Jump to content

The impermanence of art.


Recommended Posts

A very thought provoking <a

href=http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4935334-103390,00.html>

essay</a> on the impermanence of art, and ruminations on the meaning

of the fire that consumed a large quantity of modern art in a

warehouse fire, this week, in London. <br><p>

 

From the UK newspaper, The Guardian.<br><p>

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4935334-103390,00.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is why as much art as possible should be created. All will not survive, but some will. Giving those that come after us a view of how our world, as viewed through our eyes, and in our medium.

 

In the Kalahari desert there are a few places where cave paintings have survived for as long as the paintings in the valey of the kings in Luxor have been in existence. These remaining objects of art give us the only view of how the people that were, observed the world.

 

We all have the task to do the same.

 

May some examples of what we did, survive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As Shelley so neatly put it...

 

I met a traveler from an antique land

 

Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone

 

Stand in the desert. Near them, on the sand,

 

Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown,

 

And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,

 

Tell that its sculptor well those passions read,

 

Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,

 

The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed,

 

And on the pedestal these words appear:

 

"My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:

 

Look upon my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"

 

Nothing beside remains. Round the decay

 

Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare

 

The lone and level sands stretch far away

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As Shelley so neatly put it...

 

So you have read Shelly...very good. Can't help thinking it would have been more interesting how Harvey would have put it. Most of us have read Shelley, how many have read Harvey. Maybe he feels he has so little to offer. Just not worthy. Best stick to Shelly, or whoever.

 

There's a thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look upon my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"

 

No, don't feel any despair, sorry mate. Wish i could oblige

 

My thoughts.

 

A bloke who has established himself on a mountain

Well, he has no work to do

A bloke should be in the market-place

 

While working with reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Predictably, the tabloids here in the UK had a huge laugh about the destruction of £50 million of modern art (mostly Britart pieces). I was a bit disappointed to see that Tracey Emin reacted to this by going on the BBC programme Breakfast with Frost this morning to complain about the British public. A choice quote: "It is just not fair and it's not funny and it's not polite and it's bad manners." Indeed.</p>

 

<p><a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/kent/3761851.stm">Here</a> is a brief BBC article complete with a video clip of Ms Emin on this morning's Breakfast with Frost.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Time gone missing

In the pain of realization

Soul swept aside in the wake of daylight

Each day dawns and ends again

In the frenzy of pain

A pain your body doesn�t sense anymore

but your soul fights to free

A mark of solemn silence

amidst the cry of humanity

Each face becomes the reflection of another

Each thought, a thought of another

Each soul burnt by the flesh of lies

Where Art no longer sees the day of light

Where history is written in the captive�s blood

Soon to dry and leave no Mark

In the end thats all art ever come down to

It stops living the when the audience leave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The periodic destruction of art is, historically, most likely the norm rather than the exception. For example, how much art was destroyed by the firebombing of Dresden, Germany? Or the atomic bombs dropped on Japan? Now that we live in the age of the computer photographers at least have the option of copying their collected works onto CD's and disbursing the CD's to a variety of locales. It is also worth noting that some photographers have chosen to deliberately destroy their own work, i.e. destroy or deface their own negatives so additional prints could not be made from them. Doing this was supposed to enhance the monetary value of the prints that they had made during their lifetimes.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mani,<br>

Thanks for the link.<p>

 

Suchitra,<br>

Interesting little poem.<br>

From where does it originate?<br>

Thanks!<p>

 

Bill,<br>

I remember reading that Brett(?) Weston destroyed his negatives because he didn't want others to create their own print interpretations.<p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"It is also worth noting that some photographers have chosen to deliberately destroy their own work, i.e. destroy or deface their own negatives so additional prints could not be made from them. Doing this was supposed to enhance the monetary value of the prints that they had made during their lifetimes."

 

Monetary gain was not the idea behind Brett Weston destroying negatives before he passed on. He did not feel others could or would print as he did. It was HIS work, not the interpretation of someone else and certainly not a reaction to the marketplace pricing schemes.

 

While some may do this in an attempt to force up prices it will often have the pleasant effect of removing from the marketplace boring photos the world can well do without.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...