Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

(In Art) What matters to you more concept or technical ability?

Torygraph? Fuck off! Do you nod along to Toby Young, hehehe

toby.jpg



(yeah I know what you're saying I just did not think you'd use the torygraph for legitmacy :p)
 
Groucho said:
A greater challenge though would be to first agree a definition of Art and then to define criteria by which we can judge 'good' and 'bad' Art within the parameters of that definition.

Greater minds than mine have tried and stumbled.
Click to expand...

I may be wrong but I've always thought that Duchamps' work was exactly that... a challenge to show that no definition, of sorts, will give you an adequate answer to what is or is not Art.

The Fountain being a double_treble bluff at the cost of the observer or those who attempt to give it cause celebre in jus being what it is... a manufactured item with form being given precedence over function in an environment alien to purpose...and stuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuff



it's worth considering object trouves(sp) also as anthropologically_archaeologically I think I'm also right in saying that Man found and carried objects he found on interest but of no definable purpose millennia before he chose to make marks of his own for expression_coz He could.

Off to Lidl to gettaway from this...:D
 
boskysquelch said:
I may be wrong but I've always thought that Duchamps' work was exactly that... a challenge to show that no definition, of sorts, will give you an adequate answer to what is or is not Art.

The Fountain being a double_treble bluff at the cost of the observer or those who attempt to give it cause celebre in jus being what it is... a manufactured item with form being given precedence over function in an environment alien to purpose...and stuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuff
Click to expand...

and that's why Duchamp was a fookin genius. I rest my case m'lud. Next.
 
boskysquelch said:
I may be wrong but I've always thought that Duchamps' work was exactly that... a challenge to show that no definition, of sorts, will give you an adequate answer to what is or is not Art.
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree that that was part of the intention and that in that respect the work succeeds imo.

Of course the work, or the various 'copies' are not the 'work' in its totality but merely a physical pointer to the concept. The submission of the piece by R Mutt, its rejection for display and Duchamp's defence of the piece, and its subsequent acceptance as an iconic work of Art are all integral to the concept and the evolution of its impact on assumptions about Art and artists.

A multi-way debate in a cafe might have gone/might go -

Some bloke has put a urinal in a gallery and called it a work of art! What tosh!

If it is in a gallery it must be a work of art.

huh?

No, no it's a concept, the concept is the work

Bollocks! It's crap. It's a f*ckin urinal, not a fountain. A pile of piss.

Ah but you see the urinal has a beauty of its own, a functional design whose beauty as a work of Art in and of itself had not been appreciated even by the designer until an Artist had the insight to observe the inate beauty of the piece, and by title and by the act of upturning the piece the Artist shares with us that insight, thus a mass manufactured object of utility becomes a work of Art through the magical 'touch' of an Artist and by merit of the fact that the piece is displayed in an Art gallery and signed by the artist.

Piss!

Except that the artist who signed the 'piece' does not exist. The piece is a joke, a snub to the art world who wouldn't know the difference between good Art and bad Art only what sells, only what is accepted, oh they say 'an artist has signed the piece it must be a work of Art' thus we see artistic merit and inate beauuty in an object that had none before, thus proving we are duped by the Artist. It's a con-trick. He's 'avin' a larf at the expense of the art World! You know he hated Art critics for snubbing his nude descending the stairs.

Well yes, perhaps, but the very act of perpetrating this 'hoax' and provoking this discussion is in fact the work of Art, not the piece itself, but the idea behind its display. The work of Art as concept was thus born

Duchamp = bloody genius.:)
 
zenie said:
Be that any medium?

Do you care more about the concept behind it or the finished article?

Is the need for experimentation greater than the crafts itself?

Just out of interest like ;) :cool: :p
Click to expand...

Not concept or technical ability. If you like it you like it.
 
Johnny Canuck2 said:
That's all it's about.
Click to expand...

I'd disagree with that ;)

Photography can be a form of expressionism like any other art form can't it?

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:
Not concept or technical ability. If you like it you like it.
Click to expand...

hmm...do you think it's as simple as that?

Do you think art is as simple as 'oh that looks pretty?'
 
jms said:
Both. Depends on context.
Click to expand...

sooooooooooooooo The Mona Lisa is Art in the Louvre and just a painting elsewhere?

Nah...lots more subtle than...hence bringing Duchamp into it.

However I am still yet to be convinced that "concept" can exist in our physical dimension only the mental....even Groucho's explanation has the flaw that the conversation he jus cited is ethereal and therefore still only a concept of comprehension! :p


Ooooh I feel this will get all Koonsian in a mo.

Heeere we go... http://www.jca-online.com/koons.html ... a jolly good read...Koons da maaaaaaaaaaan:D
 
Concept - all the way.

Without that whats the point?

Obviously you need to find a means of expressing that concept to your audience, but for me the how is very much subservient to the why. Function dictates form and all that....
 
zenie said:
I'd disagree with that ;)

Photography can be a form of expressionism like any other art form can't it?



hmm...do you think it's as simple as that?

Do you think art is as simple as 'oh that looks pretty?'
Click to expand...

I didn't say if it looks pretty you like it, I said if you like the picture (for whatever reason) then you like it. It is as simple as that.

I went to art collage and could not stand the bullshit that people would crap on about art. I remember an exhibition I had where this chap (who didn't know me or that it was my work) was coming up with all kinds of absurd bollocks about my influences and what the pictures were about. Every time I would try to explain that I was just painting and making what I thought was nice people would say 'ah so you are dada then'.

The poor Dadaists hated movements in art so decided to not be a movement and were immediately called dada and became the anti movement movement.

I believe that everything is art from chairs to computers to paintings in galleries. I think this is what people like Marcel Duchamp was highlighting with his ready-mades.

Who cares if Jeff koons didn't build the sliver train, he commissioned it and it exists, if you like it you like it if you don't you don't, if you like that he got someone else to do it for him you like that concept but maybe not the end result.

You like what you like.
 
ATOMIC SUPLEX said:
I didn't say if it looks pretty you like it, I said if you like the picture (for whatever reason) then you like it. It is as simple as that.

I went to art collage and could not stand the bullshit that people would crap on about art. I remember an exhibition I had where this chap (who didn't know me or that it was my work) was coming up with all kinds of absurd bollocks about my influences and what the pictures were about. Every time I would try to explain that I was just painting and making what I thought was nice people would say 'ah so you are dada then'.

The poor Dadaists hated movements in art so decided to not be a movement and were immediately called dada and became the anti movement movement.

I believe that everything is art from chairs to computers to paintings in galleries. I think this is what people like Marcel Duchamp was highlighting with his ready-mades.

Who cares if Jeff koons didn't build the sliver train, he commissioned it and it exists, if you like it you like it if you don't you don't, if you like that he got someone else to do it for him you like that concept but maybe not the end result.

You like what you like.
Click to expand...

I heard somethng similar happen to someone else and didn't Robster say someone commented on a bit of art in his gallery, when it was a bit of rubbish!! :D

I thought you were muso trained Mr Suplex :cool:
 
ATOMIC SUPLEX said:
I went to art collage and could not stand the bullshit that people would crap on about art. I remember an exhibition I had where this chap (who didn't know me or that it was my work) was coming up with all kinds of absurd bollocks about my influences and what the pictures were about. Every time I would try to explain that I was just painting and making what I thought was nice people would say 'ah so you are dada then'.
Click to expand...

:D

I had much the same experience. They'd try to stick you any art movement that they thought would fit or was that particular profs favorite. They wouldnt' just let you experiment and figure it out. They tried to make me an Abstract Expressionist. I got so tired of fighting with them, that I decided to paint a few their way. I rolled some canvas out on the floor, and threw some paint on it. For good measure I slapped a on few brush strokes. All the while cussing my professors. Took all of 20 minutes and I ended up with three washy, blue/purple pieces that I entered in the end of year competition. They won me a small scholarship. Wouldn't believe the bullshit they spouted about them. "I really love the energy here." "Oh, such masculine painting." Can't win for losing.
 
zenie said:
I heard somethng similar happen to someone else and didn't Robster say someone commented on a bit of art in his gallery, when it was a bit of rubbish!! :D

I thought you were muso trained Mr Suplex :cool:
Click to expand...

I'm an art school drop out. I did my 2 year B-tech then went to do a degree but gave up because I wanted to play in this band I was in.

I then took Music Technology when I was 20 or 21 I think.
 
ATOMIC SUPLEX said:
I went to art collage and could not stand the bullshit that people would crap on about art. I remember an exhibition I had where this chap (who didn't know me or that it was my work) was coming up with all kinds of absurd bollocks about my influences and what the pictures were about. Every time I would try to explain that I was just painting and making what I thought was nice people would say 'ah so you are dada then'.
Click to expand...

This happens to everyone at some point who does a BA. Art school is counter-productive in many ways, its like they want you to fit within the constrains of established schools of thought. I used to have right ding dongs with my tutor who had a go at me for doing no "visual research" and I said I didn't want to do any because I don't want to be influenced by others. I want it to be spontaneous and chaste of influence.

Now I *really* must go!!

I have a some shit with out the honours :D
 
firky said:
This happens to everyone at some point who does a BA. Art school is counter-productive in many ways, its like they want you to fit within the constrains of established schools of thought. I used to have right ding dongs with my tutor who had a go at me for doing no "visual research" and I said I didn't want to do any because I don't want to be influenced by others. I want it to be spontaneous and chaste of influence.

Now I *really* must go!!

I have a some shit with out the honours :D
Click to expand...
It is a lot of bollocks isn't it. It used to make me quite mad, all that 'your picture needs some background of bollocks to be valid' crap.

I still have the 'everthing is art' argument about twice a year though.
 
ATOMIC SUPLEX said:
I'm an art school drop out. I did my 2 year B-tech then went to do a degree but gave up because I wanted to play in this band I was in.

I then took Music Technology when I was 20 or 21 I think.
Click to expand...

What were you studying?

If you're studying fine art and you want to be an 'artist' then I think you do need concepts and reasons behind why you do everything yeh.....
 
zenie said:
What were you studying?

If you're studying fine art and you want to be an 'artist' then I think you do need concepts and reasons behind why you do everything yeh.....
Click to expand...

I don't think you do. concepts and reasons behind why you do everything are valid but in no way essential. There is no need to make art elitist or intellectual, just because you can talk bollocks about something doesn't make it clever and just because you don't doesn't make it bad.

In fact I would say they are more important in graphic design where you are working to a brief and will probably have to explain yourself.
 
firky said:
This happens to everyone at some point who does a BA. Art school is counter-productive in many ways, its like they want you to fit within the constrains of established schools of thought. I used to have right ding dongs with my tutor who had a go at me for doing no "visual research" and I said I didn't want to do any because I don't want to be influenced by others. I want it to be spontaneous and chaste of influence.

Now I *really* must go!!

I have a some shit with out the honours :D
Click to expand...

Nah. Don`t agree.

There was no attempt on my degree to fit us into any genres...okay my tutor got a bit pissed when I started poncing around claiming I wasn't an artist, but I reckon that was fair enough.

Visual research just acknowledges your influences (a bit like a reference) no matter what you believe you ain`t producing art in a vacuum.
 
ATOMIC SUPLEX said:
I don't think you do. concepts and reasons behind why you do everything are valid but in no way essential. There is no need to make art elitist or intellectual, just because you can talk bollocks about something doesn't make it clever and just because you don't doesn't make it bad.

In fact I would say they are more important in graphic design where you are working to a brief and will probably have to explain yourself.
Click to expand...

Nah.

There is always a reason for creative production / art. It doesn`t have to be a fancy bullshit concept, but its there.
 
zenie said:
I heard somethng similar happen to someone else and didn't Robster say someone commented on a bit of art in his gallery, when it was a bit of rubbish!! :D
Click to expand...

Zenie is correct. This act of random placement of rubbish and a picture in a back room, out of the main gallery area was considered by a senior art lecturer from Goldsmiths to be a sophisticated piece. I just didn't say anything :)
 
When I worked in a gallery we had some christmas decorations up. It was polar bears and snow. We kept getting comments about how ironic that piece was. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
Would a bit of encouragement make us go take and share more photos?
Replies
2
Views
701
nottsgirl
N
Mumbles274
2025 Art Thread
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
heinous seamus
heinous seamus
weltweit
  • Poll Poll
Would you say that photography is creative?
2
Replies
37
Views
2K
Saul Goodman
Saul Goodman
chemn
Geometric Art/ Mandala
Replies
23
Views
748
chemn
chemn
weltweit
How Often Do You Calibrate Your Monitor?
Replies
24
Views
943
RoyReed
RoyReed
Back
Top Bottom