""…real people get what I'm doing. It's other artists that don't understand me." LoBaido describes himself as an artist and patriot. "For years I've been painting the American flag. I used to have to beg store owners to let me do it on their walls. A lot of them didn't want to do it because they thought it would be bad for business. Bad for business? Now after Sept. 11, I can't keep up with the demand. I love painting the flag because I worship America. I realize what I have: a great family, access to beautiful woman, Johnny Red scotch and to be whatever I want to be." Born and raised on Staten Island, LoBaido is a fourth-generation New Yorker. His father worked in sanitation and his mother was in real estate. "I'm from the working class - the people that build this city." According to LoBaido, it's this pedigree that's keeping his WTC memorial out of consideration."
googling Scott LoBaido, i see he has made a bit of a name for himself with this sort of 'patriotic' work since 9/11. there are various news articles from outfits like cnn on what he is doing.
i did a bit of a search on the web for other paintings from the middle ages etc similar to the one above. because i seem to recall seeing similar sorts of 'patriotic' paintings of a king on a horse holding the severed head of an enemy. but i couldn't find any.
such work indicates a failure of compassion and understanding and, instead, celebrates barbarism, is easily identifiable as political propaganda. so too, on the other hand, can (for instance) anti-republican art fall into a different but related category of political propaganda. how then to create work which escapes both categorizations but does not simply avoid the political?
""…real people get what I'm doing. It's other artists that don't understand me." LoBaido describes himself as an artist and patriot. "For years I've been painting the American flag. I used to have to beg store owners to let me do it on their walls. A lot of them didn't want to do it because they thought it would be bad for business. Bad for business? Now after Sept. 11, I can't keep up with the demand. I love painting the flag because I worship America. I realize what I have: a great family, access to beautiful woman, Johnny Red scotch and to be whatever I want to be." Born and raised on Staten Island, LoBaido is a fourth-generation New Yorker. His father worked in sanitation and his mother was in real estate. "I'm from the working class - the people that build this city." According to LoBaido, it's this pedigree that's keeping his WTC memorial out of consideration."
googling Scott LoBaido, i see he has made a bit of a name for himself with this sort of 'patriotic' work since 9/11. there are various news articles from outfits like cnn on what he is doing.
i did a bit of a search on the web for other paintings from the middle ages etc similar to the one above. because i seem to recall seeing similar sorts of 'patriotic' paintings of a king on a horse holding the severed head of an enemy. but i couldn't find any.
such work indicates a failure of compassion and understanding and, instead, celebrates barbarism, is easily identifiable as political propaganda. so too, on the other hand, can (for instance) anti-republican art fall into a different but related category of political propaganda. how then to create work which escapes both categorizations but does not simply avoid the political?
This video by doron golan gets props from me simply because the musician is so painfully earnest, and the director's approach to his subject is equally open and earnest: http://www.the9th.com/04/revolution/
It's risky to unabashedly care. Very not post-modern. No nudge. No wink. No reverse spin. Nothing to fall back on.
"a smile like the cartoon, tooth for a tooth you said that irony was the shackles of youth" - mr. stipe
_
Jim Andrews wrote:
> such work indicates a failure of compassion and understanding and, > instead, > celebrates barbarism, is easily identifiable as political propaganda. > so > too, on the other hand, can (for instance) anti-republican art fall > into a > different but related category of political propaganda. how then to > create > work which escapes both categorizations but does not simply avoid the > political?
there is no defense for that painting. it's propaganda painted by an idiot. your insinuation that other artists – ones you would probably categorize as post-modern – don't care about their work is simply insulting.
On Sep 6, 2004, at 12:16 AM, curt cloninger wrote:
> This video by doron golan gets props from me simply because the > musician is so painfully earnest, and the director's approach to his > subject is equally open and earnest: > http://www.the9th.com/04/revolution/ > > It's risky to unabashedly care. Very not post-modern. No nudge. No > wink. No reverse spin. Nothing to fall back on. > > "a smile like the cartoon, tooth for a tooth > you said that irony was the shackles of youth" > - mr. stipe > > _ > > Jim Andrews wrote: > >> such work indicates a failure of compassion and understanding and, >> instead, >> celebrates barbarism, is easily identifiable as political propaganda. >> so >> too, on the other hand, can (for instance) anti-republican art fall >> into a >> different but related category of political propaganda. how then to >> create >> work which escapes both categorizations but does not simply avoid the >> political? > + > -> post: [email protected] > -> questions: [email protected] > -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support > -> visit: on Fridays the Rhizome.org web site is open to non-members > + > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the > Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php > > > – <t.whid> www.mteww.com </t.whid>
how am i defending that dumb painting? i don't even reference it. it's obviously moronic pap. i'm responding to jim's question.
the relevant issue is never whether an artist cares about her work (by definition she at least cares enough to put something out there); but rather, how well is she able to convey her concern through her work? I think Doron's piece risks an earnestness that a lot of recent contemporary political artwork shies away from. It is a high-degree-of-difficulty dive in a pool full of low-degree-of-difficulty, pot-shot dives. It stands for something rather than merely standing against something.
"I hate to see your broken face A lazy life of fade-aways A fashionable cynicism The poison they want you to drink Oh no, man, that's so easy Oh no, man, that's too easy." - stereolab
peace, curt
_
t.whid wrote:
> there is no defense for that painting. it's propaganda painted by an > idiot. your insinuation that other artists – ones you would probably > categorize as post-modern – don't care about their work is simply > insulting. > > > > On Sep 6, 2004, at 12:16 AM, curt cloninger wrote: > > > This video by doron golan gets props from me simply because the > > musician is so painfully earnest, and the director's approach to > his > > subject is equally open and earnest: > > http://www.the9th.com/04/revolution/ > > > > It's risky to unabashedly care. Very not post-modern. No nudge. > No > > wink. No reverse spin. Nothing to fall back on. > > > > "a smile like the cartoon, tooth for a tooth > > you said that irony was the shackles of youth" > > - mr. stipe > > > > _ > > > > Jim Andrews wrote: > > > >> such work indicates a failure of compassion and understanding and, > >> instead, > >> celebrates barbarism, is easily identifiable as political > propaganda. > >> so > >> too, on the other hand, can (for instance) anti-republican art fall > >> into a > >> different but related category of political propaganda. how then to > >> create > >> work which escapes both categorizations but does not simply avoid > the > >> political? > > + > > -> post: [email protected] > > -> questions: [email protected] > > -> subscribe/unsubscribe: > http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz > > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support > > -> visit: on Fridays the Rhizome.org web site is open to non-members > > + > > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the > > Membership Agreement available online at > http://rhizome.org/info/29.php > > > > > > > – > <t.whid> > www.mteww.com > </t.whid> >
On Monday, September 06, 2004, at 08:21AM, curt cloninger <[email protected]> wrote:
>the relevant issue is never whether an artist cares about her work (by definition she at least cares enough to put something out there); but rather, how well is she able to convey her concern through her work?
Earnestness. Ew. One of the sadder spectacles surrounding the Chapmans is the procession of critics who agree that the Chapmans are "serious". Seriousness doesn't offset badness. If it did, the greatest poets would all be high school students.
Conveying one's concerns is not a sufficient measure of work (I don't think you're saying it is, but some people do use this as a metric). It's possible to fail in that and still produce good work. Being able to talk up art isn't the same as being able to make up art. Greenberg wasn't the greatest Abstract Expressionist.
thanks, i enjoyed that very much, curt. i've seen another movie by doron, and it has something in common with this one. it's, again, of one man, an israeli man in this case, doing something like a performance only it is intimate and manages to convey something of substance about who he is and what he loves.
i checked out http://davidrovics.com and thence to http://www.soundclick.com/pro/?BandID1310 where there is a 'pro' recording of the same song ("after the revolution"). i liked doron's recording better. david rovics is all there in doron's recording, whereas he and his song get a bit drowned out by the proness of the instrumentation in the pro version. doron seems to be on to something.
concerning the question i asked and david rovic's song, somehow i am reminded of a poem by leonard cohen from his book 'flowers for hitler' (1964) called "kerensky". this poem is also concerned with the revolution. i think they are both beautiful.
Kerensky
My friend walks through our city this winter night, fur-hatted, whistling, stricken with seeing Eternity in all that is seasonal. He is the Kerensky of our Circle always about to chair the last official meeting before the pros take over, they of the pure smiling eyes trained only for Form. He knows there are no measures to guarantee the Revolution, or to preserve the row of muscular icicles which will chart Winter's decline like a graph. There is nothing for him to do but preside over the last official meeting. It will all come round again: the heartsick teachers who make too much of poetry, their students who refuse to suffer, the cache of rifles in the lawyer's attic: and then the magic, the 80-year comet touching the sturdiest houses. The Elite Corps commits suicide in the tennis-ball basement. Poets ride buses free. The General insists on a popularity poll. Troops study satire. A strange public generosity prevails. Only too well he knows the tiny moment when everything is possible, when pride is loved, beauty held in common, like having an exquisite sister, and a man gives away his death like a piece of advice. Our Kerensky has waited for these moments over a table in a rented room when poems grew like butterflies on the garbage of his life. How many times? The sad answer is: they can be counted. Possible and brief: this is his vision of Revolution. Who will parade the shell today? Who will kill in the name of the husk? Who will write a Law to raise the corpse which cries now only for weeds and excrement? See him walk the streets, the last guard, the only idler on the square. He must keep the wreck of the Revolution the debris of public beauty from the pure smiling eyes of the trained visionaries who need our daily lives perfect. The soft snow begins to honour him with epaulets, and to provoke the animal past of his fur hat. He wears a death, but he allows the snow, like an ultimate answer, to forgive him, just for this jewelled moment of his coronation. The carved gargoyles of the City Hall recieve the snow as bibs beneath their drooling lips. How they resemble the men of profane vision, the same greed, the same intensity as they who whip their minds to recall an ancient lucky orgasm, yes, yes, he knows that deadly concentration, they are the founders, they are the bankers–of History! He rests in his walk as they consume of the generous night everything that he does not need.
They are laughable, yes. But the paintings and murals found in Saddam Hussein's private quarters betray a mind obsessed with sex and violence, argues Jonathan Jones
Rob: > Conveying one's concerns is not a sufficient measure of work (I don't > think you're saying it is, but some people do use this as a metric). > It's possible to fail in that and still produce good work.
curt: totally agreed (I love Black Sabbath's "Children of the Grave" not because I can hear Ozzy's concern coming through the lyrics, but because the song rocks). it's just a more germane metric than usual when critiquing political art that seeks to motivate some specific/didactic tactical viewer resonse. And (as you point out vis the Chapmans) it's always more germane than the biographical perspective of the artist. I assume Barthes would concur.
Comments
t> http://it.news.yahoo.com/040831/38/2x6oy.html
t> yeeesh, speaks for itself…
my goodness, it must be hard to survive as artist in States.
–
Roman Minaev
trashconnection.com
> http://it.news.yahoo.com/040831/38/2x6oy.html
>
> yeeesh, speaks for itself…
from http://www.nypress.com/16/7/nyc/nyc1.cfm :
""…real people get what I'm doing. It's other artists that don't
understand me." LoBaido describes himself as an artist and patriot. "For
years I've been painting the American flag. I used to have to beg store
owners to let me do it on their walls. A lot of them didn't want to do it
because they thought it would be bad for business. Bad for business? Now
after Sept. 11, I can't keep up with the demand. I love painting the flag
because I worship America. I realize what I have: a great family, access to
beautiful woman, Johnny Red scotch and to be whatever I want to be." Born
and raised on Staten Island, LoBaido is a fourth-generation New Yorker. His
father worked in sanitation and his mother was in real estate. "I'm from the
working class - the people that build this city." According to LoBaido, it's
this pedigree that's keeping his WTC memorial out of consideration."
googling Scott LoBaido, i see he has made a bit of a name for himself with
this sort of 'patriotic' work since 9/11. there are various news articles
from outfits like cnn on what he is doing.
i did a bit of a search on the web for other paintings from the middle ages
etc similar to the one above. because i seem to recall seeing similar sorts
of 'patriotic' paintings of a king on a horse holding the severed head of an
enemy. but i couldn't find any.
such work indicates a failure of compassion and understanding and, instead,
celebrates barbarism, is easily identifiable as political propaganda. so
too, on the other hand, can (for instance) anti-republican art fall into a
different but related category of political propaganda. how then to create
work which escapes both categorizations but does not simply avoid the
political?
ja
http://vispo.com
Could this artist be just playing the pander game to the hilt?
It might just be totally immaterial whether he actually believes his
rhetoric or not.
Patrick Lichty
Editor-In-Chief
Intelligent Agent Magazine
http://www.intelligentagent.com
1556 Clough Street, #28
Bowling Green, OH 43402
225 288 5813
[email protected]
"It is better to die on your feet
than to live on your knees."
—–Original Message—–
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
Of Jim Andrews
Sent: Sunday, September 05, 2004 8:40 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: RHIZOME_RAW: republican art
> http://it.news.yahoo.com/040831/38/2x6oy.html
>
> yeeesh, speaks for itself…
from http://www.nypress.com/16/7/nyc/nyc1.cfm :
""…real people get what I'm doing. It's other artists that don't
understand me." LoBaido describes himself as an artist and patriot. "For
years I've been painting the American flag. I used to have to beg store
owners to let me do it on their walls. A lot of them didn't want to do
it
because they thought it would be bad for business. Bad for business? Now
after Sept. 11, I can't keep up with the demand. I love painting the
flag
because I worship America. I realize what I have: a great family, access
to
beautiful woman, Johnny Red scotch and to be whatever I want to be."
Born
and raised on Staten Island, LoBaido is a fourth-generation New Yorker.
His
father worked in sanitation and his mother was in real estate. "I'm from
the
working class - the people that build this city." According to LoBaido,
it's
this pedigree that's keeping his WTC memorial out of consideration."
googling Scott LoBaido, i see he has made a bit of a name for himself
with
this sort of 'patriotic' work since 9/11. there are various news
articles
from outfits like cnn on what he is doing.
i did a bit of a search on the web for other paintings from the middle
ages
etc similar to the one above. because i seem to recall seeing similar
sorts
of 'patriotic' paintings of a king on a horse holding the severed head
of an
enemy. but i couldn't find any.
such work indicates a failure of compassion and understanding and,
instead,
celebrates barbarism, is easily identifiable as political propaganda. so
too, on the other hand, can (for instance) anti-republican art fall into
a
different but related category of political propaganda. how then to
create
work which escapes both categorizations but does not simply avoid the
political?
ja
http://vispo.com
+
-> post: [email protected]
-> questions: [email protected]
-> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
-> give: http://rhizome.org/support
-> visit: on Fridays the Rhizome.org web site is open to non-members
+
Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
This video by doron golan gets props from me simply because the musician is so painfully earnest, and the director's approach to his subject is equally open and earnest:
http://www.the9th.com/04/revolution/
It's risky to unabashedly care. Very not post-modern. No nudge. No wink. No reverse spin. Nothing to fall back on.
"a smile like the cartoon, tooth for a tooth
you said that irony was the shackles of youth"
- mr. stipe
_
Jim Andrews wrote:
> such work indicates a failure of compassion and understanding and,
> instead,
> celebrates barbarism, is easily identifiable as political propaganda.
> so
> too, on the other hand, can (for instance) anti-republican art fall
> into a
> different but related category of political propaganda. how then to
> create
> work which escapes both categorizations but does not simply avoid the
> political?
there is no defense for that painting. it's propaganda painted by an
idiot. your insinuation that other artists – ones you would probably
categorize as post-modern – don't care about their work is simply
insulting.
On Sep 6, 2004, at 12:16 AM, curt cloninger wrote:
> This video by doron golan gets props from me simply because the
> musician is so painfully earnest, and the director's approach to his
> subject is equally open and earnest:
> http://www.the9th.com/04/revolution/
>
> It's risky to unabashedly care. Very not post-modern. No nudge. No
> wink. No reverse spin. Nothing to fall back on.
>
> "a smile like the cartoon, tooth for a tooth
> you said that irony was the shackles of youth"
> - mr. stipe
>
> _
>
> Jim Andrews wrote:
>
>> such work indicates a failure of compassion and understanding and,
>> instead,
>> celebrates barbarism, is easily identifiable as political propaganda.
>> so
>> too, on the other hand, can (for instance) anti-republican art fall
>> into a
>> different but related category of political propaganda. how then to
>> create
>> work which escapes both categorizations but does not simply avoid the
>> political?
> +
> -> post: [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> -> visit: on Fridays the Rhizome.org web site is open to non-members
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>
>
>
–
<t.whid>
www.mteww.com
</t.whid>
hi tim,
how am i defending that dumb painting? i don't even reference it. it's obviously moronic pap. i'm responding to jim's question.
the relevant issue is never whether an artist cares about her work (by definition she at least cares enough to put something out there); but rather, how well is she able to convey her concern through her work? I think Doron's piece risks an earnestness that a lot of recent contemporary political artwork shies away from. It is a high-degree-of-difficulty dive in a pool full of low-degree-of-difficulty, pot-shot dives. It stands for something rather than merely standing against something.
"I hate to see your broken face
A lazy life of fade-aways
A fashionable cynicism
The poison they want you to drink
Oh no, man, that's so easy
Oh no, man, that's too easy."
- stereolab
peace,
curt
_
t.whid wrote:
> there is no defense for that painting. it's propaganda painted by an
> idiot. your insinuation that other artists – ones you would probably
> categorize as post-modern – don't care about their work is simply
> insulting.
>
>
>
> On Sep 6, 2004, at 12:16 AM, curt cloninger wrote:
>
> > This video by doron golan gets props from me simply because the
> > musician is so painfully earnest, and the director's approach to
> his
> > subject is equally open and earnest:
> > http://www.the9th.com/04/revolution/
> >
> > It's risky to unabashedly care. Very not post-modern. No nudge.
> No
> > wink. No reverse spin. Nothing to fall back on.
> >
> > "a smile like the cartoon, tooth for a tooth
> > you said that irony was the shackles of youth"
> > - mr. stipe
> >
> > _
> >
> > Jim Andrews wrote:
> >
> >> such work indicates a failure of compassion and understanding and,
> >> instead,
> >> celebrates barbarism, is easily identifiable as political
> propaganda.
> >> so
> >> too, on the other hand, can (for instance) anti-republican art fall
> >> into a
> >> different but related category of political propaganda. how then to
> >> create
> >> work which escapes both categorizations but does not simply avoid
> the
> >> political?
> > +
> > -> post: [email protected]
> > -> questions: [email protected]
> > -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
> http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> > -> visit: on Fridays the Rhizome.org web site is open to non-members
> > +
> > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> > Membership Agreement available online at
> http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
> >
> >
> >
> –
> <t.whid>
> www.mteww.com
> </t.whid>
>
On Monday, September 06, 2004, at 08:21AM, curt cloninger <[email protected]> wrote:
>the relevant issue is never whether an artist cares about her work (by definition she at least cares enough to put something out there); but rather, how well is she able to convey her concern through her work?
Earnestness. Ew. One of the sadder spectacles surrounding the Chapmans is the procession of critics who agree that the Chapmans are "serious". Seriousness doesn't offset badness. If it did, the greatest poets would all be high school students.
Conveying one's concerns is not a sufficient measure of work (I don't think you're saying it is, but some people do use this as a metric). It's possible to fail in that and still produce good work. Being able to talk up art isn't the same as being able to make up art. Greenberg wasn't the greatest Abstract Expressionist.
- Rob.
thanks, i enjoyed that very much, curt. i've seen another movie by doron,
and it has something in common with this one. it's, again, of one man, an
israeli man in this case, doing something like a performance only it is
intimate and manages to convey something of substance about who he is and
what he loves.
i checked out http://davidrovics.com and thence to
http://www.soundclick.com/pro/?BandID1310 where there is a 'pro'
recording of the same song ("after the revolution"). i liked doron's
recording better. david rovics is all there in doron's recording, whereas he
and his song get a bit drowned out by the proness of the instrumentation in
the pro version. doron seems to be on to something.
concerning the question i asked and david rovic's song, somehow i am
reminded of a poem by leonard cohen from his book 'flowers for hitler'
(1964) called "kerensky". this poem is also concerned with the revolution. i
think they are both beautiful.
Kerensky
My friend walks through our city this winter night,
fur-hatted, whistling,
stricken with seeing Eternity in all that is seasonal.
He is the Kerensky of our Circle
always about to chair the last official meeting
before the pros take over, they of the pure smiling eyes
trained only for Form.
He knows there are no measures to guarantee
the Revolution, or to preserve the row of muscular icicles
which will chart Winter's decline like a graph.
There is nothing for him to do but preside
over the last official meeting.
It will all come round again: the heartsick teachers
who make too much of poetry, their students
who refuse to suffer, the cache of rifles in the lawyer's attic:
and then the magic, the 80-year comet touching
the sturdiest houses. The Elite Corps commits suicide
in the tennis-ball basement. Poets ride buses free.
The General insists on a popularity poll. Troops study satire.
A strange public generosity prevails.
Only too well he knows the tiny moment when
everything is possible, when pride is loved, beauty held
in common, like having an exquisite sister,
and a man gives away his death like a piece of advice.
Our Kerensky has waited for these moments
over a table in a rented room
when poems grew like butterflies on the garbage of his life.
How many times? The sad answer is: they can be counted.
Possible and brief: this is his vision of Revolution.
Who will parade the shell today? Who will kill in the name
of the husk? Who will write a Law to raise the corpse
which cries now only for weeds and excrement?
See him walk the streets, the last guard, the only idler
on the square. He must keep the wreck of the Revolution
the debris of public beauty
from the pure smiling eyes of the trained visionaries
who need our daily lives perfect.
The soft snow begins to honour him with epaulets, and to
provoke the animal past of his fur hat. He wears a death,
but he allows the snow, like an ultimate answer, to forgive
him, just for this jewelled moment of his coronation. The
carved gargoyles of the City Hall recieve the snow as bibs
beneath their drooling lips. How they resemble the men of
profane vision, the same greed, the same intensity as they
who whip their minds to recall an ancient lucky orgasm, yes,
yes, he knows that deadly concentration, they are the founders,
they are the bankers–of History! He rests in his walk as they
consume of the generous night everything that he does not need.
Leonard Cohen
> Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: republican art
>
> http://it.news.yahoo.com/040831/38/2x6oy.html
>
> yeeesh, speaks for itself…
>
Well, it's in the genre:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/arts/critic/feature/0,1169,937248,00.html
Look at the size of those missiles
They are laughable, yes. But the paintings and murals found in Saddam
Hussein's private quarters betray a mind obsessed with sex and violence,
argues Jonathan Jones
Rob:
> Conveying one's concerns is not a sufficient measure of work (I don't
> think you're saying it is, but some people do use this as a metric).
> It's possible to fail in that and still produce good work.
curt:
totally agreed (I love Black Sabbath's "Children of the Grave" not because I can hear Ozzy's concern coming through the lyrics, but because the song rocks). it's just a more germane metric than usual when critiquing political art that seeks to motivate some specific/didactic tactical viewer resonse. And (as you point out vis the Chapmans) it's always more germane than the biographical perspective of the artist. I assume Barthes would concur.