What is art, a deuxieme manifesto on the dissisitudes of modern day epistemology?

December 23, 2007

Books are art, the glass over there is art.

I defined it as such.

 

This is art, when bought for $3.36 in british money that’s just a little more than a dollar fifty.

 

Second grade is art. There is art in you and on this ticket.

 Algerian is art ART Duchamp was an artist and guilty of it. Hey Pomp stop selling those pins, he isn’t innocent. Dali was a sell out and an artist, but Disney was the Pope! Guns aren’t art, we don’t won’t them not the futurists, they can take their automobiles and leave.  BYE Sans art Le gouvernement français est art.  Il n’y a rien d’art ici, sauf tout ce qui est art.  Germany lost world war two.  The Large Glass has another name. The Seven Dwarfs was a German story. Mickey Mouse represents an alliteration, art.  Art is in the paper, art is in the pen, art is on the tv, art is in the den, art lives in you, art comes from me, art sings to all, art’s done by a bee, art is something dumb, art is something fun, art is sometimes alive, and art is relentlessly a pun,  art can breath change, art can be thrown away, art can cause tears, art is here to stay.  That was a really dumb poem. This is war! You still owe me that $4.56                                                             I STAND FOR ART Tristan hurry up and come back to us before countless more go to art school. Hanz we have failed, and Earnst if you hadn’t painted Ubu, he would have gone unnoticed in today’s world.  We want NO violence, we are not the futurists or the idiot Dadaists who cried for such stupidity.  But should you see Mr. Ubu (he is no longer a king) KILL HIM! That is all! Free those confined by the trap.  R. Mutt I Salute You! Huysmans.


Manifesto of Artistic Artistry Relevance

December 7, 2007

Yet again I feel the need to address the role of this discussion. The why, if you will. Why should we engage in defining art, or more generally why should we even engage in the discussion of art? Perhaps I feel the need to defend this on account of the numerous friends I have who by attending art schools have become rather elitist in their opinions, believing that they are the only authorities on which art can be discussed. I want to say to them here and now that that couldn’t be further from the truth. I could spend much more than one post and my beliefs on these institutions that call themselves art schools but that isn’t the purpose of this post. For today I want to state clear and simply my manifesto as an artist and in homage to other artists who realize what art really is.

 

Me Manifesto of Artistic Artistry Relevance:

 

1.      Art is in everything and everything is in art. Artists do not create Art, they create art. We the spectators, the viewers, the readers, the observers, the audience, the listeners, the society in which this cult is supported are the creators of Art.

2.      Art cannot exist on its own.

3.      Art is not a person, place or thing and it is definitely not a noun!

4.      Art is an interaction!!!! An experience, a conversation that communicates what some call the ineffable, what I just call art.

5.      Artists are everyone!

6.      A self identified artist should never be trusted!

7.      Art schools are just bricks and mortar.

8.      Manifestos are works of art, not political statements.

9.      You are an artist.

10.  Art does not live.

11.  Art can turn a profit. Art should turn a profit.

12.  To talk about art is to acknowledge your own existence in this world.

13.  To not talk about art is to live passively.

14.  As we describe art as being active and challenging, so is the discussion, anything else is entertainment.

15.  Dali is a sell out!

16.  The Mona Lisa is no longer art!

17.  Fountain is the greatest experience of the twentieth century

18.  Disney has brought us the twenty first.

19.  This should cost $2.67

20.   

21.  art is worthless and does not bring us anything to better our society.

22.  Ignore statement twenty and refer to statement five when dealing with liars

23.  Periods should not exist.

24.  Is this Art?

25.  no


Categorizations as reduction.

November 30, 2007

Recently I have engaged Everett Scott in what has become a very interesting conversation into how and why we organize art, looking at why there is Art and art and where entertainment plays a role and how Art acts differently. What has come from this are some very interesting notions as to entertainment and art being on separately playing fields and ultimately incomparable as to effect and purpose on society and culture. This may not be false in the end. And I being one who loves adapting and utilizing arguments contrary to my own brought this up in a recent conversation in a Mystical class I am currently in being taught by Professor K. The conversation was on the mystical merit of Dali. I being of the mind to challenge even my own beliefs on art decided to take the opinion that Dali was a “sellout artist” and one not deserving of any merit; in the end I used this distinction to place Dali as an entertainer rather than an artist. My professor, Professor K, stated rather bluntly that such distinctions were reductive and closed minded.

Well first I’d like to say that I disagree entirely with both sides of that little debate, Dali is an artist to me, and such distinction are most certainly not reductive and closed minded. In fact I would argue that such a statement is the only thing closed minded and reductive in that debate. To refuse to engage in a debate because you believe it to be reductive is the closed minded attitude. I grant that I am not one to revel in categorizations but I do believe there is merit in trying to understand why such works as Guernica or Olympiad or even the Mona Lisa are distinctively different than that of Disney or MGM’s Bond films. But I am not bringing this up to just point out a failure in our class’s ability to discuss openly, rather I want to acknowledge the merit of trying to understand the differences between Art and art and why we should do that. I know that personally I do not believe in such differences but I think in looking at the apparent differences we better understand why we create them. So then I guess I do believe in them I just don’t prescribe to them. I really do not know. But in regards to aesthetics, I do want to delve into how that word applies to art and I will very soon.