Funcionário deita "obra de arte" para o lixo

  • 10 Respostas
  • 3292 Visualizações
*

JNSA

  • Analista
  • ***
  • 833
  • +1/-1
Funcionário deita "obra de arte" para o lixo
« em: Agosto 29, 2004, 11:27:37 pm »
Citar
Cleaner Thinks Modern Art Is Garbage

Fri Aug 27,10:07 AM ET  Add Oddly Enough - Reuters to My Yahoo!
 


LONDON (Reuters) - A cleaner at London's Tate Britain modern art gallery threw out a bag of garbage which formed part of an artwork because it was thought to be trash, British newspapers reported Friday.

   

The transparent bag of garbage -- full of newspaper, cardboard and other bits of paper -- formed part of a work by German-born artist Gustav Metzger called "Recreation Of First Public Demonstration Of Auto-Destructive Art."


It was on display next to a sheet of nylon that had been spattered with acid, and a metal sculpture on a table when a cleaner tossed it out with the other trash.


A Tate spokesman said the mistake was made the day before the exhibition opened at the end of June, and although the bag was later rescued, it had been damaged and Metzger had to replace it with another one.


The newspapers said the spokesman would not reveal how much the bag had cost to replace.


"It's now covered over at night so it can't be removed," the spokesman told the Times.



fonte:http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=573&ncid=757&e=4&u=/nm/20040827/od_nm/odd_garbage_dc

 :lol:

Devo dizer que, correndo o risco de parecer inculto, compreendo muito bem este pobre homem. Estas férias visitei o Gugenheim em Bilbao, e a Tate Modern, em Londres, e muitas das supostas "obras de arte" eram, pura e simplesmente, lixo...

Entre outras, tive oportunidade de ver muitas obras do Sr. Mark Rothko, tais como estas:




(Isto não é um quadrado preto... É mesmo um quadro... :? )

(E não, isto não está repetido... É mesmo outro quadro...  :twisted:

Outra "obra" maravilhosa era o "Eight Grey", do Gerhard Richter... E perguntam vocês o que é o "Eight Grey"... Pois bem, o "Eight Grey" são oito painéis de vidro cinzento... :oops:

Felizmente, em Bilbao, pude ver algumas coisas bem melhores, como James Rosenquist, o que tornou a exposição bem mais suportável...


 

*

komet

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 1663
  • Recebeu: 1 vez(es)
  • +0/-1
(sem assunto)
« Responder #1 em: Agosto 29, 2004, 11:58:21 pm »
Ahh você desilude-me JNSA, n vê a diferença das tonalidades, entre aqueles dois quadros supostamente "negros" ? Nao têm nada a ver, a diferença da textura, a emoção inerente a cada um deles, como me sinto sozinho neste mundo de artistas incompreendidos...  :roll:
"History is always written by who wins the war..."
 

*

JNSA

  • Analista
  • ***
  • 833
  • +1/-1
(sem assunto)
« Responder #2 em: Agosto 30, 2004, 12:10:56 am »
Citação de: "komet"
Ahh voçê desilude-me JNSA, n vê a diferença das tonalidades, entre aqueles dois quadros supostamente "negros" ? Nao teem nada a ver, a diferença da textura, a emoção inerente a cada um deles, como me sinto sozinho neste mundo de artistas incompreendidos...  :Bajular: Eu é que sou uma pobre alma, cega à infinita sublimidade destas criações... :sil:

Eis a explicação do segundo quadro preto, para nós compreendermos melhor a alma do artista:

Citar
Mark Rothko, Untitled,1968, Private Collection



Rothko's reading of Nietzsche, the nineteenth-century German philosopher, suggests that his compositions could represent the binary opposition between a rational or abstract element versus an emotional, primal, or tragic one (referring to Nietzsche's discussion of the polarity between an Apollonian and a Dionysian principle in artistic expression). Certain qualities such as radiance or the duality of light and dark have a long history of symbolic meaning in Western culture from which Rothko clearly drew. An impression of vast space can be said to represent the historical concept of the "sublime," a quasi-religious experience of limitless immensity in nature. Conversely, these canvases also produce an environment of their own, and installations of Rothko's work create the sensation of a sacrosanct place.



http://www.nga.gov/feature/rothko/late4a.html

Como é que eu não vi a luz??!!!  :bang:
 

*

komet

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 1663
  • Recebeu: 1 vez(es)
  • +0/-1
(sem assunto)
« Responder #3 em: Agosto 30, 2004, 12:14:02 am »
Deve ser aquele tipo de conversa  " só os parvos e estupidos é q nao veem"  :lol:
"History is always written by who wins the war..."
 

*

Luso

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 7603
  • Recebeu: 545 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 186 vez(es)
  • +224/-260
(sem assunto)
« Responder #4 em: Agosto 30, 2004, 11:56:07 am »
São várias as histórias que se contam sobre esta pretensa arte. Aliás, isto é mesmo arte ("objectos válidos por eles próprios", que "transcendem o utilitarismo" e que "devem provocar uma reacção ao contemplador", segundo os teóricos da estética.

Ora, o que acontece é que os artistas actuais devem materializar as teorias de alguns crâneos (??) e por isso serão mais ou menos apreciados, melhor ainda se as suas ideias políticas estiverem de acordo com o pensamento dominante do "submundo" da arte, sobretudo moderna.

Ou seja:

Os críticos de arte;
Os estetas e teóricos;
Os neófitos deslumbrados com as teorias e que julgam que agoram vêem a luz - os estudantes;
Os pedantes;
Os inadaptados que neste mundo encontram outros incompreendidos;
Os loucos;
Os aldrabões - que querem explorar os lorpas;
Os alienados, que procuram o escapismo;
Os homosexuais;
Os novos-ricos;
As mulheres intelectuais (uma contradição de termos);
As mulheres normais que quase sempre confundem o absurdo com profundidade;
Os histéricos na sua constante preocupação pela originalidade como se a originalidade fosse uma qualidade que tudo valida;
Os esquerdelhos que se aproveitam das mentes que fogem do real mas que são determinadas e empenhadas na sua loucura (dá jeito ter um fanático).

Ou seja - na minha visão redutora, mas minha - a arte "moderna" vive sobretudo da própria caca que produz e isto literalmente: aliás vejam-se (ou não) as obras de artistas que receberam o prémio Tate que incluem obras com bosta, urina (Piss Christ), uma cabeça de vaca em putrefacção e moscas, uma cama suja com um preservativo usado e coisas que tal.

Digo-vos isso deste modo porque também conheço o meio e tenho formação artística. Óbviamente que não o discuto com os meus colegas porque o mais certo é receber como resposta um chorrilho de lugares comuns como "incompreensão", "intolerância" e as teorias todas, como se a arte tivesse que seguir algum livrinho vermelho.

Para mim a arte é prazer. O resto é conversa. Quem tiver prazer em ver uma cabeça de vaca em putrefacção não quero que de mim se apróxime!

Quanto aos preços: comprar as cacas que por aí se vêem pelos preços que são pedidos é uma fraude. Como comparar um capricho de alguém
a uma boa aparelhagem de som ou um simples frigorífico?
Tudo isto é estúpido, mas a arte hodierna é como todas as artes anteriores: representa bem a época respectiva.

Agora alguém que tenha coragem para dizer coisas destas à Bárbara Guimarães!
Ai de ti Lusitânia, que dominarás em todas as nações...
 

*

Luso

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 7603
  • Recebeu: 545 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 186 vez(es)
  • +224/-260
(sem assunto)
« Responder #5 em: Agosto 30, 2004, 12:06:37 pm »
"Deve ser aquele tipo de conversa " só os parvos e estupidos é q nao veem"

Exacto! Essa é a ideia que gostaria de sublinhar. É o revanchismo típico do inferior e do alienado que se quer sentir superior aos outros e para isso inventa um mundo em que o sistema de valores nega a realidade: - Eu sofro aqui estas indignidades mas hei-de ter o paraíso quando morrer. O rico é que não. É um pecador e vai para o inferno".
Que aliás também podemos encontrar na origem do cristianismo e na essência do comunismo (duas balelas que têm muito em comum, sobretudo no elogio e na elevação do escravo, do povo, do pobre, do inadaptado etc).

"Ah! Eu sou pobre mas sou mais feliz que o rico!" e coisas do género.

Não vão em cantigas. Geralmente as coisas são muito mais simples do que nos querem fazer crer.
Ai de ti Lusitânia, que dominarás em todas as nações...
 

*

fgomes

  • Perito
  • **
  • 475
  • +0/-0
(sem assunto)
« Responder #6 em: Agosto 30, 2004, 06:19:29 pm »
Isto é um exemplo da decadência a que chegou a civilização ocidental ! E o pior é que estes "artistas" por cá "comem" à mesa do orçamento. Se não fossem os subsídios do estado o que seria destes parasitas ?

Discordo do Luso, o Cristianismo e até o Comunismo inspiraram arte mais interessante do que esta.
 

*

Luso

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 7603
  • Recebeu: 545 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 186 vez(es)
  • +224/-260
(sem assunto)
« Responder #7 em: Agosto 30, 2004, 07:08:59 pm »
fgomes, não concorda comigo mas eu concordo consigo! :mrgreen:
Ai de ti Lusitânia, que dominarás em todas as nações...
 

*

Ricardo Nunes

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 1257
  • Recebeu: 4 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 5 vez(es)
  • +2/-0
    • http://www.falcoes.net/9gs
(sem assunto)
« Responder #8 em: Agosto 30, 2004, 07:13:21 pm »
Existe alguma forma de condecorar este empregado?  :mrgreen:
Ricardo Nunes
www.forum9gs.net
 

*

Luso

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 7603
  • Recebeu: 545 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 186 vez(es)
  • +224/-260
(sem assunto)
« Responder #9 em: Agosto 30, 2004, 07:23:06 pm »
"If that's art, I'm Picasso

BY PETER BRONSON
The Cincinnati Enquirer
        Here's a quiz you should NOT take with your scrambled eggs and jelly donut. It's a game I call “Find the Con Artist.”

        Can you tell which of the following are actual, gen-yoo-wine works of art?

        • Dead fish: “A shark in an enormous tank of formaldehyde, a symbol of the coming art invasion.”

        • D-composition: “Maggots, flies and a cow's head put a life-and-death spin on minimalism.”

        • Landfill: “A colorful collage of coffee-grounds, broccoli and spaghetti makes a statement about our materialist dialectic.”

        If you answered, “All of the above,” you qualify to be an art critic for the New York Times and write pretentious descriptions like the ones above.

        If you said, “That's not art,” you qualify to be mayor of New York and be labeled an “ignorant philistine” by art critics who get hives from looking at a picture of Jesse Helms, but think grotesque photos by Robert Mapplethorpe are “erotic.”

        If you think it's all a bad joke, you're right. But the first two jokes are in art museums. The third is inside a Hefty bag at the bottom of a trash can in my garage. I keep it there because it reeks — just like some of the garbage that gullible critics defend as “art.”

        In the New York Times Magazine (Sept. 26), art critic Deborah Solomon reviewed a collection of contemporary art owned by Charles Saatchi, called “Sensation.” She wrote that “it is easy to admire his adventurous eye, even when you're thinking, This piece makes we want to throw up.”

        She was probably thinking about something called “A Thousand Years,” which she describes as “a seven-foot-tall glass box stocked with the decomposing head of a cow and a large supply of maggots and buzzing flies.”

        Or maybe she was thinking about the flattering photos of a notorious child-murderer. Or the sculpture in human blood. Or the sliced pig in a jar. Or the Virgin Mary splattered with elephant dung.

        There's so much to make a critic gag. But that would be unsophisticated. It might reveal that critics don't know art from a toaster in the bath tub. Truth and beauty are out of style. It's not real art unless it delivers another shock treatment to our catatonic culture.

        So the critics nod and smile as if they know the right price of the Brooklyn Bridge — or the artistic value of a cow's head in the Brooklyn Museum of Art.

        “In Brooklyn, the show will no doubt be less controversial” than it was in England, Ms. Solomon predicted. Wrong again. New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani threatened to fire the entire Brooklyn Museum of Art Board, and yank city funding. “Anything I can do isn't art,” he said. “You know, if you want to throw dung at something, I could figure out how to do it.”

        Exactly. But the ACLU is trying to make a First Amendment issue out of it. The arts crowd calls it “censorship.”

        It's the same old, lame old argument that intentionally misses the point: There is no First Amendment “right” to public funding for art of any kind, much less the stuff that grosses out the people who pay for it. Artists can perpetrate any hoax they please — on their own dime.

        But the “Sensation” has already served its purpose. It made headlines for the museum, the artists and the collector, who crave attention almost as much as they crave heads of dead presidents on green paper. The museum has been accused by the mayor of conspiring with Mr. Saatchi in a scam to inflate prices for an auction after the show.

        It figures. Mr. Saatchi is an advertising executive. It doesn't matter if it's art. As long as it makes news and stirs up trouble, somebody will bid high for a chance to own a famous decaying cow's head, or to posture as a heroic defender of government-subsidized “free expression.”

        If all this sounds vaguely familiar, we've been here before. But this time there's a twist. Nobody is calling the whole city of New York backward and prudish, the way art critics labeled Cincinnati during the Mapplethorpe battle. Maybe that's because most of the art critics live in New York.

        But some things never change.

        Some con artist on a government grant sweeps out a zoo cage, spatters it on a Madonna — and the critics “Ohhhh” and “Ahhh” as they find deep meanings in what the rest of us call “crap.”

        I'm no artist. I thought Yoko Ono's “painting” in Cincinnati was better after it was vandalized. But I'm working on my own gen-yoo-wine work of art: A colorful collage of lollipops in a frame, named for all the scrambled eggheads who mistake jelly donuts for art. I call it, “Suckers.”

        Peter Bronson is editorial page editor of The Enquirer. If you have questions or comments, call 768-8301, or write to 312 Elm Street, Cincinnati, Ohio 45202. "


- E mai nada!
Ai de ti Lusitânia, que dominarás em todas as nações...
 

*

Luso

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 7603
  • Recebeu: 545 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 186 vez(es)
  • +224/-260
(sem assunto)
« Responder #10 em: Agosto 30, 2004, 07:36:00 pm »
"The rotting cash cow" by Helena Kotkowska, London



Dealers have reduced art to pure sensationalism in a milieu as elitist as ever


A ceiling made of coloured perspex tiles, extracts in red from a pornographic text copied laboriously onto a white wall – these were two of the exhibits put forward for the Turner Prize show in 2002. The exhibits were reminiscent of those featured in 2001, when the winner was an installation of a room with the light going on and off and the door opening and closing.


Ever since the Sensation Exhibition in 1997, the prized works of the art world have shown an uncanny aptitude for the repetitive, the monotonous and the pseudo-technical. Video installations, photography and films showing the same actions in endless repetition have become standard dull fare, dazzling in their lack of any meaningful content, and chosen, it seems, according to the greatest ability to induce the most soporific effect in the viewer.


Craving for publicity

The ‘Sensation’ exhibition at least stood out in one respect, in that its outstanding use of hype and publicity has surely never been matched before or since and probably owed much to the orchestration of Charles Saatchi, owner of most of the exhibits, advertising tycoon and previously PR man to Margaret Thatcher. Much to the organisers’ delight, no doubt, the ‘shocking’ quality of many of the works – Damien Hirst’s rotting cow’s head with its attendant swarm of flies, the Chapman brothers’ circle of plastic children sprouting genitals instead of noses or mouths, the portrait of Myra Hindley composed of children’s hands – became the focus of attention and was paraded in the press and television for weeks before the exhibition opened.


More publicity was guaranteed when one of the visitors to the exhibition threw eggs at the portrait of Myra Hindley. Further antics followed, with Tracey Emin appearing drunk on a TV chat-show and then walking out mid-programme, while Norman Rosenthal – Director of the Royal Academy – put in an appearance with a glossy, lipstick ‘kiss’ on his cheek. Notoriety was assured, ensuring that the exhibition would attract millions of visitors. It did. The queues of people at the doors of the Royal Academy proved the wisdom of choosing advertising over art.


One could argue that there is nothing wrong with marketing art. In a world where advertising determines the profit outcomes for most products, why should not the art world benefit? Has not art always had sponsors, benefactors and patrons? The problem is that the arts – all of them – have, to an extent, always been the expression of what is best in humanity, a way of transmitting down the ages the things which unite us. Some artists in the past have suffered for their vision. There are those who argue that, in holding art in too great an esteem, there is a danger of inviting elitism, of art becoming elevated to a rarified atmosphere where only the privileged few can enter.


The new elite

However, in the art world that dominates today, another lie is being spun. Under the guise of making art accessible to the many, the art world remains as exclusive as ever. Ticking away behind the scenes is a money-making machine. As Matthew Collings, presenter of the Turner Prize, found out, having some talent ‘helps’ an artist to advance their career, but what really matters, it seems, is ‘where the dealer places the work’. Art dealers, galleries, curators, prestigious museums and public institutions abroad, are still pulling the strings, very much as always, except that now the media (Channel 4 sponsors the prize), advertisers and even corporations are also taking their chunk of the market.


Elitism has never been so rife. Today ‘the celebrity syndrome’ that prevails, with Madonna being asked to present the award at the Turner Prize 2001 and artists’ success being measured as to who can sell their work to Elton John. Contributors to the new ‘designer’ art have to be young and with an inclination to appear on TV. They also need to have the ability to produce such impoverished visual images that the works seem unable to stand on their own, being accompanied more and more frequently on their creators’ part by lengthy monologues and ‘explanations’, as posed and as contrived as the artists themselves. Good technicians are being elevated to the status of artists and, in order to stay in the market, are producing a dreary catalogue of one ‘sensation’ after another, of one ‘shock’ after another.


Sale of the century

‘Conceptual art’ has simply become yet another commodity to be packaged and sold and, even here, nothing new has been invented. Corporations worked out the formula some time ago. When the photograph of Che Guevara was bought as an image to stick on T-shirts, the revolutionary figure was popularised, but also, in a way, belittled. The subversive was ‘accommodated’, tamed, made safe and, as a consequence, trivialised.


Worse, with not a drawing, painting or sculpture in sight at any of the prestigious exhibitions, the suggestion is that only a certain type of work is welcome, creating a no-go area for any differing views. Artists who may be producing works that are more substantial are being ignored, presumably to labour away in poverty.


Advertising may work very well as advertising. It goes for the immediate and the instant, quick to appeal and equally quick to forget. But in using similar techniques in art and treating art as a mere commodity that, like a detergent, has to be flagged and sold, something is lost. Human experience is trivialised, art is brought down to the banal and, instead of meaning or beauty, all we are left with is the cheap effect.



Helena Kotkowska is on the committee of Friends of LMD. hkotkowska@hotmail.com


© Friends of Le Monde Diplomatique
Ai de ti Lusitânia, que dominarás em todas as nações...
 

 

CIOFE - Apoio para Militares e Ex-militares das FA's

Iniciado por tenentecarlos

Respostas: 1
Visualizações: 3614
Última mensagem Março 21, 2009, 09:24:21 am
por Ranger Rebelde
Políticos alemães sugerem sesta para enfrentar calor

Iniciado por Marauder

Respostas: 1
Visualizações: 1437
Última mensagem Julho 27, 2006, 12:24:51 pm
por pedro
Prontos vem para aqui o anti-semita estragar isto ...

Iniciado por ricardonunes

Respostas: 28
Visualizações: 4952
Última mensagem Novembro 29, 2008, 05:55:12 pm
por 123go
Bombeiro veste-se de Homem Aranha para salvar criança

Iniciado por Xerif3

Respostas: 1
Visualizações: 1073
Última mensagem Março 24, 2009, 11:46:30 am
por TOMSK
Todos os pretextos são bons para menorizarem as Forças Armadas

Iniciado por zawevo

Respostas: 1
Visualizações: 488
Última mensagem Abril 01, 2019, 05:01:23 pm
por zawevo