Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Demo_Chris

(6,234 posts)
25. At the risk of goving offense....
Sat May 3, 2014, 08:46 AM
May 2014

I think most people are baffled by the bullshit. They want art to inspire them to pause and think about the world in a different way, and they have convinced themselves that this is a difficult challenge that transcends technical merit. It's not. I would day instead that real art, REAL art, must be viewed as if it were divorced from the framing and the hype. If it cannot be appreciated on that level then it is not art, but advertising.

If a chef like Gordon Ramsay begins with the best ingredients and prepares them flawlessly, he could serve that meal on china or a paper wrapper and it would still taste fantastic. It does not need the framing of the fine china, the ornate environment, or the five star revues, the difference is hopefully self evident. A Big Mac on fine china is still just a Big Mac.

Most art today does not meet this threshold. It relies completely on this framing to succeed. If you saw 'Pastel Poo #4' on someone's home carpet it would only open your mind in terms of forcing you to appreciate just what a gullible moron this person was. If you saw it in an alley you would kick it aside, but place it in an empty white room with a spotlight and a flier talking about stairways to the subconscious mind and suddenly its art. It's only art because someone who wants your money told you it was art. It's a Big Mac on china.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Pretty much the same thing frazzled May 2014 #1
Why? Have you seen Art? jberryhill May 2014 #2
Surprised. Educated. Challenged. Relaxed. Amazed. Liberal In Texas May 2014 #3
If it is actually art. Not just some stunt. Archae May 2014 #4
Christo and Jeanne-Claude works were not stunts. Neither was Serrano's work limited to urine nor Hissyspit May 2014 #9
Out of curiosity, are these works art? xocet May 2014 #13
I remember the orange curtains well... Rhiannon12866 May 2014 #56
more Garfunkel bigtree May 2014 #5
You are probably the only one... awoke_in_2003 May 2014 #45
nah bigtree May 2014 #46
Yeah, I am unnecessarily harsh on him... awoke_in_2003 May 2014 #47
This message was self-deleted by its author Warren DeMontague May 2014 #6
Somewhere to go. nt rrneck May 2014 #7
Interesting thought and discussion Cali and nice to read from you again. nt adirondacker May 2014 #8
thank you so much, andirondacker cali May 2014 #24
Transcendence greyl May 2014 #10
Art is communication... uriel1972 May 2014 #11
"And then, make me see something..... differently." Spitfire of ATJ May 2014 #12
Those are awesome... giftedgirl77 May 2014 #30
Is this the Art who let a fart U4ikLefty May 2014 #14
If that's what you want, why not? cali May 2014 #15
to not feel alone A-Schwarzenegger May 2014 #16
That's an interesting perspective cali May 2014 #17
This message was self-deleted by its author A-Schwarzenegger May 2014 #18
Thanks for your thoughtful post. canoeist52 May 2014 #19
I would love- if you feel so inclined- to view some of your work cali May 2014 #22
Inspiration. randome May 2014 #20
great answer! and thanks, randome. cali May 2014 #23
Kick! Heidi May 2014 #21
At the risk of goving offense.... Demo_Chris May 2014 #25
No offense taken but I'm interested in what YOU want from art- not what you think cali May 2014 #28
I have opened my mind. I've had this debate a hundred times, including with art professors... Demo_Chris May 2014 #33
Ack. don't get defensive. I wasn't insulting you. cali May 2014 #35
Sorry, I wasn't trying to sound defensive at all..' Demo_Chris May 2014 #50
I remeber in Ingmar Bergman's 1984 film "Fanny and Alexander" the old theater director giving a Douglas Carpenter May 2014 #26
Pretty close to the same. Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2014 #27
I've never been able to get anything from Glass but I think it's interesting cali May 2014 #31
Well, it's like anything else - the more practice you get Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2014 #34
The appreciator is never an outsider, you are the audience, the other part, the thing that is needed Bluenorthwest May 2014 #29
I like that thought. cali May 2014 #32
You don't believe everything is art? Shankapotomus May 2014 #36
I want exactly what I said. a painting, for example is an inanimate object cali May 2014 #39
I don't see it as either sad or impoverished Shankapotomus May 2014 #40
I'm a Buddhist- not a Zen Buddhist but in the Kagyu School of Tibetan Buddhism cali May 2014 #43
Simple, a "reaction" Broken_Hero May 2014 #37
I want Art to distinguish itself from Artwork superpatriotman May 2014 #38
Emotion LittleBlue May 2014 #41
It's interesting to me that serrano has been brought up twice in this short thread cali May 2014 #42
Jimmy Swaggert got people discussing televangelism LittleBlue May 2014 #44
discredited modern art? I don't think he did that except among people cali May 2014 #55
I don't commission any art, so I don't really insist on anything. JVS May 2014 #48
I don't know art, but I lnow what I like. AScott May 2014 #49
Lots of things Recursion May 2014 #51
I like the anthropological definition applegrove May 2014 #52
I think art is very personal for the artist. ohheckyeah May 2014 #53
that's a great story. "the poor little fruit tree" cali May 2014 #54
I think its a Japanese cherry tree ohheckyeah May 2014 #58
a Maverick, a Mustang, a Montego, a Merc Montclair reddread May 2014 #57
ha. just for you: cali May 2014 #60
A bridge over troubled water. madinmaryland May 2014 #59
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»What do you want from Art...»Reply #25