[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@MIP.NET 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....

e.


.............................................................................

"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]