Art that people rave about that's actually shit.

[sleaterkinney]

I posted it as "actually shit" art.
And OU...would you want some guy's shit in a tin in your house as a piece of art? Honestly?

So you don't think it's bad art then?

 

[bubblesmcgrath]

You think it's shit. Why do you think it's shit? I would actually want to engage with this thread, instead of you, if I didn't see you being all over the place, twisting words into meanings that you clearly didn't mean, instead of allowing that some people who don't agree with you could have a point.

I'm being Devils advocate. I'm asking why this shit in a tin and other art is so important.
Go on....engage with the thread.
.....talk about the shit in a tin....tell the thread why it is amazing.

 

[bubblesmcgrath]

So you don't think it's bad art then?

I'm asking you why you think it is good art.
If you have an opinion that declares it to be brilliant then I'd like to hear why and how you came to that conclusion. Or was it a case of you deciding after being told it was good art? Did cultural influences effect you? Did your initial reaction vary with your later thoughts once someone told you it was good? Or did you read that it was brilliant?

 

[sleaterkinney]

Devils advocate now ffs.

 

[sleaterkinney]

I'm asking you why you think it is good art?

No you're not, you posted it up as an example of bad art, therefore you have to explain this. You seem to have a lot of trouble with the concept of discussion forums.

 

[chilango]

Can people stop assuming "liking" or "appreciating" a piece of art means you want it in your house/on your wall?

 

[bubblesmcgrath]

Devils advocate now ffs.

So still nothing from you.
You declare it to be brilliant.
But you have no other comment that throws light on its brilliance.
Nothing about society and corruption.
Nothing about the era it came from.
Or the state of Germany at the time.
Or the artist?
Just "it's brilliant"
And you expect it to stick?
It is shit in a tin....you've still to state why you think it is brilliant.

 

[bubblesmcgrath]

Can people stop assuming "liking" or "appreciating" a piece of art means you want it in your house/on your wall?

Where would you put it then?

 

[chilango]

Also I'll tell you why Manzoni's "Artist's Shit" is so good bubblesmcgrath. Because in that simple gesture and object he manages to communicate a critique of the artworld and the cult of the artist far more succinctly and with more clarity than most who attempt to do so.

 

[chilango]

Where would you put it then?

Why would I put it anywhere?

 

[bubblesmcgrath]

Also I'll tell you why Manzoni's "Artist's Shit" is so good bubblesmcgrath. Because in that simple gesture and object he manages to communicate a critique of the artworld and the cult of the artist far more succinctly and with more clarity than most who attempt to do so.

Nope.
That's not what he was about.
And not what the 90 cans of his own shit were about either.

They are about the intimacy of the artistic creation. The interplay of the product of the artist's body and the consumer. The creative act ...consumption and expulsion...branding...marketting and consumerism.
That's what he said ....mind you his inspiration was less convincing. His father told him his art was shit.

 

[chilango]

Nope.
That's not what he was about.
And not what the 90 cans of his own shit were about either.

They are about the intimacy of the artistic creation. The interplay of the product of the artist's body and the consumer. The creative act ...consumption and expulsion...branding...marketting and consumerism.
That's what he said ....mind you his inspiration was less convincing. His father told him his art was shit.

Doesn't matter though, does it?

As the viewer I'm free to like it on my own terms, aren't i?

 

[Miss Caphat]

It's the extremes of anything that stand out. Really good art and really shit art are what people are going to talk about, and when something really shit sells for big money, people are going to question it and the validity of those involved in the process.

I've never liked the Conservative party. I think they're a bunch of cunts... but some people do like them and agree with their politics. Should I say nothing for fear of upsetting those who support and agree with them?

Everyone is entitled to an opinion, and my opinion is that most modern art is shit. Maybe not as shit as Tory politics but shit, nonetheless.

not going into the political thing because that's a bit too far-fetched for me, sorry.

you are definitely entitled to your opinion. there's no question about that whatsoever.

but when do you hear people talking about art that they really liked? is it anywhere near as often as you hear people talking about music or films or television they really like?
and if not, why do you think that is?

 

[Pickman's model]

Where would you put it then?

in your dinner

 

[Orang Utan]

Is this worthy of wall space?

I'm interested but I want to know more.

What's with the frame? That's one thing I don't get about art in galleries.

 

[Orang Utan]

I posted it as "actually shit" art.
And OU...would you want some guy's shit in a tin in your house as a piece of art? Honestly?

Of course not. So is your assessment of good art something you'd want to hang on a wall in your house?

 

[Orang Utan]

Also I'll tell you why Manzoni's "Artist's Shit" is so good bubblesmcgrath. Because in that simple gesture and object he manages to communicate a critique of the artworld and the cult of the artist far more succinctly and with more clarity than most who attempt to do so.

Oops. I thought it was Beuys. Just been reading about him n all.

 

[Dr_Herbz]

not going into the political thing because that's a bit too far-fetched for me, sorry.

you are definitely entitled to your opinion. there's no question about that whatsoever.

but when do you hear people talking about art that they really liked? is it anywhere near as often as you hear people talking about music or films or television they really like?
and if not, why do you think that is?

I think a lot more people listen to music than look at art... but let's take music as an example. We all know Justin Bieber is shit... yet he's loaded, so people must be buying his shit. Does this make it not shit?

I'm interested but I want to know more.

What's with the frame? That's one thing I don't get about art in galleries.

I don't know what's with the frame. Looks a bit overkill to me. Maybe the frame forms part of the 'art'?

I kinda like it but I can't put my finger on why. I think it might be because my eyes keep wandering around the picture, looking for something to like

 

[Orang Utan]

Is Justin Bieber shit though? I don't know. I've not heard any of his music.

 

[Orang Utan]

People are MUCH more vituperative about music than they are about art though. It's far more intolerable for people to consider that other people like music they hate than it is for art. I wish I could remember what I have read that talks about this.

 

[Dr_Herbz]

People are MUCH more vituperative about music than they are about art though. It's far more intolerable for people to consider that other people like music they hate than it is for art. I wish I could remember what I have read that talks about this.

I'm not sure that's necessarily the case. I'll cite this thread as evidence

 

[Orang Utan]

Hmm. I personally don't care if you like Rothko, Manzoni, Beuys etc. I only get annoyed when you dismiss it as shit without making the effort to look beyond the aesthetics of having a nice painting on your wall. I would probably get even more annoyed if you said that Coil's Time Machines was shit cos it didn't have the melodies and harmonies of Beach Boys' Pet Sounds.

 

[Dr_Herbz]

Would this ^^^ be considered conceptual or abstract art?

 

[Orang Utan]

Why does it matter? I dunno. You have presented it without saying who made it and what it is called. I still don't know if the frame is part of the work. You clearly don't think context is important but it is.

 

[Dr_Herbz]

Why does it matter? I dunno. You have presented it without saying who made it and what it is called. I still don't know if the frame is part of the work. You clearly don't think context is important but it is.

It was in an art gallery I visited in France a few years ago but I can't remember who it was by.
The blurb said it was painted using the pigment from various autumn leaves.

 

[Miss Caphat]

I think a lot more people listen to music than look at art... but let's take music as an example. We all know Justin Bieber is shit... yet he's loaded, so people must be buying his shit. Does this make it not shit?

Fair point, but I guess my point was sort of that we know music so well, for the most part, and have such a better developed understanding of music for the most part, that when we hear a Justin Beiber song once or twice, and note his persona and the dickish things he does, it seems much more a fair ruling,
than for example, to read an article about Mapplethorpe's (?) exhibit where he depicted Christ in urine and grumble about how "our tax dollars are being used to support this hogwash!"*, or something, without understanding the context or why it might be important, etc.

I don't mean to imply that you/ we're all a bunch of art ignoramuses, but I certainly don't know much myself even after being involved with visual art my whole life (but not really studying it as a whole, if that makes sense). I guess what I'm saying is in the interest of balance, I would trust an art historian or someone who knew the whole story more than someone with an amateur interest in art, though amateurs and kids, etc, can all have very interesting things to say about artworks.


*which really was a huge thing here in the US, it caused a severe drop in funding for the National Endowment for the Arts, iirc.

 

[Orang Utan]

Hmm, I know more way about Mapplethorpe than Bieber. I would recognise him quicker in the street (and follow him to see if I could gatecrash any party he went to)

BTW Andres Serrano did the Piss Christ photo, not Mapplethorpe. It's a lovely photo just to look at.

 

[Orang Utan]

Actually, Piss Christ is a good example of looking at art in context. Before you know how it was composed, you could look at it purely aesthetically, as it is rather beautiful. But it's a picture of Christ. Your reaction to and knowledge of Christ and how he is traditionally depicted depends entirely on your upbringing. Many people are used to seeing Christ looking tormented on the cross (Catholics at any rate) but plunging the horror of the crucifix into a warm yellow aura transforms him into the beatific serene Christ that we see in other depictions of Christ. This is all before we know that yellow glow is just the artist's piss.

 

[Orang Utan]

Sorry that was shit. Time for bed.Up in five hours.

 

[Miss Caphat]

I really like that piece Orang Utan

I wonder if we'll proceed to the discovery that artwork made of piss is vastly superior to artwork made of shit?