Relevant
Relevant Feed
Bringing context to the space between culture and technology.
1760 Members
See All
We'll be adding more communities soon!
© 2019 Relevant Protocols Inc.
30
Why he spent so many letters? It's so stupid. Only question I would like to ask is: When does he consider the last "real" art object? I've checked his wikipedia, dunno maybe he is just making one more art-joke by writing this. This reference for good Michelangelo art object is so controversial. People decide it as good, huh. What people? It's the same stuff as contemporary. It's only worthy if he is attacking all global history of art, but this David reference totally destroys it. Same as style of the text it's just low-level ranting, for complete resemblance it should be written in caps lock. I don't think that guy from Goldsmiths can think so superficially. This is a one more point to mark it as a joke.
2
in a hilarious and polemical essay, artist Liam Gillick shreds the current state of contemporary art and the art world today. "We wouldn’t say that all conceptual art is a waste of time. It is just that in many cases the artist has extremely little to say and that is the real issue. Because it’s pish. It’s the pish receiving all the attention of the self-appointed art world authority that really pisses us off. These pseuds hold court over modern art and default to the most pretentious meaningless shite simply to set themselves apart from people who ‘just don’t get it’ ... all to the detriment of the good stuff. Modern Art is art critics and rich types fan-wanking over some esoteric display to look sophisticated as members of some club not for the hoi-polloi. Don’t tell the viewer how to interpret the work; have both the decency and the courage to allow the viewer to bring personal experience to the equation. Mealy-mouthed art speak ‘statements’ designed both to obfuscate and to lay claim to deep, soul-wrenching significance deserve nothing but contempt. Bingo. The answer to ‘Why does contemporary art look so simple?’ is because churning this guff out is easy and pays well. Nailed it. The art doesn’t have to be good, it just had to appreciate in value. The whole scene is controlled by a cabal of upper class critics and collectors who decide which artist gets to be important. Once the artist realizes they are in they are free to knock out any old shit. All that glitters, is not gold—but it can be a good investment none the less."
0
I can’t even read this please advise @commune_mist 😂
0
I understood it as satire, absorbing common criticisms of art whilst injecting his own. It reads as overtly pessimistic and nihilistic, however, for this reason I feel it potentially opens up space for the reader to form a counter argument towards pessimisms against art. Although, I could be wrong.