Oro Bourous, Outsider Net.Artist pt 2.

"What this world needs is to give up the pretense that it can discern
quality for itself; it needs to give up the charade that there is any way to
make art that works or does not work, and that all art is successful in and
of itself by simply being created by an artist, like myself. The artist
should determine what art is good art, and no one else. Unfortunately, the
world is ruled by people who simply don't get my work, (and many other
artists work) and as such, I am not allowed to participate in their art
world hierarchy- not that I would want to.

But there is a large number of artists who refuse to conform to that system
without ever having stepped foot into the door of a museum, simply knowing
the evils that lay in wait once inside. These artists are a movement in and
of themselves. I declare this the "No-Show Movement," because we reject the
idea of shows, exhibitions, galleries, and museums. We reject the idea that
we should even try to have our work in such a context, because our work
should not be enslaved by being seen. And because we feel we could not have
our work shown in a system that is so corrupt. Instead, our work exists in
real life, and in conversation- we talk about the projects we would make, if
only getting a grant was easier. And while we could simply make art in the
streets, we reject that, as well, because having our art in the streets with
trash and car exhaust is a disservice to our ideas. In this way, our ideas
remain untainted by actualization.

But if they changed this system of appraising "quality" based on things they
did not understand, I might be able to participate in the art world. As it
is, I want to make a living off of my art, but I refuse to compromise. And
it is the fault of the institutions for not paying money based solely on an
artists unwillingness to compromise. That is why I reject the institutions
altogether, and why I have dedicated my life to complaints about them."

-Oro Bouros, Outsider Net.Artist




—– Original Message —–
From: "marc.garrett" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2003 9:23 AM
Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: Circlejerk P.H.D


> What this world needs is more hierarchical definitions. So we can define
who
> are the right and correct people to meet regarding furthering an art
career.
> If you have 'up and coming' artists in the same space as the more
> established it could get very confusing. Exclusivity finely tunes good
> art…
> Circlejerk P.H.D
>
>
>
> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> -> post: [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>

Comments

, curt cloninger

I assume these posts are hyperbolic. I can agree somewhat, but my problem is with the "anti-" of it. If my art is "pro-" something, then my art is necessarily influenced by that something, and that works out well since I'm for that something. If my art is "anti-" something, then my art is also influenced by that something, which is not so great since I'm actaully against that something. To make art specifically to snub institutions is akin to making art specifically to gain acceptance into institutions. Either way, an awareness of the institutions dictates the creation of the art.

Institutionally accepted shock/un-art conceptualists (serrano, hirst, tracy emin) welcome your embrace ("pro-") or your utter dismissal ("anti-"). What they can't stand is the critique that they are not that interesting. Oh, it's not great, it's not evil, it's just kind of boring. [The situationists who occasionally crop up on this list fall into the same category.]

The "paying" art world is what it is. I don't need money or fame from it. I don't make my work to gain acceptance into it. But neither is my work a reaction to it. If someone "inside" wants to recognize and hype something I've done "outside," that's fine. As long as it doesn't cause me to alter my work in order to get a gig.


++++++++++++++

Eryk Salvaggio wrote:

>
> "What this world needs is to give up the pretense that it can discern
> quality for itself; it needs to give up the charade that there is any
> way to
> make art that works or does not work, and that all art is successful
> in and
> of itself by simply being created by an artist, like myself. The
> artist
> should determine what art is good art, and no one else. Unfortunately,
> the
> world is ruled by people who simply don't get my work, (and many other
> artists work) and as such, I am not allowed to participate in their
> art
> world hierarchy- not that I would want to.
>
> But there is a large number of artists who refuse to conform to that
> system
> without ever having stepped foot into the door of a museum, simply
> knowing
> the evils that lay in wait once inside. These artists are a movement
> in and
> of themselves. I declare this the "No-Show Movement," because we
> reject the
> idea of shows, exhibitions, galleries, and museums. We reject the idea
> that
> we should even try to have our work in such a context, because our
> work
> should not be enslaved by being seen. And because we feel we could not
> have
> our work shown in a system that is so corrupt. Instead, our work
> exists in
> real life, and in conversation- we talk about the projects we would
> make, if
> only getting a grant was easier. And while we could simply make art in
> the
> streets, we reject that, as well, because having our art in the
> streets with
> trash and car exhaust is a disservice to our ideas. In this way, our
> ideas
> remain untainted by actualization.
>
> But if they changed this system of appraising "quality" based on
> things they
> did not understand, I might be able to participate in the art world.
> As it
> is, I want to make a living off of my art, but I refuse to compromise.
> And
> it is the fault of the institutions for not paying money based solely
> on an
> artists unwillingness to compromise. That is why I reject the
> institutions
> altogether, and why I have dedicated my life to complaints about
> them."
>
> -Oro Bouros, Outsider Net.Artist
>
>
>
>
> —– Original Message —–
> From: "marc.garrett" <[email protected]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2003 9:23 AM
> Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: Circlejerk P.H.D
>
>
> > What this world needs is more hierarchical definitions. So we can
> define
> who
> > are the right and correct people to meet regarding furthering an art
> career.
> > If you have 'up and coming' artists in the same space as the more
> > established it could get very confusing. Exclusivity finely tunes
> good
> > art…
> > Circlejerk P.H.D
> >
> >
> >
> > + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> > -> post: [email protected]
> > -> questions: [email protected]
> > -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
> http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> > +
> > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> > Membership Agreement available online at
> http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
> >
>