invoke.

Invalid comparison. A relic is getting it's meaning not by a creative process, but through a religious context. A part of a dead corpus is no art. A relic is not a piece of art. Also, I reject the statement that beauty only is taste (arbitrariness) and not asthetics (norm). The form is not totally arbitrary, and is not independant from craftsmanship. Craftsmanship is needed to allow the form being worked out of the medium. It compares to the state of a certain relaxed concentration that plays an impoortant role in meditation. note: "relaxed" as well as "concentration": no "wether this or that", but "both. Also, you may like the scribbling your little kid, 4 yars old, just has produced. You see beauty in it, for certrain reason. Nevertheless, it is no piece of art, and you really must be extrmeely clever like the artist above in order to get it sold for 100.000 dollars. On the other ahnd, the expensive price of something does not mean that it is art.

[CB..]

it's just the old "blank canvas" routine...a good trawl thru the vaults of the museums would reveal hundreds of indentical blank canvas's done by far greater minds than this fellow...like everything else to-day....it's got nothing new to say...there is a sense in that the lady's graffiti "defacement" of the work has more artistic integrity than it actualy deserves...a genuine artist would celebrate her act...even encourage it....given we are talking about yet another blank canvas..art is for the people by the people...hell there's an entire exhibition for you....tell him to "create" dozens of blank canvas's.. hang them in a public space...let's have some fun...no??

EDIT;;;

hang on a minute..are we talking about a completely blank canvas here??
or are those scribbles on the canvas the original artists work or are the scribbles the work of the lady who "defaced" the blank canvas's..
if the original work WAS the scribbles then i can live with that...kinda like having a page torn from some-ones diary blown up and put on the wall...the fact that there is no legible writting there to read...then becomes the reasoning behind the work..

if it was just a set of blank canvas's then screw him..and give the lady a job..

or is the whole damn thing just a "put up job" to raise the profile of the artist..wouldn't surprise me..cos guess what..that's been done before aswell...yawn..zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

it's a shame ol' Vincent didn't have a spin doctor...because if he had have had one he wouldn't have ended his life penniless in an asylum..or if he did it would have had nicer curtains...and better room service...meaning in art...?
that's all you need to know..:rotfl:

mind you we ARE TALKING about it..so maybe the guys not so "off the beam" after all...but it only ever lasts for 15 minutes...as a far more astute artist once said..

if his point is that it is all about percpetion...then it's perhaps time to do something about it...as we have handed our entire future over to a bunch of "perception manipulators" the spin doctors...there's no point just standing by with a smug ironic smile on one's face..saying "i know...." that's not going to change anything...anytime soon...:arrgh!: makes him lots of money tho....art as corporate whore?? ok...some-body tell me to shut up for gawds sake...:arrgh!: :rotfl:

[Letum]

Invalid comparison. A relic is getting it's meaning not by a creative process

You seam to be confusing things being the same and things being comparable.

[Skybird]

http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/4121/bild1lb9.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

This is a piece of art by me. It's title is "The Dawn of the empty Void".

It is an asymmetrical composition created in three-ink-mono-layer technique, which required the artist to
simultaneously use three different tools in just one painting. The first impression of the observer of calm
dominating the picture and a mental impression of floating in the ocean of existence is then interrupted by
realizing the existence of lines disturbing the initial impression. Like human life cuts through the world and
messes it up, the artist's masterfully handed tool cuts through the whuite like a hot knife through butter.
Although balance seem to have been restored - note the small figurines exactly on the left and the right
side - by indicating through these little men that two men are more than one, and without them man would
ne nothing, the crucial interaction and chaotic events in the world as to be seen in the upper part of the
painting nevertheless result in the insight that one day all things come to an end and nothing lasts forever
- you see the third zig-zagging line, symbolizing the desperate search for living on, ending in a straight, flat
line. The artist is expressing hidden criticism of today's inhumane machinery medicine without soul, and
wants to remind us that even when our life had a meaning, it nevertheless is in vain. The empty void is
rising from below, and is preparing to swallow all what is there: the lines, the scribbled little men, and the
sudden strike of orange sh!t that happens, until all is just peaceful empty white void again. It is then when
the observer will start to realise that the peaceful silence is disturbed by the existence of lines, and the
cycle starts new from the beginning.

[Skybird]

Invalid comparison. A relic is getting it's meaning not by a creative process

You seam to be confusing things being the same and things being comparable.
A relic neither is the same as a piece of art, nor does it compare to it. It's meaning is totally different, and is not a question of taste, or asthetics. It's meaning is predefined by religious dogma.

[Letum]

Invalid comparison. A relic is getting it's meaning not by a creative process
You seam to be confusing things being the same and things being comparable. A relic neither is the same as a piece of art, nor does it compare to it. It's meaning is totally different, and is not a question of taste, or asthetics. It's meaning is predefined by religious dogma.
The comparison is gained through the fact that both have value transcendent of their
material worth.
The value of both is gained through properties given to the objects that are not
properties of usefulness or aesthetics, but of the experience of the object one has
after giving it it's emotional, religious or ideological properties.

[Tchocky]

Further Reading - The Work Of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction, Walter Benjamin

:)

[Skybird]

Invalid comparison. A relic is getting it's meaning not by a creative process
You seam to be confusing things being the same and things being comparable. A relic neither is the same as a piece of art, nor does it compare to it. It's meaning is totally different, and is not a question of taste, or asthetics. It's meaning is predefined by religious dogma.
The comparison is gained through the fact that both have value transcendent of their
material worth.
The value of both is gained through properties given to the objects that are not
properties of usefulness or aesthetics, but of the experience of the object one has
after giving it it's emotional, religious or ideological properties.
Well - I then hope that you now have finished to give "the Dawn of the empty Void" the according emotional and ideological properties, so that we can start talking about money. due to the transcendantal value of the work, I originally planned for a price of 10.000 Euros, but like so many great artists before me who suffered from darkening of their minds and worsening of psychological balance, I have just crumpled the painting in an act of mentally disbalanced vandalism, but without tearing it. So the good news is it could be restored, which may cost around 20 Euros, and the foldings just add to the originality, increasing the overall value by an estimated 20%. I therefore would ask you for the transfering of 12.020,- Euros. I will send it via standard envelope as soon as the money arrived.

[Letum]

Well - I then hope that you now have finished to give "the Dawn of the empty Void" the according emotional and ideological properties



Well, it certainly has emotional and ideological properties, but they those of a piece of,
rather blunt, satire. Amusing , but not the kind of think I would pay money to see.

That said, at almost 0.5MB, I have already payed more than it's worth via my
bandwidth fee.

[The Avon Lady]

Oh, for heaven's sake!

The Emperor is naked!

http://img232.imageshack.us/img232/3412/ksm0611lrl7.jpg

[Sailor Steve]

This reminds me of Todd Snyder's song Talkin' Seattle Grunge Rock Blues, about a band who become famous for getting onstage and not doing anything at all:

Hey, hey, my, my
rock and roll will never die
hang your hair down in your eye
you'll make a million dollars

Well i was in this band goin' nowhere fast
we sent out demos but everybody passed
so one day we finally took the plunge
moved out to Seattle to play some grunge

Washington state that is

Space Needle

Eddie Vedder

Mudhoney


Now to fit in fast we wear flannel shirts
we turn our amps up until it hurts
we've got bad attitudes and what's more
when we play we stare straight down at the floor

Wowee

Pretty scary

How pensive

How totally alternative


Now to fit in on the seattle scene
you've gotta do somethin' they ain't never seen
so thinkin' up a gimmick one day
we decided to be the only band that wouldn't play a note

Under any circumstances

Silence

Music's original alternative

Roots grunge


Well we spread the word through the underground
that we were the hottest new thing in town
the record guy came out to see us one day
and just like always we didn't play
it knocked him out
he said he loved our work
he said he loved our work but he wasn't sure if he could sell a record
with nothing on it

I said "Tell 'em we're from seattle"

He advanced us two and a half million dollars


Hey, hey, my, my
rock and roll will never die
hang your hair down in your eye
you'll make a million dollars


Well they made us do a video but that wasn't tough
'cuz we just filmed ourselves smashin' stuff
it was kinda weird 'cuz there was no music
but mtv said they'd love to use it


The kids went wild, the kids went nuts
Rolling Stone gave us a five-star review said we played with guts
we're scorin' chicks, takin' drugs
then we got asked to play mtv unplugged
you should have seen it
We went right out there and refused to do acoustical versions of the
electrical songs we had refused to record in the first place

Then we smashed our $#!+


Well we blew 'em away at the grammy's show
by refusing to play and refusing to go
and then just when we thought fame would last forever
along come this band that wasn't even together

Now that's alternative

Hell, that's alternative to alternative

I feel stupid

And contagious


Well our band got dropped and that ain't funny
'cuz we're all hooked on drugs but we're outta money
so the other day i called up the band
I said "Boys i've taken all i can
shave off your goatees
pack the van
we're goin' back to Athens"




Pretty funny when you make a song about it, but "art" with nothing on it. I think HE should pay HER two million dollars!

[The Avon Lady]

Anyway, over the years the worst and/or extreme of the lot sounds like it ends up in London's Tate Modern. I vividly recall this (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/arts/1641195.stm) from a few years back.
I TOLD YOU SO!

The Tate has reached bottom (http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2007/10/art_threatening_life.html).

Just pathetic. :down:

[Skybird]

Better a crack in the floor than a crack in the brain.

Oh wait. It's just one and the same... :doh:

[Tchocky]

It's called Shibboleth :)

An old survey revealed that many people closely associate art galleries with churches, the silence and sense of reverence. Cracking open a gallery is an interesting step away from this.
The artist described her intention in terms of divisiveness and alienation, but that doesn't matter. It's up to the viewer.
The emperor doesn't have to be wearing any clothes, the situation is different.

[Kaleu. Jochen Mohr]

http://www.iconoduel.org/images-site/content/images06_06/twombly_untitled_1970.jpg

http://www.londonkoreanlinks.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/02/twombly3.jpg

http://www.thecityreview.com/f04ccon1z.jpg

god! even i could make some smudges and call it art... mayby i will get famous to :hmm:
if this is "modern" (baby) art.. then what will the art be in the future ? :huh:

[The Avon Lady]

http://www.iconoduel.org/images-site/content/images06_06/twombly_untitled_1970.jpg

http://www.londonkoreanlinks.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/02/twombly3.jpg

http://www.thecityreview.com/f04ccon1z.jpg

god! even i could make some smudges and call it art... mayby i will get famous to :hmm:
if this is "modern" (baby) art.. then what will the art be in the future ? :huh:
All you need is Tchocky to me your marketing manager. :yep:

[TteFAboB]

If everything is art, then nothing is art. The word art becomes a synonym to the words painting, drawing, sculpture, and so on. The distinction can no longer be expressed normally, it is up to the Poet to work around the language and get his impression out. That's why we'll go ahead and consider everything as poetry aswell, so the circle is closed, leaving no exit.

[Torpedo Fodder]

I often wonder: If the standards of what passes for "Art" today were as low in the 1920s as they are today, I wonder if history would have turned out differntly: Think about it, Hitler could have actually succeeded as an artist, and thus would be less likely to become a genocidal dictator. :p

[Skybird]

If everything is art, then nothing is art.

clapclapclapclapclapclap! So true. :yep:

[Camaero]

I have been working on this for months now and have over 60 hours into it. I thought this would be a good place to share what I can finally call a masterpiece!

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d146/camaero/art.jpg

[Skybird]

To make effort and hard work look like if it is nothing and all easy fun - that is really an art! i also like the diversity of interpretations possible. compared to it, the mona Lisa is boring. She always smiles inthe same way. Camaero, keep on the hard work, and you will have a great future greeting you.

[Tchocky]

If everything is art, then nothing is art.
clapclapclapclapclapclap! So true. :yep:

True. Unfortunately it's impossible to make statements such as "this is art", and "this is not art". As soon as divisions such as the above are made, we then impose criteria and restrictions, ending up with a manual "How To Make Art". Which is rubbish.
Don't bother yourself with questions of what is or is not art - your sensibilities will decide that for you :)

My standard glib response is that art is what gets hung up in galleries, literature is what gets taught, and art criticism is an employment scam for art critics.

[Skybird]

My standard glib response is that art is what gets hung up in galleries, literature is what gets taught, and art criticism is an employment scam for art critics.
That avoids all and everything. If nothing is art, everything is art.

Looking at what is often hunged up in galleries, I have my doubts.

[Takeda Shingen]

Let me end off by saying that I view much of what's called "modern art" as a farse. :down:

They said the same things about Mary Cassatt, Pierre-August Renior and Edgar Degas when they were creating works. 100 years later, we hold them as the standard. The jury will be out on both Twombling and Skybird's works for probably that long as well.

[Skybird]

But I wanted to get burned and strayed into the wind after my death. So how could I turn in my grave in case Tak's vision becomes a reality...? :-? Should I erect a mast with a wind turbine before dying?

[Takeda Shingen]

Should I erect a mast with a wind turbine before dying?

Yes. It will also serve as a work of kinetic art until the world can determine the worth of your other works.

[The Avon Lady]

[quote=The Avon Lady]Let me end off by saying that I view much of what's called "modern art" as a farse. :down:
They said the same things about Mary Cassatt, Pierre-August Renior and Edgar Degas when they were creating works. 100 years later, we hold them as the standard./QUOTE]
I refuse to be a populist.