but is it really art? i mean, come on...

looking glass spectacle · 01.03.2010, 05:21 PM

i've always considered that question to have been definitively answered/rendered moot/rendered mute in 1917 by r. mutt...

consequently i've always considered to be hopelessly uninformed responses to works of art along the lines of:

"my three year old can paint better than that"
"i could do that"
"that's stupid/pointless/meaningless/just a bunch of random images strung together by a pretentious hack in order to confuse us"
"that's not art, it's just a urinal/blank canvas/bunch of felt/an apple/pile of sand/square piece of plate steel/piece of rope/some broken glass in a box/a shark in fromaldahyde/a tent/a lawn chair/a bunch of canoes/etc/etc"

but then, while taking a photo of this bunch of canoes by nancy rubins, i noticed a long yellow hose running along the wall of the museum...

after looking around for a minute for clues i found this plaque that indicated that the museum had purchased the long yellow hose from a mexican hose salesman in 1996.

... i've never before felt an impulse to immediately dismiss a piece of art as worthless/not art. there's always been something there that i could at least get a critical/interpretive handle on... some real or imagined more or less vague intention towards meaning that i could at least sink my teeth into and then accept or reject on those terms... at least engaging the work before saying that i don't like it/think it's poorly executed/downright idiotic...

but this absolutely refuses to be anything other than simply a hose... is that the point? more duchamp than duchamp? urinal as urinal and not readymade? if so, why is the hose not in use as a hose?

does anyone else "get it"?

looking glass spectacle · 01.03.2010, 05:25 PM

Savage Clone · 01.03.2010, 05:31 PM

I like how the title tells you what it is. Really gets to the heart of the concept.
Yes, I think it is perfectly OK for both the uninformed rube and the sophisticated modern art appreciator to call shenanigans on this particular acquisition.

knox · 01.03.2010, 05:42 PM

if i say its art then it is.

Hip Priest · 01.03.2010, 05:47 PM

I say it is art. Whether it is good art or not is another matter.

Orozco has a tendency to do things like this. His 'Home Run' piece is a good example, where he placed oranges in the windows of a building across the road from the gallery.

His work makes me smile. I quite like it, in a way.

truncated · 01.03.2010, 05:53 PM

Another one of those subjective concepts that can be endlessly deconstructed until everyone is nauseous and the concept no longer has meaning. And is also trumped by werewolf movies.

ploesj · 01.03.2010, 05:54 PM

i've been studying this question for days now and i have an exam about it in two day so i really REALLY don't feel the need to start discussing it here.

EVOLghost · 01.03.2010, 05:56 PM

so...this can be a great way to study for you exam...

truncated · 01.03.2010, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ploesj

i've been studying this question for days now and i have an exam about it in two day so i really REALLY don't feel the need to start discussing it here.

There are courses for this? I hope you're not paying for this education.

phoenix · 01.03.2010, 06:03 PM

the point of art is that it exists when you call it. whether you like it and whatever merit it carries is something else.

often times with art pieces it can help to look at the context of the original creation and the rest of the artists body of work. As much as there are wonderful paintings which are aesthetically pleasing and very easy to understand, and stand well alone without any need for comparitive pieces or knowledge of art movements.. because their intention is to depict a scene in a certain way.. other pieces like sculpture or instalation art, even some paintings/ers are often more in depth and can require some background knowledge of the artists intentions, especially if they were created years before. I honestly don't consider this a problem when discovering a piece. There are lots of things in this world that contain more than just what is on the surface..

knox · 01.03.2010, 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by truncated

There are courses for this? I hope you're not paying for this education.

haha oh god.

demonrail666 · 01.03.2010, 06:10 PM

I wrote a big long reply to this but deleted it because when I read it back all I could see were invisible words saying 'shut up you boring pretentious prick'. In essence though, I agree with Hip Priest on this one.

Hip Priest · 01.03.2010, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by demonrail666

I wrote a big long reply to this but deleted it because when I read it back all I could see were invisible words saying 'shut up you boring pretentious prick'. In essence though, I agree with Hip Priest on this one.

Funnily enough, I wrote and deleted a long response too, before settling on the thing you agree with.

Splendid.

phoenix · 01.03.2010, 06:15 PM

I personally don't know this artist, but even looking quickly;

"Orozco's exploration of the use of video, drawings, and installations in addition to his photographs and sculptures, allows the audience's imagination to explore the creative associations between oft-ignored objects in today's world. His work permits a rarely allowed interaction between the artwork and the audience."

Seemingly his intention is to break down physical/sociological barriers which can exist between artist work and audience, in a playful manner. I would say such a piece does that quite well. Ordinary objects can be often ignored and considered very humble, and placing items in such a way to give them high cultural significance has been popular since da da, perhaps earlier.

He is asking you to look at the item in a different light. Putting something usually considered quite worthless into a place usually reserved for expensive, exclusive, elitist items. It is quite subtle though, because the item does not have a reserved plinth or space. It's playful.. humorous.. from what I can see. Art does not have to be world changing. Can be, sure, but does not have to in order to be considered art.

Genteel Death · 01.03.2010, 06:18 PM

We've had a trillion threads where this subject has been touched. Is it art? Personally I don't think it is, then again if you show it in an art gallery apparently it is. I'm more curious about the motivations for defending such works, rather than worrying about my thoughts on them.

atsonicpark · 01.03.2010, 06:27 PM

You're either an artist, or you're a craftsman.

Also... Everything is art.

Also.. yellow hoses rule.

phoenix · 01.03.2010, 06:30 PM

I'm not sure you should be following the arts if you really consider this an overly difficult piece to comprehend...

I say that in the nicest way possible..

pbradley · 01.03.2010, 06:38 PM

The 'is it art?' question is a hole that I've learned to step over.

Glice · 01.03.2010, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by phoenix

I'm not sure you should be following the arts if you really consider this an overly difficult piece to comprehend...

I say that in the nicest way possible..

Ha! Brilliant.

Like Herrs Rail and Priest, I wrote a massive reply that I deleted, but I think phoenix has about got the measure above.

ploesj · 01.03.2010, 06:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by truncated

There are courses for this? I hope you're not paying for this education.

i study illustration and we get a few theory classes on art history, basic philosophy, anthropology and art philosophy. what we do in this last class is look at different views on the subject of art and what defines art, what different types of people call 'art' etcetera etcetera. it's actually quite interesting to discuss, and i'm enjoying this part of my education as well as the rest.

01.03.2010, 05:21 PM	#1
looking glass spectacle 100% Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 591	i've always considered that question to have been definitively answered/rendered moot/rendered mute in 1917 by r. mutt... consequently i've always considered to be hopelessly uninformed responses to works of art along the lines of: "my three year old can paint better than that" "i could do that" "that's stupid/pointless/meaningless/just a bunch of random images strung together by a pretentious hack in order to confuse us" "that's not art, it's just a urinal/blank canvas/bunch of felt/an apple/pile of sand/square piece of plate steel/piece of rope/some broken glass in a box/a shark in fromaldahyde/a tent/a lawn chair/a bunch of canoes/etc/etc" but then, while taking a photo of this bunch of canoes by nancy rubins, i noticed a long yellow hose running along the wall of the museum... after looking around for a minute for clues i found this plaque that indicated that the museum had purchased the long yellow hose from a mexican hose salesman in 1996. ... i've never before felt an impulse to immediately dismiss a piece of art as worthless/not art. there's always been something there that i could at least get a critical/interpretive handle on... some real or imagined more or less vague intention towards meaning that i could at least sink my teeth into and then accept or reject on those terms... at least engaging the work before saying that i don't like it/think it's poorly executed/downright idiotic... but this absolutely refuses to be anything other than simply a hose... is that the point? more duchamp than duchamp? urinal as urinal and not readymade? if so, why is the hose not in use as a hose? does anyone else "get it"? __________________
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

01.03.2010, 05:25 PM	#2
looking glass spectacle 100% Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 591	__________________
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

01.03.2010, 05:31 PM	#3
Savage Clone invito al cielo Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 11,290	I like how the title tells you what it is. Really gets to the heart of the concept. Yes, I think it is perfectly OK for both the uninformed rube and the sophisticated modern art appreciator to call shenanigans on this particular acquisition.
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

01.03.2010, 05:42 PM	#4
knox invito al cielo Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 5,255	if i say its art then it is. __________________
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

01.03.2010, 05:47 PM	#5
Hip Priest invito al cielo Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Birkenhead Posts: 9,397	I say it is art. Whether it is good art or not is another matter. Orozco has a tendency to do things like this. His 'Home Run' piece is a good example, where he placed oranges in the windows of a building across the road from the gallery. His work makes me smile. I quite like it, in a way. __________________ Abhor that which is evil; cleave to that which is good. http://www.flickr.com/photos/outsidethecamp/
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

01.03.2010, 05:53 PM	#6
truncated invito al cielo Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 3,607	Another one of those subjective concepts that can be endlessly deconstructed until everyone is nauseous and the concept no longer has meaning. And is also trumped by werewolf movies.
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

01.03.2010, 05:54 PM	#7
ploesj invito al cielo Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: antwerp. Posts: 2,901	i've been studying this question for days now and i have an exam about it in two day so i really REALLY don't feel the need to start discussing it here. __________________ blog flickr
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

01.03.2010, 05:56 PM	#8
EVOLghost invito al cielo Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: cybatraz! Posts: 11,537	so...this can be a great way to study for you exam...
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

01.03.2010, 06:03 PM	#10
phoenix invito al cielo Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: the future where it's hot and dark Posts: 5,926	the point of art is that it exists when you call it. whether you like it and whatever merit it carries is something else. often times with art pieces it can help to look at the context of the original creation and the rest of the artists body of work. As much as there are wonderful paintings which are aesthetically pleasing and very easy to understand, and stand well alone without any need for comparitive pieces or knowledge of art movements.. because their intention is to depict a scene in a certain way.. other pieces like sculpture or instalation art, even some paintings/ers are often more in depth and can require some background knowledge of the artists intentions, especially if they were created years before. I honestly don't consider this a problem when discovering a piece. There are lots of things in this world that contain more than just what is on the surface.. __________________ tiny and lost.
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

01.03.2010, 06:10 PM	#12
demonrail666 invito al cielo Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 18,510	I wrote a big long reply to this but deleted it because when I read it back all I could see were invisible words saying 'shut up you boring pretentious prick'. In essence though, I agree with Hip Priest on this one.
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

01.03.2010, 06:15 PM	#14
phoenix invito al cielo Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: the future where it's hot and dark Posts: 5,926	I personally don't know this artist, but even looking quickly; "Orozco's exploration of the use of video, drawings, and installations in addition to his photographs and sculptures, allows the audience's imagination to explore the creative associations between oft-ignored objects in today's world. His work permits a rarely allowed interaction between the artwork and the audience." Seemingly his intention is to break down physical/sociological barriers which can exist between artist work and audience, in a playful manner. I would say such a piece does that quite well. Ordinary objects can be often ignored and considered very humble, and placing items in such a way to give them high cultural significance has been popular since da da, perhaps earlier. He is asking you to look at the item in a different light. Putting something usually considered quite worthless into a place usually reserved for expensive, exclusive, elitist items. It is quite subtle though, because the item does not have a reserved plinth or space. It's playful.. humorous.. from what I can see. Art does not have to be world changing. Can be, sure, but does not have to in order to be considered art. __________________ tiny and lost.
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

01.03.2010, 06:18 PM	#15
Genteel Death invito al cielo Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 8,744	We've had a trillion threads where this subject has been touched. Is it art? Personally I don't think it is, then again if you show it in an art gallery apparently it is. I'm more curious about the motivations for defending such works, rather than worrying about my thoughts on them.
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

01.03.2010, 06:27 PM	#16
atsonicpark invito al cielo Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 28,843	You're either an artist, or you're a craftsman. Also... Everything is art. Also.. yellow hoses rule. __________________
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

01.03.2010, 06:30 PM	#17
phoenix invito al cielo Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: the future where it's hot and dark Posts: 5,926	I'm not sure you should be following the arts if you really consider this an overly difficult piece to comprehend... I say that in the nicest way possible.. __________________ tiny and lost.
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|

01.03.2010, 06:38 PM	#18
pbradley invito al cielo Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: SoKo Posts: 10,621	The 'is it art?' question is a hole that I've learned to step over.
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|