it is apparent that artform reaches its saturation points with exercises such as conceptual writing and etc
[
(if i take someone else's poem and put it in my hands that constitutes a different art-work - what if a beggar
put a poem in his hands would that be called art? yes according to the proponents
but I say there is also intention of the mind mind-set projecting certain energy that "I want this to be called art"
which forces us to accept it in that direction (at least as long as the energy lasts)
there is myriad dispositions of a work of art a book is fallen into the ground would that constitute different work of art
than the book itself?
I think we are reaching absurd levels of notions that only entertain as thought and might as well go into some handbook
but not be called art at least to the current conceptions of art - something that I worked to physically produce
otherwise the 4 55 moments of silence of Cage can be considered as a nice dance gesture can be categorized as dance it's pretty simple
and those who put in their hands books of others can be categorized as dancers
or performers in other sense
that's perfect let them do that dance and let us see (it) the dance
but of course we only see the end result of the dance which is the bodies frozen (in time and space)
a visual art like if the dancers were to be frozen there for ever
that would constitute sculpture
or if they were frozen in film that would constitute a film re- representation of the dance of the activities which was called art in the
beginning
therefore the 'artist' have some concept and pass it on to others to perform it's performance art
and we see the end result of course the end result is nothing in itself but we have to take in the whole performance
and that to be seen in its entirety is difficult if not impossible in some cases
therefore we have a fragmentation of art
where something is conceived in the minds of some people in italy and they are executed in afganistan
where is the art in this whole body?
it's the whole body which we don't it have as a whole
thus the exasperation you can't own that whole body
you would have to own the artist its mind and the produced result
or do we get the energy of the artist on the art work?
thats always the case (a painting of picasso carries his energy)
but now it becomes more pertinent as the artist is explicitly part of the art object
thus because these artists can't produce actual artworks (they are physically incapable or not inclined to do so)
they embody themselves int the art object which becomes
object from work
i.e. concept +work
thus the concept comes to the fore and we have to celebrate them for their concepts
that's science and they would do well to devote themselves to science
]
where the artform reaches the highly intellectuals where there is no action of the body but only of the brain (someone will say this happens
in every epoch - and then?)
these can be categorized as conceptual activities but the term 'art' carries enough currency so that everyone will want to be included in that
of course the definition of art changes it was craft in the ancient world (e.g., the Parthenon)
where now craft is relegated to the lower echelons of folk and kitschy activities
everyone will agree that art is to produce something beautiful but what that beautiful means is different for different people
it can also mean anti-beautiful such as those feminist-based activities which are used to protest something
I say art is the expression of non-functionality and the genuiness of it will be determined by time
this includes the above named activities and it is unfortunate that it does
but I think the above named activities are a show-off
so then we will have to deal with practice and cut off some
I like the notion of Bill Benzon http://new-savanna.blogspot.gr/2012/07/bryant-watch-mcart.html that brings it back to the 'eye of the beholder' or bring it back to circle
'let me hang this in the wall and let people see it and decide if it is art if it has any effect on them positive negative
[I have to re-read heidegger's on the work of art but I think his dictum is that the work of art opens up truth]
this opens the question of categorization
different levels of people will have a reaction to different levels of 'art'
so it is a problem of time
and don't go be taking exit polls outside the museum
there will be ohhhh and aaaaahs of the people
then they go home and sit down on it
or years will pass
or centuries
of course other forms are easily detectable right off hand
I have to say I'm surprised by the conceit of these people
they are clever manufacturers
of course everything that is is
and everything that exist exists
[
(if i take someone else's poem and put it in my hands that constitutes a different art-work - what if a beggar
put a poem in his hands would that be called art? yes according to the proponents
but I say there is also intention of the mind mind-set projecting certain energy that "I want this to be called art"
which forces us to accept it in that direction (at least as long as the energy lasts)
there is myriad dispositions of a work of art a book is fallen into the ground would that constitute different work of art
than the book itself?
I think we are reaching absurd levels of notions that only entertain as thought and might as well go into some handbook
but not be called art at least to the current conceptions of art - something that I worked to physically produce
otherwise the 4 55 moments of silence of Cage can be considered as a nice dance gesture can be categorized as dance it's pretty simple
and those who put in their hands books of others can be categorized as dancers
or performers in other sense
that's perfect let them do that dance and let us see (it) the dance
but of course we only see the end result of the dance which is the bodies frozen (in time and space)
a visual art like if the dancers were to be frozen there for ever
that would constitute sculpture
or if they were frozen in film that would constitute a film re- representation of the dance of the activities which was called art in the
beginning
therefore the 'artist' have some concept and pass it on to others to perform it's performance art
and we see the end result of course the end result is nothing in itself but we have to take in the whole performance
and that to be seen in its entirety is difficult if not impossible in some cases
therefore we have a fragmentation of art
where something is conceived in the minds of some people in italy and they are executed in afganistan
where is the art in this whole body?
it's the whole body which we don't it have as a whole
thus the exasperation you can't own that whole body
you would have to own the artist its mind and the produced result
or do we get the energy of the artist on the art work?
thats always the case (a painting of picasso carries his energy)
but now it becomes more pertinent as the artist is explicitly part of the art object
thus because these artists can't produce actual artworks (they are physically incapable or not inclined to do so)
they embody themselves int the art object which becomes
object from work
i.e. concept +work
thus the concept comes to the fore and we have to celebrate them for their concepts
that's science and they would do well to devote themselves to science
]
where the artform reaches the highly intellectuals where there is no action of the body but only of the brain (someone will say this happens
in every epoch - and then?)
these can be categorized as conceptual activities but the term 'art' carries enough currency so that everyone will want to be included in that
of course the definition of art changes it was craft in the ancient world (e.g., the Parthenon)
where now craft is relegated to the lower echelons of folk and kitschy activities
everyone will agree that art is to produce something beautiful but what that beautiful means is different for different people
it can also mean anti-beautiful such as those feminist-based activities which are used to protest something
I say art is the expression of non-functionality and the genuiness of it will be determined by time
this includes the above named activities and it is unfortunate that it does
but I think the above named activities are a show-off
so then we will have to deal with practice and cut off some
I like the notion of Bill Benzon http://new-savanna.blogspot.gr/2012/07/bryant-watch-mcart.html that brings it back to the 'eye of the beholder' or bring it back to circle
'let me hang this in the wall and let people see it and decide if it is art if it has any effect on them positive negative
[I have to re-read heidegger's on the work of art but I think his dictum is that the work of art opens up truth]
this opens the question of categorization
different levels of people will have a reaction to different levels of 'art'
so it is a problem of time
and don't go be taking exit polls outside the museum
there will be ohhhh and aaaaahs of the people
then they go home and sit down on it
or years will pass
or centuries
of course other forms are easily detectable right off hand
I have to say I'm surprised by the conceit of these people
they are clever manufacturers
of course everything that is is
and everything that exist exists
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου