[Table of Contents] [Search]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Cute but stupid

At 7:57 PM 3/24/97, patriot@xxxxxxx wrote:

>I have never cared for it either and I DON'T think this is from a lack of
>artistic appreciation or intellect, but rather from an abundance of good
>judgement.  Once, at the Guggenheim in NYC I saw what to my mind was the
>ultimate in the "conceit" of so-called modern art.  It consisted of a
>series of "panels", apparently stretched canvas, approximately 2" x 3",
>hung in the "portrait" orientation and each consisted of a single color,
>red, yellow, orange, etc.  There were about five or six of them, all just
>flat surfaces, no texture, brushstrokes or whatever.  I don't "think" I
>could have done that, I know damned well I could.

it is always easy to look at someone else's work, already done, and say
that 'i could have done that.' i too could stand in front of a plane and
let the wind blow paint randomly onto a canvas. what i don't think i could
do, and what, in my opinion, creates a lot of contemporary art, is come up
with the concepts that lie behind each of these works and give reason and
meaning to them. honestly, could you? painting a still life does require
skill, but it requires very little thought. looking at a still life
requires little thought as well. looking at contemporary art brings a
challenge to the viewer. (s)he must *think*. perhaps this is why people
aren't comfortable with it....



"I don't think 'This is my party' is applicable anymore. The party's kind
of over. Now it's more like, 'This is my life,' 'This is my tribe.'"
                                                                - Nan Goldin

"Than so few now dare to be eccentric marks the chief danger of the time."
                                              - John Stuart Mill (1806-1873)

[Subject index] [Index for current month] [Table of Contents] [Search]