Old_Zircon
| |
| Previous Next 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 |
| Comments |
Goldsmiths: But Is It Art? (Episode 1 - Part 1)
06/13/13, 12:09
(even though it kind of fails because he denies everything and ignores her). |
 |
Goldsmiths: But Is It Art? (Episode 1 - Part 1)
06/13/13, 11:56
In episode 2 she finds out about a neon piece that Gander is working on and has a duplicate made and put in a gallery before he gets the original out, which is about the hardest troll there is. |
|
Goldsmiths: But Is It Art? (Episode 1 - Part 1)
06/13/13, 11:49
The older, armor designer's stuff was really bad but to me it seemed like that was because he was trying to follow instruction without trying to understand why, an he actually could have done something interesting if he'd either been more open to what he was being taught or reacted against it really strongly. He just didn't commit to anything. |
|
Goldsmiths: But Is It Art? (Episode 1 - Part 1)
06/13/13, 11:46
For me personally,of what they showed the Irish thief woman was the only one doing anything particularly interesting (and apparently the school agreed - she won some prizes and got excellent reviews). The guy with the blinking shells was the worst. The guy who sold a few paintings and got offered a teaching job in Moscow did completely forgettable stuff that would look at home in a coffee shop or the lobby of a hotel that wanted to look "contemporary." All of the pieces that sold were his least favorite and his teachers had to basically force him to even show them. The stuff he liked was even worse. |
|
Goldsmiths: But Is It Art? (Episode 1 - Part 1)
06/13/13, 10:16
SPOILER: the stuff that actually sells at the end is the really mediocre paintings. The best stuff and the worst stuff are ignored, but people love the really average stuff.
So no surprises. |
|
Goldsmiths: But Is It Art? (Episode 1 - Part 1)
06/13/13, 09:49
The blinking shells guy s the classic example of excessive focus on technique (although in this case the "technique" is concept not craft, but it's the same thing really) - he's thinking REALLY REALLY HARD about it - so hard he's literally sweating and on the verge of some kind of panic attack - and the harder he thinks the worse the project gets because the thinking IS THE PROBLEM. |
|
Goldsmiths: But Is It Art? (Episode 1 - Part 1)
06/13/13, 09:47
She sometimes reminds me of a good friend and roommate of mine back in college whose master's thesis was (in part) creating multiple personas fr herself and then advertising for a "boyfriend" as if it were a job - through the Internet, direct mailings, and canvassing in character as her own agent in the downtown business district for a few months. For the final piece she papered a room with printouts of literally thousands of (usually painfully awkward) mail and email responses she had gotten and had some video loops of some of the actual job interviews she had done in character with people (mostly men, no surprise there). It actually was great, but mostly because it was excellent, long-game trolling and she got a lot of fairly high powered business and finance types.
I think there's a very strong overlap between good conceptual art and good trolling. |
|
Goldsmiths: But Is It Art? (Episode 1 - Part 1)
06/13/13, 09:33
And peer criticism is really, really helpful in theory, but my experience with sitting in on (honors, graduate) peer critique sessions at Mass Art has been that not a single one of those motherfuckers has the first clue, and I would have gotten so constantly laid if I'd gone to art school because spouting off some variant of 9th grade literary criticism 101 was enough to have students AND faculty coming up and asking me questions afterward. And I'm not saying that as any kind of bragging or self aggrandizement, because it really was some meaningless bullshit I was saying the couple times that happened.
Troll deep. |
|
Goldsmiths: But Is It Art? (Episode 1 - Part 1)
06/13/13, 09:29
Art school could be a really good networking opportunity though. |
|
Goldsmiths: But Is It Art? (Episode 1 - Part 1)
06/13/13, 09:28
I always feel bad for the teachers who clearly really understand art (which is definitely not all of the teachers, but a lot of them) but have to suck it up and find a way to flatter students who are clearly never going to have the first clue but have the money. You must have to either have a really good sense of humor or be some kind of saint to stay sane as a professor at an art school. |
|
Douche Chill
06/13/13, 09:23
It took me quite a few episodes to get over the Desperate Housewives quick-cut editing stylebut once I did it was so worth it. |
|
represtentations of gender in advertising
06/13/13, 09:19
These days homosexuality and sex in general are a bit less taboo so there's more racism and sexualized violence in ads because that still tends to make people uncomfortable. |
|
represtentations of gender in advertising
06/13/13, 09:16
Advertising isn't about making you have conscious, positive associations about the product or brand, it's about making you remember it and the best way to o that is to evoke a strong emotional reaction while the product or brand logo is on screen. And the best way to provoke a strong emotional reaction is to break taboos, which is why they used to hide vulvas in advertisements for women's products and penises in advertisements for men's, especially back in the 50s and 60s (although I've seen it done really overtly as recently as a decade ago, I don't really pay much attention anymore) - homosexuality was more taboo back then, so putting images of the genitals o the gender you were marketing to would make them uncomfortable, ad that would theoretically make them more likely to notice your brand or product on the shelf later on.
There's a photo of one of the classic, famous examples in this article but there are a ton of them, and it's not much of a challenge to spot them even today:
http://www.americanscientist.org/bookshelf/pub/really-useful-sex-in-advertising-and-more---
As a general rule of thumb, if something in a print ad has been photoshopped to be a bit too large or a bit too small then it is supposed to catch your eye, and that means there's a pretty good chance it also loos like a penis. |
|
Goldsmiths: But Is It Art? (Episode 1 - Part 1)
06/13/13, 09:03
The best art is art that communicates meaning without deliberation. Not necessarily without intent, but without deliberation. |
|
Goldsmiths: But Is It Art? (Episode 1 - Part 1)
06/13/13, 09:01
I was definitely trained (and I think having some lessons can be helpful if you have the right teacher and approach it as "learn by ear and then apply theory to understand what you earned rather than starting from theory) butI always made a point to kind of segregate my formal training from what I did ersonally. I can write scores and I can sight read for a few instruments (although that's receding) but I can't sight read for any ofthe instruments I'm actually serious about or good at. Incollege I had private composition lessons for years (and did quite well at it according to them) but I rarely if ever compose on an instrument, and when I do it's never a primary one. As a guitarist, if I feel myself getting to technical I switch to a tuning I've never used before and just stick to that for a few years until I start getting too good at it. The interesting thing is, I've found if I do that when I go back to a tuning I AM familiar with my approach to playing has changed so much that it's almost like I have to relearn the old tuning and it keeps things from getting stale.
As far as the whole "but what does it MEEEAAAN?" obsession in the modern art world, I've got to give credit to one of my high school writing teachers who was a stanch postmodernist for really driving home the idea that the artist's intentions are completely secondary and they should basically shut up and let other people find meaning in it. I don't totally buy it, but I think it's a much better approach than planning the meaning of a piece in detail, since that usually makes the actual piece itself become kind of an afterthought and that's not a way to make art that has any real depth to it.
MY takeaway from spending a ot of time with art students back in college and sitting in on some high level classes at art schools an taking my share of art courses and occasionally working at a gallery when they need someone to fill in, is that the "art world" is largely about learning how to convince people who don't really know much about art (because a really high percentage of the people who buy art don't have a clue - a lot of them hire companies to choose it for them, since they're really just looking for a decoration that won't lose value so they can sell it in a few years when they decide to change the color scheme of their summer home - there are exceptions but in general there is absolutely no correlation between understanding art and having the money to buy it), and that the emphasis on the "meaning" or intent of pieces is tied up with the fact that the piece really is secondary, and what an artist who wants to actually be commercially successful needs to do is create and sell a myth. It's show business, and that wouldn't even necessarily be bad if they would just admit it,at least to themselves. Which is why I'm completely OK with the woman in this who just steals stuff. |
|
He-Man Vintage Stinkor
06/13/13, 08:35
It's weird because I know what patchouli smells like and I distinctly remember what Stinkor smelled like (I never had him but a friend did)and they're pretty different smells. I never would have guessed. |
|
Goldsmiths: But Is It Art? (Episode 1 - Part 1)
06/12/13, 19:19
Anyhow, most of the teachers seem pretty good. I think someone who had something to say could get a lot out of this place, but most people won't. So like art school (and a whole lot of other types of higher education) in general. |
|
Goldsmiths: But Is It Art? (Episode 1 - Part 1)
06/12/13, 19:14
Also, painters who put text in their paintings are so highly suspect it's not even funny. I mean, painters in general are kind o suspect but if you put text in there you'd better be able to deliver. |
|
Goldsmiths: But Is It Art? (Episode 1 - Part 1)
06/12/13, 18:44
"Art for me is very much about what I can get away with."
I am completely OK with that sentiment. |
|
Goldsmiths: But Is It Art? (Episode 1 - Part 1)
06/12/13, 18:40
Unless you're legitimately mentally ill or autistic and get discovered as some kind of outsider artist, you're pretty much obligated to spend a good amount of time honing your craft before you can credibly abandon technique, although I do think that's a good end goal - overly technical art or music or whatever is almost aways utterly vacuous in my opinion; c.f. shred guitar. I count excessive focus on concept as overly technical, too.
Growing as an artist is a process of absorbing more than you need and then abandoning what you don't need. You can't abandon what you never had to begin with. |
|
