I love doing Street Photography but......

Discussion in 'Philosophy' started by reallife, Oct 19, 2018.

  1. We can always wonder what might have been. We can also get out there ourselves.
    If he were after that kind of drama, he might have.
    He left arrest to future artist/activists like Ai Weiwei. Duchamp was a kind of art activist but I don't think he was interested in risking arrest or did much that would lead to that kind of result. Duchamp's cynicism, if we want to call it that, was directed at contemporaneous art institutions, and didn't require or even suggest illegal activities. His cynicism didn't manifest as opportunism.
     
  2. Phil.
    It is simply a matter of standard.
    No more.
    No less.
     
  3. With regards to that, the point is that the critic who issued the colorful praise was supported by his peers in his praise. And more to the point doubled down after the artist was revealed.

    And what of the lone critic who described the artist sight unseen based upon seeing his work?
     
  4. Like I said, simply a matter of standard......

    Was the art created by the Monkey or the Critic?
     
  5. So a thing, not being a work of art can become a work of art simply in the viewing of it?
     
  6. In regards to the current conversation about viewers fooled into praising something done by animals or kids masquerading as or mistaken for being highly accomplished and mature works of art, there are many such stories. They can certainly be amusing and entertaining. They can also show how difficult it is to draw boundaries around what's considered art and why. A lot of art is ahead of its time and it's often hard to recognize what all art offers in the moment in which it's made and shown. That can lead viewers and critics alike to a certain openness into what they will accept, because they know they are not always meant to fully understand it since it's often presenting new paradigms. NEW paradigms. Making too much out of these goofy stories is counterproductive, IMO, and much too often spread by armchair critics of the art world as a whole.

    The kind of opportunism alluded to in the hypotheticals of what Duchamp might have done to be even better than he already was certainly exists in the art world as it does in every walk of life. But it's certainly less at play in the world of art than in the corporate world or the world of politics. It's a minor concern relative to most good art.

    These individual stories sort of stand out and can gain much more attention than they really deserve. Most accomplished critics are studied in art, have seen a lot of art not just in books but in museums and galleries and studios all over the world, can put art into historical, cultural, and political contexts. It does the critic a disservice to overemphasize such stories, often simply for the amusement of those who know much less about art and tend to think of the art world in merely cynical terms.
     
  7. One of the critics got it right.
     
  8. Now we’re getting somewhere!
     
    Phil S likes this.
  9. I think more responsibility lies with the anti-intellectuals, anti-academics, and many just plain fools.

    Post-modernists are often just the misunderstood and (sometimes willfully) misinterpreted fall guys of dummies.
     
    Last edited: Nov 10, 2018
  10. Moving On, which post-modernists are you thinking of and what have they done or said that's given art criticism a bad name?

    I'm not asking for a quote. I'm asking for some specifics as well as the gist of what some of the post-modernist thinkers have said and your thoughts on how that has negatively influenced art criticism.
     
    Last edited: Nov 10, 2018
  11. Name something I've espoused that boils down to a moral relativism.
     
  12. Sandy Vongries

    Sandy Vongries Administrator Staff Member

    “One mustn’t criticize other people on grounds where he can’t stand perpendicular himself.”
    – Mark Twain
     
    Ricochetrider likes this.
  13. The weakness of
    The critics duped by the apes......
    If everything is subject to whim of everchanging interpretation, there is no standard for critical thought.

    The whim of the Ape corresponds to the whim of his adoring critic.
    Like I said, one critic got it right.
    The fact that he identified the artist is not easily dismissed.
    In fact it is more important than the miss by the other critics and the intransigence after the truth was revealed because the truth was deemed “irrelevant”.
    Hmmmmmm.
     
    Last edited: Nov 10, 2018
  14. Sandy Vongries

    Sandy Vongries Administrator Staff Member

    Whichever identity you have morphed into, "Shadow" why do you need to denigrate and insult others? Time to dial back.
     
  15. And perhaps take the trialog to the Philosophy Forum? Or maybe to a mutually agreed upon McDonalds some Sunday morning?
     
    Moving On and Sandy Vongries like this.
  16. More chatter but still no answer from either Phil or Moving On. Take note.
     
  17. “Trialog”
    I like that.
    A great exit cue.
    Methinks I’ll take advantage of it before the cussin’ starts.....
    ;)
     
  18. Ahh, just found the thread in its new location. Brad has clout! Anyway, to Phil:

    Fools aren’t those who disagree with me. The fool is the guy who claims I’m a moral relativist and can’t back it up with a clear and concrete example, all the while putting post-modernism down for being unclear. You are that fool.
     
  19. The idea that nothing is new comes from the letdown one feels in life when you realize that it won;t matter. So you do stuff that appears new to you. Then later, call it a midlife crisis or whatever, you realize that in the end it won;t matter. We all return to dust. No one cares. It affects little. When you shot your umpteenth roll of film of shots that start all looking the same, or worse, are different but even that doesn;t matter, then you reach a time when you question the whole point of it all. That's what Ecclesiastes, written by a rich powerful man who had accomplished everything and had everything, was talking about. That only following God gives purpose to man and his life and what he does. Everything else is vanity.
     
  20. Thanks, Alan Klein, for that sermon on the mount. Are we in heaven yet?
     

Share This Page