Field Theory: A post about art (sort of)
503 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 10 11 12 13 14 … 21 Newer→ Last
-
You are in fact ascribing aesthetic consciousness to the West alone, as if they had invented beauty.
Of course I am not, and I resent your attempts to ascribe dark purposes to me. It is in fact you who clings to your noble savage mythology, that everybody across the world and through time has the same sort of aesthetic value, "the pleasing aspects of form" as you so quaintly put it.
It is noticable that you have brought nothing to this discussion but your own rantings and a chunk of Gombrich which supported my argument more than yours. If you have read Boardman, which I doubt, you have not understood him.
-
Blows against the Umpire...
Lot a worlds in that signing thing.
Let us consider the hand outline blow painted on the cave wall next to the nifty bison sketch......immortality? Ego? Animus?
it's a god's life......actually signed his utilitarian ceramic bowl with P____ facit.
I remember an R. Mutt - Fountain / Head?
it's a dog's life... -
merc,
Hehe it is a god's life...until we die.
Some say he signed the bowl to differentiate his product at the marketplace, and thus charge more money for it... -
let's not forget the much
overlooked Sistine Chapel floorThat floor had a reason for existence. It was there to enhance the drugs man...
I'll get my coat.
Some say he signed the bowl to differentiate his product at the marketplace, and thus charge more money for it...
and I s'pose you're gonna say he was a Republican next ;)
Right coat getting.
-
Paul, you haven't even started countering Davies' arguments. (Hint: anthropology probably isn't where the crux of the question lies.) Perhaps you could take it up over lunch some day?
But you also seem to be mixing up definitional and qualitative questions.Mayor Prendergast (who has high stakes in this game) is trying to force this monstrosity upon us on the grounds that it is art. ....
Perhaps we should be asking more questions about what constitutes art. Our visual environment would be the winner on the day.There's an assumption (perhaps unfortunately implied in the notion of the 'status' of art being conferred on an object) that something 'being art' also means being ' worthy of appreciation'.
The 'institutional theory' (and I'm using quotes cos you and I seeem to understand it in rather contrary ways) was explicitly intended- at least as usually formulated- as a definition that would include the good, the bad, and the indifferent. It has to, or it fails in its intention to be a descriptive definition.
It also fails as a descriptive definition (and becomes a partial or prescriptive one) if it excludes a large part of what most speakers would term art.
Running the two things together, you seem to be advocating a prescriptive Western 'Fine Arts' definition- which you are absolutely entitled to do. What isn't so plausible is your claim that this is the established view of (heh heh!) the 'academic aesthetics industry' :) -
Some say he signed the bowl to differentiate his product at the marketplace, and thus charge more money for it...
... or stop men using it, perhaps.
-
"What is the Weta statue for again? It's designated purpose? Some could say that anything commissioned that has a brief is a different form of art...advertising springs to mind, a black art?"
Any sculpture commissioned for an event promotes that event, but the issue for me is the post match monumentalising of the rugby world cup. It may well look like a very bad hangover.
-
3410,
Speaking of Art...
The 'papers are reporting "rumours" that the RWC theme song will be a cover of Jesus Jones' Right Here, Right Now , as performed by the Feelers.
What was the brief? "Must be old, unoriginal, and unhip"?
-
, but the issue for me is the post match monumentalising of the rugby world cup. It may well look like a very bad hangover.
Yes indeed ,it could become the "Haunting" kinda like a Saddam Hussein statue, so I guess a weta could be better than ,say, a McCulley?
-
Some could say that anything commissioned that has a brief is a different form of art...advertising springs to mind, a black art?
advertising (& PR) is more of a blague art, by braggarts... the new blaggarts perhaps?
blague noun a joke or piece of nonsense.
ORIGIN mid 19th cent.: French, literally ‘claptrap, nonsense.’braggart noun a person who boasts about achievements or possessions
-
Don’t like the statue?
Wait till they announce the official RWC “Anthem”...
-
Paul, you haven't even started countering Davies' arguments. (Hint: anthropology probably isn't where the crux of the question lies.) Perhaps you could take it up over lunch some day.
Don't be coy, Rob. Tell me where I am wrong.
-
It is noticable that you have brought nothing to this discussion but your own rantings and a chunk of Gombrich which supported my argument more than yours.
Let's stop conversing, you and I, Paul.
-
Not coy, Paul. Busy!
And since you don't respond to what criticism I've made (that your definition is prescriptive, covertly qualitative, and fails to describe typical usage) I'm not going to set out to retype or paraphrase and condense the considerable arguments of Davies- or Novitz- at least until I get half-an-hour free! -
The technique that Weta employs in its work is grounded in the film industry, and that medium revolves around the camera. Weta production is photographically real because that is what they do well. To see this effect to its full just look at the ‘Riff Raff’ sculpture in Hamilton. It looks just like ‘Riff Raff’ quite a scary likeness, a bit like a waxwork dummy in bronze.
Artists employ all kind of tricks to get around this deadening effect, which are of course top secret, but if you carefully analyse a good, lively sculpture piece by piece, it can be seen that it displays Picasso’s definition of art which is ‘a lie that points to the truth.’ By quoting Picasso I don’t mean to suggest a wildly abstract piece for the Rugby World Cup but I don’t think that a work that is at the other end of that continuum, mannered and lifeless, is suitable either.
Oh and when the All Blacks choke in the semis, watch out for the Wellington wit with the hacksaw; keep your eyes on the ball.
-
One question that has not been asked is why the Rugby World Cup should merit a statue. Could this set a precedent? Will our cities become littered with memorials to sporting contests?
-
merc,
That, Paul, is a good question.
Some perhaps apt Blake quotes...for we have hirelings in the Court...(remember Blake was tried for sedition).
http://betatesters.com/penn/blake2.htmWB; Artists employ all kind of tricks to get around this deadening effect...
I laffed over this one...for reasons I can't explain just yet. -
Paul Litterick - what about ta-moko?
That's the thought that has been hanging in my mind since you rather summarily (and with no specific reasons)dismissed my Robinson bowl and mere pounemu alike as 'craft' - Not Art. Discounting mana & many other aspects (the sounds that can come from them, the beauty of their lines etc.) of the aforesaid works...
Where does the moko of an upoko-ariki stand?
A Japanese full-body tattoo? -
The 'papers are reporting "rumours" that the RWC theme song will be a cover of Jesus Jones' Right Here, Right Now , as performed by the Feelers.
Please tell me some Andy Kaufman-esque performance comedy genius is fucking with us by spreading this rumour.
-
From Page 3
I think Paul won that one...
Now, your starter for 10 points. ;-)Islander...
Geez you stirrer!
Do I get a wooden spoon or something?
(remember Blake was tried for sedition).
Nah. He was murdered in Brazil on his boat and got sculpted. In that latter respect he is not alone
Oh, how we as a Nation suffer from our Art. -
merc,
Word.
-
what about ta-moko?
Don't ask me, ask Immanuel Kant.
I am concerned that you think I dismissed your artefacts. I did not wish to imply that they were of lesser status, just observing that hand-made objects of functional value are given the name crafts, while the word art has been given to non-functional objects of primarily aesthetic value, at least since the 18th Century. There is nothing lacking in an object because it fulfills a practical use.
I think this conversation has been bedeviled by the assumption that calling something 'art' gives it a superior status. I have been arguing that 'art' is a term given to particular practices that originated in Europe but are now found world-wide, practices not just of creation but also of display, exchange and collecting.
As I understand moko (correct me if I am wrong) it fulfills purposes of identification and the manifestation of status. Traditionally, it was not made primarily for aesthetic purposes.
-
Artists are identified by the Art World by the fact of their making expressive pieces of work, and the purpose of those works being expression.
Ah, the ol' 'art as expression' theory (as mediated by the masters of the artworld).
I thought that died with Tolstoy? -
How would you define art, Rob?
-
"Oh, how we as a Nation suffer from our Art."
stevee you just have to be an arts administrator with that attitude dude.
"I laffed over this one...for reasons I can't explain just yet."
... that is quite funny in its self, but it could just be a symptom of something much bigger and nastier.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.