James - your new avatar is missing out on an opportunity to score a cheap point. The slogan should read, These are not stripes.
A Kino runner for the DDR
Do we have an emoticom for a very, very long sighhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
Ah well, off to watch Come Dine with Me a perfect example of no tax payer subsidy whatsoever. LOL!
I didn't ask you how obvious you felt it was.Originally Posted by Marthas dad
Just have a look back at the poster shown by pure sound, they are IMO works of art if you like them or not.
A poster carries more power and feeling wen it has a strong artistic content that underpins the main message of a poster.
Unfortunatley few of the London Olimpic posters do either.
Last edited by moggy58; 07-11-2011 at 08:17 PM.
Last edited by Tel; 07-11-2011 at 08:16 PM.
There must be more to living
Than a mortgage and a lawn to mow - Joni
At the other end of the spectrum I personally dislike the Ofili, but then again I'm not a fan.
I entirely abhor foo, but the reason why foo is foo is precisely because there really does exist an objectively accessible measurable world by reference to which it does nothing. If you equate art- even art you abhor- with foo thejn you are making the same conflation of the evaluative/subjective and testable/ objective worlds which foo-peddlars make.
Anything can be discussed intelligently, if not on this forum, and in the case of art it can only really be assessed by intelligent discussion. For my own part I have found that in the case of contemporary art in particular the act of discussing it generally gets you to the point. I have on many occasions found myself expounding on what I think to be the problem with a particular piece or exhibition, only to find half way through that that was now what I liked about it. Cildo Meireles particularly comes to mind. I also find that listening to other people's views really helps, whether you end up agreeing with them or not. Equally I would say that it is probably easlier to evaluate responses to art than it is to identify what is valid art.
Would there would be any contemporary or even modern art if no one was allowed to discussed what some people thought was "obviously" not worth discussing.
I am left to wonder whether you think that these unidentified works that are truly moving in the Tate would be worthy of discussion- but even if you did identify them I presume that you would think that it was self evident not only that they were true works of art whereas those in this commission aren't, but why each work fell on one side of the line rather than the other. Perhaps you would be good enough to enlighten the trstees of the tate of your views so that they can clear away all the other stuff that only foolish old pseudo intellectuals would think worthy of consideration. I am intrigued though by where say Rothko's works would fall (presumably either all good or all bad?) I feel fairly confident that Duchamp's urinal would be thrown in the bin-or would it be redeemed by being funny?
Incidentally I can't help wondering whether all those people who buy posters in the Tate shop realise that what they are buying isn't art because it's on a poster (QED). It was a bit careless of the Tate to forget that when they had the Rodchenko exhibition a couple of years back.
Anyway, since you appear to think that there is nothing which can be said on the subject of the works in the Olympic commission, it seems that there can be nothing further to discuss.
My mum has Alzheimer's and isn't on Facebook.Originally Posted by Marthas dad
I've had another look at the Sarah Morris one and I like it even more, in fact I would like a poster of it. FWIW it makes no difference to me what it is supposed to be, the fact it's supposed to represent Big Ben in some way means nothing to me and has no influence over my enjoyment of it.
I just like it
"Suitable outcomes for all - FME/proper not overpriced/underperforming e.g. Walmart-wotever Wallwart CAN be just spot-on so often, utilised correctly/unplugged after enjoyment."
Well cum to da sick UK olympicalz innit. u jus gotta sho dem drawingz respek wam boyz.
I don't like stuff that sucks.
Adamdea, you miss my point entirely. My view is that by trying to discuss it, you cannot appreciate it or disregard it without intelectualising it. Trying to intelectualise that which we can know nothing about, is bollocks, it's Pseudo intelectual, and I can't be doing with it.
To me, when it comes to art you either like something or you don't. It's an emotional reaction that doesn't need or deserve discussion. I love Sashimi, many find it repulsive. There is nothing further to discuss in the matter without becoming ridiculous in the process. Art to me is the same. I may be wrong, but that is how I feel about art.
To get back on topic, as posters these works of art are shit - that's my view. But perhaps the point of these posters is not to advertise the olympics, perhaps the point of them is to be sold in the gift shops as momentos, so they should be judged as works of art after all. In which case I am wrong to dismiss them. For mew though. as works of art, I don't really like them much. Most of them I find childish and totally without any merit whatsoever and a couple are mildly amusing and nice to look at.
Your view on them is neither here nor there to me. But sneering at people for saying they don't like them doesn't further your argument any.
As for identifying works that I enjoyed in the Tait, I couldn't, not many. I rarely take notice of who it is by, I just look at it and either enjoy it or not. I am not going to buy it, I am certainly not going to try and discuss it with anyone. It's just me and it.
Favourite thing ever.. Anish Kapoor's Red Wax.. (not at the Tait, Natch). Doris Salcedo's crack (ohh matron) was marvelous. No idea why, but it was (to me at least, many thought it was just a crack and they are right too). I saw some video art at the Pompidou a few weeks ago that had me gripped for ages. I like a lot of art, but I don't feel the need to defend that which I find either cynical or simply ermm.. sorry but crap.
"Hugely affable" - Esquire Magazine :-)
Last edited by adamdea; 08-11-2011 at 12:26 AM. Reason: Reflection