Art???

[Jonzjob]

At the moment this woman 'artist( :? ??)' is trapped on a ship in the Pacific somewhere because the ship owners have filed for bankrupsy. She is currently an MA student at the Royal College of Art in London, specialising in 'absurdist film-making'.

If you have no idea just what that is then have a gander at her web page. http://www.rebeccamoss.org/works.html

Absurdist? Or should it be called idiotic? For me it belies belief that any education establishment could possibly 'train' people in this way? But I suppose it goes along the same lines as a degree in Coronation Street?

This is her situation at the moment and I find it incredible that passengers could be trapped in this way, but I think I would make an exception for her?

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-37346601

 

[Fitzroy]

Now this is an interesting one! Visited the site prepared for derision, but instead i found myself enjoying the videos, completely absurd but then again we had years of Monty Python which i thoroughly enjoyed.

 

[Sheffield Tony]

I don't know what her art is like, but TalkTalk think she is a pornographer ! ?

 

[bugbear]

Art you say?

Try this:

http://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/par ... ver-t07429

BugBear

 

[Phil Pascoe]

In about 1994 Cornwall Association of Woodturners wrote to the Tate in St. Ives asking if we could put on a weekend exhibition in the winter when everything was quiet. We had a very nice, polite letter back thanking us for our offer, but turning it down as there was no way that woodturning could possibly be considered artistic.

 

[Duncan A]

Described as a conceptual artist, this guy is a very entertaining off-the-wall artist: CHRIS DOBROWOLSKI http://cdobo.com/
He studied at Hull University (don't confuse him with the American artist of the same name) and likes to make wacky "escape" contrivances including making and "flying" a home-made original Bumble Bee plane - very scary. He is very practical and can knock up most things out of wood with limited resources.

His presentations are very entertaining and certainly raise the question: Art or entertainment?

Duncan

 

[MatthewRedStars]

In about 1994 Cornwall Association of Woodturners wrote to the Tate in St. Ives asking if we could put on a weekend exhibition in the winter when everything was quiet. We had a very nice, polite letter back thanking us for our offer, but turning it down as there was no way that woodturning could possibly be considered artistic.

This is one of my favourite things to argue about

Woodwork and furniture isn't art. It can be artistic but it isn't art unless it was created with artistic intent. And I don't mean design which utilises the tools of The Arts. Function drowns out any other motivation.

A pile of bricks in a builders yard, is not the same as the identical pile of bricks in the Tate. Context and intent! The intentional act of placing them in a gallery transforms them into art. This is undeniably true - no one gets furiously annoyed about bricks in a builders yard, they do about bricks in a gallery.

Art can be made from wood. I've made a few wooden sculptures. But these have no function. And they were created to (try and) transcend their objecthood. They are more than the thing they physically are. Whether good or bad. They move past function, they demand (i hope) contemplation.

This will sound incredibly patronising (sorry) but the average person doesn't 'get' art, anymore than they 'get' theoretical physics (of course, some do). They look for design and craft and skill and The Arts, but for the past 100 years those things have been of ever decreasing importance (and in some ways are the polar opposite of art) in art. The RCA is one of the best art schools on the planet. They know what they are talking about. And if people find it stupid it says more about the viewer than the creator. Duchamp destroyed the role of making in art, a century ago. The public still hasn't caught up.

Obviously everyone has the right to an opinion, but if my teeth hurt I'll go to the dentist, and if my house is on fire I'll call the fire brigade. Not all opinions are created equal.

(edited for spelling and clarity)

Ps. I'm not picking on woodwork - I love it. I also don't consider a lot of painting and drawing 'art'. I spread my annoyingness widely.

 

[Jonzjob]

After reading that my brain cell 'urts!

It all sounds like the kings new clothes to me and for me the Tate Modern is just another set of them in the main. One bit of so called art that I saw was an old hospital bed with a few yards of thick rope wrapped around it. If that is art in any shape or form then I can fly if I flap my arms twice, slowly.

As you say, we all have our own ideas and they are mine.

 

[MatthewRedStars]

Of course, but at some point one must defer to experts in the field?

You seem to define 'art' as craft and beauty and skill, but that hasn't been the definition for more than a hundred years. Art stopped being The Arts in the 18th century. Art stopped being making at all with Duchamp. Artists were freed from having to 'do' anything.

So now we are discussing whether words mean what people want them to mean.

Does your desire for the word 'art' to mean what you think it means, over-ride 100 years of the word 'art' not meaning that?

(which is a lovely way to get into post-structuralism - the defining cultural theory of the last few decades)

Anyway, one thing I will guarantee is that the woman on the ship, and the person with the rope-bath will be able to defend their work for hours, and cover topics such as art history, sociology, cultural studies, performance history, all with reference to their own practice. These are smart people.

I have a Biochemistry BSc. And studying low level Fine Art was immeasurably harder than that. Even when i find some art really dumb, I still try to respect the effort. Because sticking an orange in a bucket isn't as easy as people think.

 

[Sheffield Tony]

Of course, but at some point one must defer to experts in the field?
[snip]
So now we are discussing whether words mean what people want them to mean.

We could discuss what defines "expert". I came across a woman once who was described in the press as "an expert on crystals". And by that they did not mean she was an expert on x-ray crystalography ! "expert" can have a similar entry level to "celebrity".

I like the idea of it being the artistic intent that defines things as art though. Wish it were the same with craft, I think of all those times I intended to make a fine piece of furniture :lol:

 

[bugbear]

Art stopped being making at all with Duchamp. Artists were freed from having to 'do' anything.

On your by-definition-elitist reasoning, they're also freed from having to (or being able to) communicate with the general population.

Which very much begs the question of what Art is for, and wether the excluded population should pay for it or subsidise it.

If Art is only for Artists talking to each other in an ever decreasing spiral, it will eventually disappear down its own fundament.

Perhaps we should move on from "What is Art" to "What is Art For". If the answer is purely "impressing Artists", it seems rather pointless.

BugBear

 

[Claymore]

What sort of glue is being sniffed on here? I have been a professional artist/designer for 30+ years and if i only needed to stick a orange in a bucket I have wasted my time and energy

 

[Jacob]

"Art" does seem to worry a lot of woodworkers - it's driving them mad on Brian's FB page too! https://www.facebook.com/groups/Woodwor ... 207015552/

I guess it's because there is a lot of cross-over with indistinct boundaries between art, design. crafts and the creative world as a whole.

A lot of people are just as likely to be sceptical about the chunterings about woodwork, craft, design that you get on here.

But the oddest thing is that nearly all of us are massive consumers of the products coming from the art/creative world, starting with TV and film and it'd be a very dull world if these various eccentrics and lunatics weren't working away behind the scenes to keep us amused.

Basically some people need to get out more - perhaps starting with their local art galleries.

Just been to the Hepworth in Wakefield - Stanley Spencer exhibition - very impressive, and the building too. You don't have to "know" anything about art and architecture to be able to appreciate them both - but you would need an open mind!

 

[bugbear]

Just been to the Hepworth in Wakefield - Stanley Spencer exhibition - very impressive, and the building too. You don't have to "know" anything about art and architecture to be able to appreciate them both - but you would need an open mind!

Of course, you could have an open mind, go and see it, and decide, for yourself, that it's horrible.

Or is "impressive" the only permissable opinion?

And who gets to choose?

BugBear

 

[Jacob]

Your choice.
But if you didn't get it first time you could try again!
I imagine everybody on here has had the experience of suddenly "getting" something which previously was hidden - a style of music, food, etc.

 

[Jacob]

In about 1994 Cornwall Association of Woodturners wrote to the Tate in St. Ives asking if we could put on a weekend exhibition in the winter when everything was quiet. We had a very nice, polite letter back thanking us for our offer, but turning it down as there was no way that woodturning could possibly be considered artistic.

I've heard this story before. In fact there are dozens of places in St Ives where woodturners can and do display, along with amateur and semi-pro craftsman/artists of all sorts.
Perhaps the Tate missed a trick though - it'd be interesting to compare and contrast the amateur arts and crafts with the so-called professionals. It could help to answer questions raised in threads like this one.
The Tate wouldn't even be in St Ives had it not been for the work of an extremely amateur self taught painter - retired fisherman Alfred Wallis, who inspired the "St Ives School"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Wallis

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Self taught? Didn't seem to teach himself very well, did he?
If a child painted that it would be valueless. I live about 15 miles from St. Ives, and I can honestly say that I don't think I've ever heard anyone say they've been to the Tate.

 

[Jacob]

Self taught? Didn't seem to teach himself very well, did he?
If a child painted that it would be valueless. I live about 15 miles from St. Ives, and I can honestly say that I don't think I've ever heard anyone say they've been to the Tate.

Time you took a trip then, and met some more interesting people! There's more to Cornwall than pasties and cider.

PS It's shut til Spring but there's other stuff.

http://www.tate.org.uk/visit/tate-st-ives


It's boring and pointless jeering from the sidelines - get in there you never know what you might discover!

 

[Phil Pascoe]

From what I have seen of the stuff that's there, I wouldn't go next door to see it. Cornish people don't tend to go to St. Ives unless they have to, anyway. - it's overpriced and full of emmets.

 

[Woody2Shoes]

In about 1994 Cornwall Association of Woodturners wrote to the Tate in St. Ives asking if we could put on a weekend exhibition in the winter when everything was quiet. We had a very nice, polite letter back thanking us for our offer, but turning it down as there was no way that woodturning could possibly be considered artistic.

This is one of my favourite things to argue about

Woodwork and furniture isn't art. It can be artistic but it isn't art unless it was created with artistic intent. And I don't mean design which utilises the tools of The Arts. Function drowns out any other motivation.

A pile of bricks in a builders yard, is not the same as the identical pile of bricks in the Tate. Context and intent! The intentional act of placing them in a gallery transforms them into art. This is undeniably true - no one gets furiously annoyed about bricks in a builders yard, they do about bricks in a gallery.

Art can be made from wood. I've made a few wooden sculptures. But these have no function. And they were created to (try and) transcend their objecthood. They are more than the thing they physically are. Whether good or bad. They move past function, they demand (i hope) contemplation.

This will sound incredibly patronising (sorry) but the average person doesn't 'get' art, anymore than they 'get' theoretical physics (of course, some do). They look for design and craft and skill and The Arts, but for the past 100 years those things have been of ever decreasing importance (and in some ways are the polar opposite of art) in art. The RCA is one of the best art schools on the planet. They know what they are talking about. And if people find it stupid it says more about the viewer than the creator. Duchamp destroyed the role of making in art, a century ago. The public still hasn't caught up.

Obviously everyone has the right to an opinion, but if my teeth hurt I'll go to the dentist, and if my house is on fire I'll call the fire brigade. Not all opinions are created equal.

(edited for spelling and clarity)

Ps. I'm not picking on woodwork - I love it. I also don't consider a lot of painting and drawing 'art'. I spread my annoyingness widely.

I like making things out of wood. The things I make are intended to have one or more functions, and are also intended to look reasonably attractive (at least to my eye). I wouldn't call them art. I wouldn't call a lot of Damien Hirst or Henry Moore's stuff art, for example, but I am impressed by the practical craft skills required to make them.

From what I think you're saying, "Art" as currently understood by all those clever enough (and sufficiently motivated to learn) to understand it, does not have any intrinsic utility. Is that true?

Is the following true? "All 'Art' is useless. All useless things are not 'Art', unless they are in a particular context, and there is evidence of intent on the part of the creator, and one or more people who "get it" say so."

I'm fascinated by what makes two people look at the same object and take different views on it - "culture"?.

Cheers, W2S

PS The older I get, the more I realise that most people don't "get" most things - half the population has an IQ of less than 100, and most people are usually pre-occupied with more quotidian concerns