BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


So what's wrong with art?

 
  

Page: (1)2

 
 
Burn
14:14 / 04.01.02
I don't actually have anything interesting to talk about concerning art, but I saw that nobody had posted in this forum for a while, and I thought maybe it felt lonely.

Happy New Year, Art & Design! I hope you're doing well!
 
 
Ierne
16:04 / 04.01.02
Well, I for one hope to contribute more to this forum, being a photographer and all...
 
 
Lothar Tuppan
16:47 / 04.01.02
Ierne, do you have any stuff posted on the web that we can see?
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
16:49 / 04.01.02
quote:Originally posted by Ierne:
Well, I for one hope to contribute more to this forum, being a photographer and all...


yeah, me too. A lot of the reason I've avoided this forum is from art school burnout...maybe now that I'm finally through with that, I'll be able to talk about art again....
 
 
Ethan Hawke
17:26 / 04.01.02
Do you remember the MTV "Liquid Television" series called "The Art School Girls of Doom"? I actually don't remember anything about the animation, but the title sure is neat.

I actually was accepted to art school at RISD when I was applying for colleges, but I decided not to go because it was enormously expensive. SInce then, I've let my art skills atrophy, (not that I was all that skillful to begin with) but I got a gift certificate to Pearl Paint, the most wonderful store on earth, for Xmas....
 
 
Ierne
18:24 / 04.01.02
I actually do have some pix online, at my friend's band website.

Gringo Love Show!

The live B&W shots are mine. (You won't find any of mine in the "backstage" or "cowboy video shoot" sections.)

They still have my old e-mail address up so if you have any feedback for me post it here (unless it's the "YOU SUCK!!!" variety, in which case PM me.)

[ 04-01-2002: Message edited by: Ierne ]
 
 
Lothar Tuppan
19:16 / 04.01.02
Cool! I like how you were still able to pull out some of the subtleties in the dark areas even with the stage lights looming from above.

Did you use a special filter or just plain old know how?
 
 
Ierne
19:25 / 04.01.02
Mezcal Man: ¡Gracias!

No filter...the trick is not using flash. I shoot with high-speed film (ASA 3200) with available (sometimes non-available!) light. And I developed all those prints in the darkroom myself before giving them to the Gringos to scan, so there was a little extra love & attention given there...
 
 
lentil
12:12 / 07.01.02
quote:Originally posted by Flux = A Brain In Psychic Peril:


art school burnout...maybe now that I'm finally through with that, I'll be able to talk about art again....


I FEEL YOU!
yeah, i graduated this year and for a while couldn't think about art, and especially not art theory. something to do with that thing that when you're at art school you're supposed to all be crazy individuals ploughing your own path but you can't shake the fact that there is an overriding mode of dialect for the whole thing that's just as institutionalised as anywhere else. however there is hope, i've been plugging away at it and enjoying making the stuff with only the opinions of my friends and girlfriend for guidance, sorting out shows off my own back etc. although having to have a day job really sucks and it's so hard to get any time down the studio between that and maintaining a social life and yadda yadda......
anyway, i genuinely love art (i mean shit, that's what i DO) and it would be great to get some discussion going on here. i don't know what about specifically though... maybe we could all swap lists of favourite artists for starters?
here's mine (i haven't included any comics artists): Bosch, Breugel (the elder), Poussin, Caravaggio, Picasso (obviously), Patrick Caulfield, Jeff Koons, Lichenstein, David Shrigley, Inka Essenhigh.... well that'll do for now. i also saw mark wallinger's show at the whitechapel gallery on the weekend and was blown away. funny that his exhibition in the 1995 turner prize was so shit.
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
17:10 / 07.01.02
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mr. Conspicuous Lentil:
[QB]

yeah, i graduated this year and for a while couldn't think about art, and especially not art theory. [/b]

Well, I read this one interview with Daniel Clowes that nails one of the things truly horrifying about art school...he was saying that art school is this place where people have to constantly be justifying the greatness of their own (and other people's) work....I've been going to art schools, serious art classes since I was 15, I've heard it all a million times over. And the moment I realized that all the 'pro' artists were just the same, if not a LOT worse, that's when I just decided "fuck this. I hate this".

One thing that really got to me was the realization that I really don't want to make art for galleries and collectors because I hate galleries, I almost never derive enjoyment from that sort of thing, and why the hell would I want to be part of something I hated just because I'm told by everyone I go to school with, all the people that I encounter that it's the way to go? They certainly aren't the audience I would want, and I just don't want to jump through hoops for people that I despise when I don't need to.

something to do with that thing that when you're at art school you're supposed to all be crazy individuals ploughing your own path but you can't shake the fact that there is an overriding mode of dialect for the whole thing that's just as institutionalised as anywhere else.

Where did you go to school? I never got the impression that any of the people I went to school with at Parsons in NYC ever felt that way. Most of them were just doing what the were told, highly insecure people who changed their styles constantly to make their professors happy. Mostly folks who would only start spouting the art babble when they were in a situation in which they were forced to..

There is most certainly a formula, a specific way of talking and writing about art that is the accepted norm, and then there are a few other ways which exist which are more or less the same thing. There is a system, it exists so that hacks and frauds can thrive. Go to any gallery in NYC, Brooklyn...you can see it. Go to student shows in May...it all fits together.

All of the artists I care most about aren't gallery types. Look at what I write in the music, film/tv, and comics forums. That's what makes me excited. It's so rare that I see decent work in galleries...I like Anthony Goicolea. I think he does really fabulous work.

My standards are extremely high, maybe artificially high for gallery/museum art. I prefer words, I prefer stories, I prefer melodies and sounds. Images are wonderful, but I enjoy them far more as parts of other things.
 
 
Suedey! SHOT FOR MEAT!
22:32 / 07.01.02
I really want to say something, but I fear I can't think of anything worthwhile. I'm with both of you on the art school thing though. Ergh. It all seems so defined and... well, regimented that it's completely missing the point. (I'm flailing around here, and I can't reeeally be bothered to attempt to go in to full-scale explanations)

But yeah, I love... art. (Read: Moons, Morrisons, Blakes, Smiths, Keroacs and carry on in that vein... ) Struggling with what direction to actually go myself - or more like, struggling to find a way to support myself with my art. Seems like a bit of a dream, but I can't imagine aiming for anything else.

I tell you, I'm sure I have a lot to say - but other than probably being mindless worthless babble - I'm not even sure if I can understand how to express it...

But anyway, that's satisfied my need to try and be "arty"
 
 
Burn
00:33 / 08.01.02
Ahh, I'm glad to see the Art room is alive and kicking. All it needed was a little nudge.
 
 
lentil
07:08 / 08.01.02
And thank you, oh promiscuous one, for that nudge.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Flux = A Brain In Psychic Peril:

One thing that really got to me was the realization that I really don't want to make art for galleries and collectors because I hate galleries, I almost never derive enjoyment from that sort of thing,

I dunno, i quite enjoy a good gallery show, i think sometimes that amount of financial backing is necessary to make good stuff on a big scale. BUT - it is a totally shit system, particularly with commercial galleries and collectors. i've been in a few (well 3 - and only one of them was a worthwhile experience) gallery shows, and the fact that if I were a customer I'd never be able to afford my own work is just absolutely ridiculous and irritating. On the other hand, if I've spent a couple of hundred hours on a painting i'm not going to let it go for fifty quid. mind you, if i didn't have to pay 50% commision on sales I'd be able to give much more reasonable prices. Also, I don't go to gallery shows that much, and sometimes only because I think i should, so if my work is up in those sorts of environments, how are people like me, or you, ever going to see or give a shit about it? Me and a mate (the only other person i met in college who consistently agreed that what we were taught was bullshit) are going to show some work in a skanky bar in spring, and for that one I'm not going to sell anything that i wouldn't be prepared to pay for and could afford.

They certainly aren't the audience I would want, and I just don't want to jump through hoops for people that I despise when I don't need to.

Too right - at my degree show a gallery owner approached me wanting to show a few of my paintings (if you look at my profile and click the 'my picture' link you'll see one - i should add that it's over a year old, so not really representative of what i'm doing now, plus the school office managed to scan my slide back to front and out of focus), i thought 'yeah might as well', it turned out to be in a swanky part of west london, selling to the kind of people who buy art in the same way that they buy restored antique furniture. needless to say nobody bought my fuck-up stoner pictures; after the show was over the owner gave me some "really helpful" advice. "my clients might buy something like that for the nursery, but they don't really like all of this weirdness in the bottom half. why don't you do a series of pastel drawings of the castle in the background and tone down the colours a bit?"
I have been lucky enough so far to just make whatever the fuck i want and find somebody prepared to put it on display, but it ain't no solution........

Where did you go to school?

At the Slade, central London

Mostly folks who would only start spouting the art babble when they were in a situation in which they were forced to..

Sounds refreshing! at the Slade they couldn't get enough of it. I didn't really know what pretentiousness was until i heard people making "jokes" about Conceptualism, or whatever

All of the artists I care most about aren't gallery types. Look at what I write in the music, film/tv, and comics forums. That's what makes me excited.

That's kind of why I deliberately only listed so-called 'fine' artists, and made a point of the fact that i hadn't included any comic artists or whatever, to highlight the fact that they're only one aspect of what turns me on.

Jesus, what a rant. I guess i'd better do some work now. I'll check out the link you posted on my lunch break.
 
 
Kit-Cat Club
07:27 / 08.01.02
Well, I'd buy your picture, Mr Lentil, if I had any money spare. Love the colours - is that Prussian Blue I spy? My favourite. Blue always does it for me. As you can see from this. (Slapdash technique - I get bored too quickly to be polished).
 
 
@ Bod (The Second)
08:33 / 08.01.02
Your marbles are cool Kit-Kat Club.
and where do i get to see Mr Lentil's prussian blue painting - i see no link..?
 
 
The Return Of Rothkoid
08:33 / 08.01.02
It's here. It won't actually link, because it's sitting in an image field.
 
 
@ Bod (The Second)
10:40 / 08.01.02
it's very good.
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
17:09 / 08.01.02

I dunno, i quite enjoy a good gallery show, i think sometimes that amount of financial backing is necessary to make good stuff on a big scale.


yeah, sometimes they can be nice. but I've never once been really excited about a gallery show, I very seldom thing about the things for long afterwards. I've never been really affected by it one way or another. This is a personal thing... I just can't get too worked up about this sort of thing. The fact that sooooo many other people feel the same way only makes it worse, the fact that gallery art is a mostly irrelevant thing in the culture at large is deserved, I think.

if I were a customer I'd never be able to afford my own work is just absolutely ridiculous and irritating.

yeah, exactly. I don't like art as decoration, either. I don't even like decorating my apartment. it's all priced out of the hands of the people who would want the stuff, and history and the free market has placed such a value on the 'aura' of the original that people either don't want or won't make reproductions... I like reproduction. I hate the idea of originals. That's why I went into photography, that's why I like books, films, music... I abandoned painting a long time ago aware of the fact that paintings only ever reach limited audiences.


Me and a mate (the only other person i met in college who consistently agreed that what we were taught was bullshit) are going to show some work in a skanky bar in spring, and for that one I'm not going to sell anything that i wouldn't be prepared to pay for and could afford.


I know some people who have done things like that here in NYC.... It's one way of doing things, it's worked out for them I guess, at least in terms of making connections and things like that. It's certainly a bit more respectable in a DIY sense... I can't really get too enthusiastic about that avenue cos a) I hate bars and b) the people who I've known who've done this are terrible artists, all of them just pathetic hacks.
 
 
Suedey! SHOT FOR MEAT!
17:24 / 08.01.02
D.I.Y.! Yes! I think comics are/could be (one of the places) where the art's at. (or should be).

Look at Blake. He had the right idea.

But anyway, it's sad that most people equate gallery with art. And that art goes no further than the gallery.

Except the funny/subversive/interesting stuff that upsets the average gallery goer.

(Not that you don't get some amazing stuff in a gallery - they just tend to sometimes breed a certain type and a horrid elitism that probably shouldn't be associated with art and brings to mind art being only for snooty upper classes - with the cash to spare.)

Now I just have to work out my own art. Basically I want to reproduce it in comic-like format and send it and get it to as many people/places as possible. Well, that's one of the goals. The most easily explained and expressed/most likely for some possible commercial illustrative "success" type goal.

Wow, I sound like a wanker.

[ 08-01-2002: Message edited by: Jonny Suede ]
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
17:40 / 08.01.02
Maybe it's just all the things I've been reading for the past several years, all the people I've known, and the type of school I went to, but more and more I think people equate art with commercial things like adverts, design, movies, video games, record sleeves, t-shirts, etc. That's what most of the people I know get off on. No one gives a fuck about what goes on in a gallery unless it has a gimmick or a nice opening reception with lots of free booze and sexy people.

All through my college career, I'd see instructors begging students to go to galleries, to go to museums, because no one fucking wants to. Then you'd see the kids in the fine art segments of the departments realize that they need to start integrating themselves in that world, so they do it the same way they were taught to get into the commercial end: they makes themselves exactly what the market seems to be 'demanding'.

I do happen to think that comics are one of the last refuge of the fine artist in terms of employment, and as a creative market in which they have some form of power and creative control.

I'm all in favor of any DIY venture. Lately it's the only really good option, especially since the market is crashing because of the war/recession.
 
 
Suedey! SHOT FOR MEAT!
17:59 / 08.01.02
Shit yes. I think that's what I was trying to express in some way. Most people would associate those things with art, and yet to be a recognised and commercially viable fine artist you must whore yourself to the gallery mindset thing to succeed. Or something.

Exactly what happened at college for me, I think. And why I "wasn't allowed" to continue fine art.

And comics.. are just a great medium to me. I mean, words and language and all the interesting things you can do with them in books is great. And all the interesting imagery and visuals from painting or illustration or graffiti or whatever are great. But... well, comics seem to be the only place where you can combine them with a certain degree of control (film - for me - has too many variables). Yes, illuminated manuscripts go commercial.

I'm no comic artist however.
I've been thinking of various installations lately...

I must stop this rambling idiocy and return later and contruct a decent reply.

Although what do people think/know of D.A. Levy (sp?)?
 
 
lentil
10:39 / 09.01.02
quote:Originally posted by Flux = A Brain In Psychic Peril:
[b]
I can't really get too enthusiastic about that avenue cos a) I hate bars and b) the people who I've known who've done this are terrible artists, all of them just pathetic hacks.


Bah! Rumbled!
 
 
lentil
10:59 / 09.01.02
quote:Originally posted by Flux = A Brain In Psychic Peril:

All through my college career, I'd see instructors begging students to go to galleries, to go to museums, because no one fucking wants to. Then you'd see the kids in the fine art segments of the departments realize that they need to start integrating themselves in that world.


Nail... head.... BAM!
I agree with you about reproduction, it's just that i love making stuff too much to give it up, but I'm in no way precious about the old "auratic original". A random thought about galleries etc.; I've been trying to get rid of any residual ideas about Art/Fine art/high and low culture or whatever and just think of stuff as 'visual input' (actually even putting the 'visual' in there may be getting too specific) which can either be good or bad. So then it all becomes simply THINGS THAT YOU LOOK AT, but there are still many different types of things, and most of them have various situations in which they work better. Eg - fat new comic, sitting on my sofa with aphex twin or something on the stereo and a large reefer in hand. Some visual input does look better, and is easier to enjoy, in a big room that's got no purpose other than for people to look at it. ie., a 'gallery' for want of a better word. i think it's because the idea of art in galleries is so inextricably intertwined with the [deep baritone] Official History of Art and Patronage that it's become so wanky and problematic, rather than because the idea of having a space designed for looking at cool stuff is a bad one per se.

btw - Kit Kat, thanks for the kind comments. It was Spectrum paints' own brand blue, generally cheap shitty stuff but they do that one colour which is really nice. i couldn't open your link though, or rather I could, but it told me the page wasn't available.

also btw - Flux - your fictionsuit leads me to suspect that you are, or were, a pavement fan. have you heard stephen malkmus' solo thang, if so what do u think? reply over in the music forum probably
 
 
Kit-Cat Club
11:13 / 09.01.02
Bloody Geocities. I gave them my beautiful content, and they laugh in my face. Oh well - sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't...

Rothkoid mirrored it for me here (thanks, R.)
 
 
lentil
13:49 / 09.01.02
nice - sharp but waxy
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
14:37 / 09.01.02
also btw - Flux - your fictionsuit leads me to suspect that you are, or were, a pavement fan. have you heard stephen malkmus' solo thang, if so what do u think? reply over in the music forum probably

Yeah, Pavement/Malkmus/Jicks are my all-time favorite band. I love the SM/Jicks album intensely. I think it was the best LP from last year.

I've got live versions of many of the songs that are going to be on the next one (due out in the fall), and it's going to be just as good, if not better.

[ 09-01-2002: Message edited by: Flux = The Man Who Loves You ]
 
 
Cherry Bomb
14:41 / 09.01.02
Oooooh, my friend Lindz has that Malkmus solo album and it does indeed rock the house...

OK sorry back to topic!
 
 
Suedey! SHOT FOR MEAT!
18:59 / 09.01.02
Looky here and ponder upon this.

(To be honest I didn't know whether to post this here, or where it is. But at least it should get this thread back to art... )
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
19:49 / 09.01.02
quote:Originally posted by Mr. Conspicuous Lentil:

Some visual input does look better, and is easier to enjoy, in a big room that's got no purpose other than for people to look at it. ie., a 'gallery' for want of a better word. i think it's because the idea of art in galleries is so inextricably intertwined with the [deep baritone] Official History of Art and Patronage that it's become so wanky and problematic, rather than because the idea of having a space designed for looking at cool stuff is a bad one per se.


I think one of the more worthwhile experiments I've been involved with have been having big loft parties where people were encouraged to bring art to display, or make art while the party was in progress. It sounds a bit precious, but it's a pretty decent way of getting people who are your age to look at and interact with your images/ideas/etc. It always works more when you stress the *party* over the *art show*, though. Which isn't a problem to me, I think. But it has with some folks I've put things like this together with...
 
 
Saveloy
21:10 / 09.01.02
Flux:
"I like reproduction. I hate the idea of originals. That's why I went into photography..."

How do you feel about online galleries? I've mentioned it before, but you might be interested in:

POD Gallery

Their aim is to make visual art as easy and as cheap to buy as books and records (there's a lengthy manifesto on the site). What they do is produce high quality digital prints, on demand, of artists' originals, which you can have in a variety of sizes from postcard to huge poster. They've got sections on experimental, digital art, comic art, cheesy stuff, kitsch and so on.

I particularly like Ken Brown's mad collage stuff.

On a similar, sort of completely different tack: I don't dislike the idea of originals, but I do think reproductions look better. Has anyone else seen a painting in a book or on a postcard, loved it, gone to see the original and been slightly disappointed?
 
 
Kit-Cat Club
21:14 / 09.01.02
On this subject it's probably best to start off with John Berger's Ways of Seeing, which IIRC has some material on why reproduction breeds familiarity, which in turn makes people less susceptible to the original works - not exactly surprising, but. Also Benjamin.

I noticed the problem especially with the Mona Lisa - never my favourite painting anyway, but IRL it is small and greenish and behind some safety glass and usually about thirty tourists with video cameras - which does make it less easy to appreciate.
 
 
Saveloy
10:32 / 10.01.02
Kit-Cat Club:
"On this subject it's probably best to start off with John Berger's Ways of Seeing, which IIRC has some material on why reproduction breeds familiarity, which in turn makes people less susceptible to the original works."

Familiarity probably plays some part, yes, but my disappointment is less "oh, is that it?" and more "I preferred it with a lovely glossy sheen". I can't quite put my finger on exactly what it is, but it probably is as simple as that. I think with glossy prints you lose the texture (which is a plus with me - I hate the texture of canvas) but gain in depth of colour and contrast. I think Francis Bacon had a similar thing, he always preferred to use ordinary reflective glass to the non-reflective variety that picture framers use as standard. It works a bit like a super thick layer of gloss varnish.

Of course, everything looks better still on a monitor, which probably explains why there are so many crap, computer designed album covers about (I'm looking at you, Stereolab!)
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
15:28 / 10.01.02
quote:Originally posted by Kit-Cat Club:
On this subject it's probably best to start off with John Berger's Ways of Seeing,


Good lord. do you realize that I've had that book as required reading in at least three classes I've taken in the past four years? sigh. and Benjamin... but I like Walter Benjamin.
 
 
Suedey! SHOT FOR MEAT!
16:44 / 10.01.02
quote:Originally posted by Saveloy:
Of course, everything looks better still on a monitor...


I must dispute that! I think things look crap on a monitor, but I do like a nice glossy print. Wanna buy one?

[ 10-01-2002: Message edited by: Jonny Suede ]
 
 
lentil
07:29 / 11.01.02
Ooh!
My computer goes down for one day and I find I've missed lots of int'resting discussion. Definitely agree with Kit Kat (I was going to abbreviate you to KKK but realised I could be horribly misquoted at some point in the future by a scurrilous journalist out to tarnish my reputation) about the Mona Lisa, what a fuckign disappointment (although like you i wasn't expecting that much anyway). There are much better things in the Louvre, I remember on Rembrandt of some meat that was pretty cool, and the ceilings are awesome. I like Flux's loft party thing too. I've never done that in terms of having a specifically organised event, but come to think of it I've had lots of big parties at the flats I've lived in over the last few years, and the walls have always been covered with mine and others' art stuff. i guess that fits with the emphasis of the party over the art; each party was great, and was an end it itself , but people would always be saying "Shit, that thing's really cool, when did you make that". However if I'd said "come and check out my new work" we would have sat around awkwardly imitating the twats off those Dorito's ads (that might not mean anything to people outside the UK) and everyone would have gone home after a glass of lukewarm chardonnay. Actually me and the people I share a studio with are planning to throw a party there soon, should fit the bill nicely.
Reproductions - what Saveloy mentioned about creating good quality reproductions of your stuff is one of the things I have planned for the hack show i mentioned earlier in this thread. i really like the idea, it means i can still make ridiculous, large ornate things if i want to but also achieve a wider and more democratic distribution.
I also am now really in the mood for some Malkmus related ranting, I might go start a thread in music (after doinmg some boring paperwork)
 
  

Page: (1)2

 
  
Add Your Reply