Does anyone consider this art?

Post Reply New Topic

I don't think this video is worksafe, but anyway here it is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9lmvX00TLY

Is this art? I was astounded that the people in the audience seemed to really enjoy this "performance piece". Is this what you have to do to get a grant nowadays? This reeks of nothing but sheer stupidity in my opinion. If someone who was genuinely handicapped did something like this, would it be received the same way? Are these the questions the artist intended to have raised by performing this. I sure hope this is a mockery of performance pieces, or else I'm never associating with artsy people again.

Yes. I agree with Frank Zappa that the only line between 'art' and 'not art' is the frame.

Is it somewhat ironic that you should post a thread like this under a name the same as that of a brilliant Japanese composer who worked in traditions that have often been accused of producing nothing but non-musical noise? Probably not, but I wanted to mention it anyway.

.

ZOMG, That was perhaps the greatest thing I have ever seen. It really speaks to me. I was captivated, and I don't even know why. It speaks a great deal about Humanity.

Last edited by ShenLong on 08 Aug 2010, 4:22 am, edited 1 time in total.

Well no. But if we all pitch in we could buy her a new can opener, a new pair of pants (those were tacky anyway), and some laundry detergent for that top.

I guess those Shout Laundry Detergent ads, featuring the smeared jam on various t-shirts, is art now too. Sort-of.

< I'm not sure why this is notable, but whilst watching that (art?) video I was eating a bag of Sour Skittles. Might have tainted the whole experience somehow.... >

One man's garbage is another man's potpourri. That just isn't my cup of tea, and nor did the title make any sense to me. The first half I did watch (just as she was smothering herself) just seemed a bit too emo for my tastes.

Yes; I second you_are_what_you_is's post (coincidentally, I ended up watching one of Zappa's Crossfire appearances earlier today). However controversial or seemingly senseless it seems, it's some kind of expression and intent for art.

Still, while I think she was trying to get something across... I don't think I've figured out yet what it is.

Ironic that my name is actually after a merzbow song, which still fit's in the non-musical noise niche. I know what your saying. If I was doing laundry and replacing my furnace filter, while in nothing but some dirty ankle socks and a pair of boxer-briefs, with a glass window stretched across the whole scene, with people looking in like I'm apart of a diorama which sends anyone walking by into a deep contemplation, then I guess that is art.

Just terrible art.



Don't feel sorry for the art students. They get laid more often on average



You missed the best part

No it is not art it is just disgusting !

Woodpecker would like to do some performance art, he would like to load a dustcart with 'monkey art' and drive it to the nearest landfill or incineration plant. Who would want to watch ?

Are we discussing it? Then it's clearly art.

by the way, what is art? do we all know the story of the lady who bought a painting in a thrift shop for 5 bucks, gave it to a friend, who said she didn't want it, original lady tried to sell it in a yard sell, was told by a professor of something that it might be a jackson pollock, so she took it to an appraiser who said could be, so she took it to some other appraiser who said yes, it's a jackson pollock. breath. took it to a gallery/dealer who said no, it's not a pollock, and on and on and on.. the art world is torn, is it a pollock or isn't it? it's been appraised at 5,000,000 and appraised at 5 bucks, depending on the breaks. my opinion (useless)- it's not by jackson pollock, doesn't flow right. the owner has been offered 1 or 2 million for it and turned it down. auction estimates are 25 million+ if a pollock. auction estimate is 5 bucks if not a pollock. years have gone by.....she still has the painting. rich woman? no, she drives a truck. just a little stubborn. the work itself is meaningless. the only meaningful criteria is who painted it. so, i ask again, what is art? i really like my art based on numerical progressions but is appraised at 5 bucks. if my name was kostabi or koontz, it would be worth 5 million. change my name? now, that's an idea. movie about ? painting- not too bad- 'who the f... is jackson pollock'.

That was sexist!

First she implied that women are weak by taking like 3 f*****g minutes to open a f*****g can of s**t.

Then she implied that women were anorexic by smearing that poopy looking s**t on her knockers but not eating any of it. 2 girls 1 cup was also sexist because it implied women are bulimic but it had more artistic merit than this.

Then she implied that women are attention whores by sticking her hand in her pants and peeing in front of an audience.

What a sexist b***h. Feminists should be offended. Her art indicates that she wants all women to go back to the kitchen.

When I saw the film, I thought at first "get on with it, it can not be that hard to open a can with a can opener like the one she had", what I saw next was disgusting. I think that this "artist" should hold her head in shame, it was just plain disgusting.

GoatOnFire had an interesting view on it. The woman was doing some disgusting things which are demeaning to women in general, I would like to ask would any of you consider it art if I filmed my dog doing a poo on the lawn ? (I hope not)

She should learn to do some real art !

Maybe this artist should be made to read about Professor Stoddart. It is a story which I think shames some sections of the art world.

I know that the Nazis had strong ideas about art, they hated modern degenerate art and loves the classical art. This was becuase the classical art served a purpose for them. When they were finally finnished off in the 1940s some paers of the art world reacted against classical art. I think it was becuase of a urge to be "left wing" and some very bad inductive reasoning.

Let us pick through a possible thought process which some of the left wing artists may have had. We start with two ideas which are true and then make a new idea from the first two.

1. The Nazis were rightwing and very bad (Very true)
2. The Nazis liked classical art and hated modern art (Very true)

Then they came up with the idea

3. Classic art is part of Nazi culture so it is bad, while modern art is against nazi culture so it must be good. (poor reasoning)

I think that this reasoning is very poor. Hilter had pet dogs, but it does not mean that all dog owners are evil raging nazi monsters. It becomes worse, the nazis in Germany had public campaigns against modern art forms such as the impressionists and even laws regulating what art could be allowed. The communists were no better they also regulated art as a political tool for use by the communist party.

Some of the modern artists after the fall of these vile political systems appear to have taken a view that any attempt to complain about 'art' is an attempt to roll back the clock to the days of the nazis or the communists. They try to smear anyone who states that their art is rubbish with the "politcally incorrect" label. I think that some of the pathetic monkey art is horrible rubbish.

I think that the unmade bed of Ms Emin is disgusting, if you visited the house of a person whose life was falling apart and you discovered that the bedroom was in that disguting state then I think that a rightminded person would be more inclined to reach for a pair of gloves and cleaning materials to tidy/clean the bed room rather than putting it on display as "art".

When a 1970s art student choose to make neoclassical art rather than abstract art they started to label him as a right wing monster, I do not know about Alexander Stoddart's political views but I think it is dangerous to assume that he is right wing just becuase he makes art of a type related to that favoured by some of the right wingers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_art
http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/s ... 405050&c=1
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tracey_Emin

Well, why not? Since there's controversy over what is art, and what is not, then we ought to have some *real* performance art! Found it on you tube, of course. Personally, this is waaay better than the girl smearing her shirt with (?) spaghettios. (She needs laundry detergent). And far more amusing

Laundry detergent advert......or cleverly disguised performance art?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQQs3nl0LcY[/youtube]

Oh Goodness, I better hope I do not get bundled into the washing machine !

LabPet this film about the woman from italy who puts her man in the washing machine is far better !

So the only way it wouldn't be considered art is if we all agreed not to talk about this ever again?