This article discusses public.exe (but gets the name wrong)
+++
Politics That Makes Peace With the Beauty of Objects
By HOLLAND COTTER
Rudely, crudely put, political art is bad art; in fact, it isn't art at
all. It's preaching in a fancy form. Conversely, art about art, about
craft and transcendence and Beauty with capital B, is just so much
cultural junk food, empty calories for empty-headed people, nothing
more.
These two views have faced off in opposing corners of the art world
boxing ring for the better part of a century, ever since Marcel
Duchamp, the Muhammad Ali of Western modernism, came floating and
stinging onto the scene and messed with the protocols and the
expectations of the game. And whether the resulting standoff is billed
as politics versus pleasure, or ideas versus objects, it is almost
always seen as a bout between Progressive and Conservative.
Pleasure and objects, the old faithfuls of aestheticism, are currently
ascendant in New York art, thanks to recent strenuous campaigning on
their behalf. And what are the champions of traditional values trying
to conserve? Among other things, the golden, olden, pre-postmodern
days, when art meant Fine Art and was made, admired and acquired by a
discriminating few.
Those were the days before the Conceptualism of the late 1960's, one of
postmodernism's utopian main events, thoroughly scrambled the
definition of art as we knew it. They were also the days before digital
technology
Politics That Makes Peace With the Beauty of Objects
-
Type: discussion
Comments
Where is it from?
On Friday, Jun 18, 2004, at 16:29 America/New_York, t.whid wrote:
> This article discusses public.exe (but gets the name wrong)
>
> +++
>
> Politics That Makes Peace With the Beauty of Objects
> By HOLLAND COTTER
oops,
http://nytimes.com/2004/06/18/arts/design/18COTT.html
On Jun 18, 2004, at 5:00 PM, liza sabater wrote:
> Where is it from?
>
>
> On Friday, Jun 18, 2004, at 16:29 America/New_York, t.whid wrote:
>
>> This article discusses public.exe (but gets the name wrong)
>>
>> +++
>>
>> Politics That Makes Peace With the Beauty of Objects
>> By HOLLAND COTTER
>
>
>
>
===
<twhid>http://www.mteww.com</twhid>
===
> These two views have faced off in opposing corners of the art world
> boxing ring for the better part of a century, ever since Marcel
> Duchamp, the Muhammad Ali of Western modernism, came floating and
> stinging onto the scene and messed with the protocols and the
> expectations of the game. And whether the resulting standoff is billed
> as politics versus pleasure, or ideas versus objects, it is almost
> always seen as a bout between Progressive and Conservative.
>
only calling Duchamp the "muhammad ali" of western modernism overlooks
the contradictions of its own metaphor - it skips over Cassius Clay.
When was Duchamp ever a second class citizen dependent on getting beat
up to make it?
At the least they could have used Arthur Craven - though who knows
Craven (who died for what Duchamp had a comfortable life for - not to
romanticize)?
http://citypaper.net/articles/101499/ae.books.surreal.shtml
reproducing the false dichotomy of politics and pleasure serves who its
meant to - the audience of pomo and modern art hasn't exactly changed,
has it?
ryan
http://porktornado.diaryland.com/images/joyce1.jpg
_
ryan griffis wrote:
> reproducing the false dichotomy of politics and pleasure serves who
> its meant to - the audience of pomo and modern art hasn't exactly
> changed, has it?
> ryan
the conceptual beauty of objects manifesto.
all objects come from concepts.
kisses,
AE.
atomicelroy.com
p.s. see me in times sq. 6/23
the conceptual beauty of objects manifesto 2
all beauty is conceptual!
kisses,
AE.
atomicelroy.com
p.s. see you in times sq.
the conceptual beauty of objects manifesto 3
my new video titled the conceptual beauty of objects is finished!
yet unviewable
so there!
AE
atomicelroy.com
p.s. be in times sq. 6-23, 7pm, I dare you