Abortion... art?!

[Simplicius]

This troll- I mean, this performance art installation says, I think, more about the shitty state the creative arts are in than whatever message the artist was trying to get across.

If the arts degenerate to nothing but artists getting on a soapbox or wanking around and art critics and enthusiasts mumbling over how deep and significant a particular work is, then why should anyone in the public-at-large give a crap about art?

Fact is, if you want the arts to flourish and not be trimmed out of school budgets, a sizable percentage of the art produced has to be enjoyable. People have to want to go see it and participate in it, not roll their eyes or do spit-takes when they read about it. The arts need to embrace their collective audience, not stand aloof from it.

I might be mistaken, but this could be an area where private patronage would function better than public funding, as art produced for somebody else by nature can't be alienating or incomprehensible, or else it will not succeed.

[Kanastrous]

If the arts degenerate to nothing but artists getting on a soapbox or wanking around and art critics and enthusiasts mumbling over how deep and significant a particular work is,

"If?"

I wish you'd been with me, last visit to the Guggenheim. No "if" about it.

then why should anyone in the public-at-large give a crap about art?

I'm pretty sure they don't.

[Darth Wong]

That's the problem; artists have marginalized themselves into an incestuous niche. They fawn over each others' work and take a perverse pride in the fact that the uninitiated find no appeal in their work whatsoever.

[Simplicius]

"If?"

I wish you'd been with me, last visit to the Guggenheim. No "if" about it.

I say 'if' because I have encountered the work of some composers, painters, and photographers - most done on commission or presented for sale in private galleries - that is not self-indulgent junk. They may not be part of the art world as we're talking about it here, but they do ply the craft.

[Illuminatus Primus]

That's the problem; artists have marginalized themselves into an incestuous niche. They fawn over each others' work and take a perverse pride in the fact that the uninitiated find no appeal in their work whatsoever.

I think their flirtation with the left combined with an art critics distinguishment of "high art" from pop culture and consumerism led to an extreme reaction against those things that usually appeal to the public (i.e., those thing popularly publicized, marketed, and sold). Being undesirable and thus becoming impossible to be consumerist is desirable.

[CaptainChewbacca]

My sister-in-law (Kodiak's wife) is an artist. She paints murals that make people happy. They're aesthetically pleasing, and people WANT to see them.

That's art.

[Kanastrous]

Yup.

[Adrian Laguna]

That's the problem; artists have marginalized themselves into an incestuous niche. They fawn over each others' work and take a perverse pride in the fact that the uninitiated find no appeal in their work whatsoever.

There's a comic book called "Ex Machina" about an super hero who becomes major of NYC. One of the first things he has to deal with is a wall-sized portrait of Abraham Lincoln with the word "Nigger" painted over it in bright red letters. The fools in one of New York's major museums made it the centerpiece of their exhibition. The best part, and this is what really makes the whole thing seem true to life, is that the artist who made it was trying to mock the elite artistic circles, and was surprised to see them embrace the stupid shit she made as the point flew completely over their heads.

[Kanastrous]

Sounds less like something related from a comic book, than something ripped from the headlines.

[Battlehymn Republic]

Check out number 1 on this list of "art."

[Vohu Manah]

Yale is claiming the whole thing is a hoax.

Statement by Helaine S. Klasky — Yale University, Spokesperson

New Haven, Conn. — April 17, 2008

Ms. Shvarts is engaged in performance art. Her art project includes visual representations, a press release and other narrative materials. She stated to three senior Yale University officials today, including two deans, that she did not impregnate herself and that she did not induce any miscarriages. The entire project is an art piece, a creative fiction designed to draw attention to the ambiguity surrounding form and function of a woman’s body.

She is an artist and has the right to express herself through performance art.

Had these acts been real, they would have violated basic ethical standards and raised serious mental and physical health concerns.

[Sam Or I]

I find this very sick. It has very little to do with the abortion aspect. If someone cut themselves and peeled it off the scab over and over to make line art, I still find it just as sick. Self mutilation and art made out of removed human body parts is just creepy and disturbing, almost horror movie like.

[Big Phil]

Almost certainly a hoax

[Rye]

That's the problem; artists have marginalized themselves into an incestuous niche. They fawn over each others' work and take a perverse pride in the fact that the uninitiated find no appeal in their work whatsoever.

I don't think it's the fault of artists, I put the fault squarely on the post modernists and their vapid ilk in such "intellectual" art critic circles. I don't know how, but somewhere along the line, someone must've made the argument that art isn't how much craftsmanship, skill and emotional representation is put into a work of art, but how much people talk about it that makes it "art". Most of those critics aren't even artists, and have just wasted their education on glorified "history of media" courses with a knowledge of textual criticism.

Of course, the unfortunate thing is, even when critics do diss pointless shit like this, it fuels the fire, they get labelled as "conservative old men" or whatever and the "controversy" gets the shitty art more airplay.

I think their flirtation with the left combined with an art critics distinguishment of "high art" from pop culture and consumerism led to an extreme reaction against those things that usually appeal to the public (i.e., those thing popularly publicized, marketed, and sold). Being undesirable and thus becoming impossible to be consumerist is desirable.

The distinguishment of high art from pop culture is a rather "conservative" view in critical culture studies, and not usually popular with post modernists. To the contrary of what you said, this shit is done because it's art that anyone can do (thus distinguishing itself from "high art" which only the elite can do), and because it will get a huge public reaction. I mean, I could draw and paint circles around Tracy Emin et al, but would one of my works of art get anywhere near as much advertising oxygen as a tent of hers filled with names of everyone she's ever slept with? Fuck no, and one of her exhibitions would get loads more popular attention in comparison to mine.

If the desire to avoid becoming consumerist were a real one, there wouldn't be a public display or selling paintings at auctions etc, as this still inexorably leads to the cult of celebrity, "idols of consumption" and soforth. Of course, there are exceptions, and the one good one that springs to mind is Banksy. Nobody really knows who he is and he is talented and intelligent in his works in a way most "modern artists" could never hope to be. As far as "folk culture vs high culture vs mass culture" and simultaneously becoming a celebrity AND being able to reject it through anonymity, Banksy's really kicked the system and critic world's ass, produced works of great effort, difference and intelligence and became rich from it.

[The Guid]

The thing is the only reason that anyone will be actually bothered by this will be because it is widely reported in non art magazines. If her target audience were the only people that had become aware of it, there would be no "outrage".

[Zwinmar]

Hoax or not, an individual that can come up with something like this is fucked up in the head.

The definition of Art is so fluid its rediculous.

[Sam Or I]

The thing is the only reason that anyone will be actually bothered by this will be because it is widely reported in non art magazines. If her target audience were the only people that had become aware of it, there would be no "outrage".

Ah, isn't that true about anything. The holocaust people only got outraged after the world found out what was really going on.

[Oni Koneko Damien]

That's the problem; artists have marginalized themselves into an incestuous niche. They fawn over each others' work and take a perverse pride in the fact that the uninitiated find no appeal in their work whatsoever.

I know the statement doesn't apply to all 'artists', even if there's a highly public majority who are talentless hacks wanking over the shit their incestuous buddies smeared on canvas and sticking their noses up at those who just don't 'understand' them. I've found it pretty much parallels the actions of trektards, comic-book wankers, and other such people. It's a cultish mentality of isolationism and complete rejection of those who don't conform to the cult's beliefs.

[Kanastrous]

I increasingly suspect that she couldn't draw a horse, if her life depended upon it.