I see you've literally ignored everything I wrote in my last four of five posts.If you think it's that easy, go and do it.
Why not? are you scared?
Are you scared people will laugh at you? Are you scared you will make your millions?
You don't get it, and it seems you never will.
I see you've literally ignored everything I wrote in my last four of five posts.
Well, OK then, but it doesn't make for a very interesting conversation.
Since you obviously didn't read (was it too long?) - I'll recap. If I - or you, or (probably) anyone here - had tried to sell "unmade bed" to an art gallery, they would have (correctly) considered it an absurd waste of time. Because we are not "artists".
But, when you are an "artist", you can do things like have an unmade bed appear in an art gallery. And it becomes "art".
To the cynic (me) it's just an unmade bed, the likes of which can be observed up and down the country in their millions.
To the "art connoussier" (you), it's a work of art. But it's a work of art because it's in an art gallery, and because of who put it there. Logically this MUST be the case because it is, all things said and done, just an unmade bed. The likes of which we have all seen before. Just not in an art gallery.
I wonder if that will work with my employer.I answered that with my VERY first post in this thread. The FACT that you have a problem with it, that you are talking about it, gives the unmade bed meaning. It is a validation of its existence.
I also said this before, not all Art is made to be adored, it isn't asking for or looking for compliment to adoration, it isn't after your approval or applause. It can just be, there is an idea, and there is the end product.
Lars Von Trier is a director, his latest film call The House That Jack Built, when it was shown in Cannes people walked out, they hated it. Do you know what Von Trier asked them? "So you really hate it right? Good."
He prefers it that people hate it as opposed to brush it aside.
I wonder if that will work with my employer.
"I didn't write this code for you. I didn't want it to be good code. I don't want your approval. It destroyed your data and bricked your servers. Got you all talking about me, tho, didn't it?"
Lol.
Truly, modern art defies reason. And logic. And since those are the criteria I most often use to judge things, I'm afraid I'm out.
Yes, to an extent.You are trying to apply logic to art?!
Lol
Yes, to an extent.
Like the question, "Why is 'Unmade Bed' art at all? It's form is replicated countless times in houses everywhere; therefore it must be because..."
Logic can be applied everywhere. Art is not immune. Why should it be?
Maths can be art, as can engineering. Unless you're saying maths and engineering can't be art?That would be delicious...
But there has to be a difference between "Unmade Bed" and my unmade bed in my house.That’s a different topic whether something has logic but why are you applying logic to art? Especially modern art.
You are trying to define art but the point is that art can’t be defined.
So don’t.
But there has to be a difference between "Unmade Bed" and my unmade bed in my house.
There has to be a distinguishing characteristic(s) between the two.
Logic demands it.
In and of itself, "Unmade Bed" does not pose any new questions that other works of "modern art" do not also pose. To be precise - "Why is this art? If not the form or technique, which is not the result of skill or training, then what?"It made you think didn’t it?
Job done.
In and of itself, "Unmade Bed" does not pose any new questions that other works of "modern art" do not also pose. To be precise - "Why is this art? If not the form or technique, which is not the result of skill or training, then what?"
It is just another example of a work which poses the same question.
A question which I put to you several posts ago, and you sort of danced around it a little bit, but never answered.
What's the difference between "Unmade Bed" in an art gallery, and my unmade bed at home?
Hey, maybe it'll be interesting for you to list for all our benefit what the differences are. I'm all ears.
Your answers were all, "You just don't get it."You’ve asked and I’ve answered, many times, you just don’t get it or didn’t read it.
That’s a different topic whether something has logic but why are you applying logic to art? Especially modern art.
You are trying to define art but the point is that art can’t be defined.
So don’t.
The point is that art can and is being defined - by very skilled marketers who profit greatly from it. Also by tax evaders and money launderers, but mainly by marketers. The material itself is utterly irrelevant. The only distiction between "modern art" and "not modern art" is the skill and power of the person marketing it - that's how "modern art" is defined.
If I drop a dirty sock on a piece of cardboard, it's not modern art.
If a marketer with enough skill and power says that it's modern art, it's modern art.
That is how YOU define it.
No, that's the reality of the installation/piece.That is how YOU define it.