Posted: April 15th, 2005, 8:25 am
"gon to an art gallery, it is like shopping in a tore. buy only if you like what you see. othrwise, its free and enjoy the free wine and cheese"
Well I think there's a few differences between store shopping and art galleries, etc....don't think Sotheby has a return policy like Walmart and I've never seen a support the store can as I've walked into Staples....but then again, Staples and Walmart don't serve wine and cheese either. And booze and dairy do go a long way. I once caught a play in Chicago called Cannibal Lesbian Cheerleaders Hooked on Crack. It was held in a converted loft and the tickets were something like $7 each. Was a pretty good show actually, some really fun bits, but the thing that irked me was the had a donation can as you left...like the money I paid for the ticket wasn't a donation enough. I've also been to a couple showings that charged a nominal fee. Not that I really have a problem with $7 for a medicore play or a couple bucks to see some decent paintings or pics...but its when you pay $80 bucks to see the tedious Sunset Blvd. because your mother wants to see a musical for Christmas and you contact a lawyer asking if its feasible to sue Webber for lost time, pain and suffering. Or you buy a $20 CD and find out the herion addicted lead singer's inaudible voice is only second worse to the boring repetitive musical accompinament and you feel as disappointed in it as you did when you learned the bullets struck John instead of Yoko, but you can't get your money back anymore than you can change what happened on that stairwell....lol...all said in good fun of course, though I dislike Yoko I don't wish her harm..lol...though a grazing wound, say to her vocal chords which would have silenced her forever but caused no other harm, would have been nice..lol
"museums, library, even browsing in bookstores, great ways to take in free art. (tho, time is money.) "
You must live in a better city than I because museums charge where I'm from...but I get what you are saying and agree. There are many ways to enjoy free art. However its not really enjoyable to read a whole book in a bookstore or a library...plus libraries aren't free either cause I don't know anyone who returns their books on time..lol...But my point was that if you do purchase art, say a book, you can't go to the author and say...ummm, this mystery novel was a little undercooked, could you either rewrite it or give me my money back, nor could I go to the ROM and say, your exhibit on ancient Egypt was not a good fit, may I have my $15 dollars back please. I once had to pretend I was dyslexic to get my money back from a foriegn film citing I didn't know it was in subtitles. Sad but true..lol
"i disagree with Trevor on the concept of art perhaps. i think some art gimmicks are brilliant and not just any schmuck can do it. "
I don't think we disagree, and if so, not by much - probably only on what gimmicks are brilliant and which ones aren't. Like I said earlier, I don't think any artist can deny ever being gimmicky. Lighting a piano on fire and recording it, is not all that brilliant and truly any body can do that. However, perhaps the thoughts behind it and inspired by it may be. Then we go back to intent and music...if I lit a piano on fire, I'd be a mad man because i'd be doing nothing more than burning an expensive instrument...Cage does it boom - brilliance to some. The same way a child hammers on the piano keys differs from Thelonius Monk's non linear ivory stroll. Perhaps with art, the means is not as important as the end result. The effect. Not what is created, but what is caused by the artistic creation. What it inspires. And if Cage burning a piano inspires more than Trevor burning his kazoo, then perhaps that is the brilliance in him burning a piano. I think in Cage's case, perhaps he is more of the art work than any of his gimmicks. But in a gimmicky case such as vomiting on someone else's art work, without their permission and calling it art, inspires absolutely no new thoughts for me other than vomiting on other people's possesions is not cool..lol.
What's also interesting is how some art loses its impact. It does not change its characteristics, though the audience has - thereby occasionally rendering the art impotent. The red spot on the wall is indeed different for everyone. Personally, something like Warhol is uninspiring and gimmicky. I understand why people thought it brilliant for its time, but its not brilliant anymore, we have surpassed it. Like anything that is "pop", it became quickly dated. His own artistic creation, pop art, was its own downfall by design...if it wasn't for ailing health from a gun shot wound, he would have outlived the life of his art. Well I don't know if that is entirely true, I think he will always be remembered as a forefather of pop art...perhaps a shared title with the creator of Bazooka Joe..lol But his films....ohhhh christ....I've seen grade school flipbooks of pole vaulters that are more entertaining and thought provoking...lol Then you get the Sistine Chapel, though religion and its followers (and non followers) have changed substantially, few do not stand in awe at the marvelous paintings that adorn its ceiling.
I think that's all I have in me this morn.
Btw Zyz, great M&R Laugh In pic
Well I think there's a few differences between store shopping and art galleries, etc....don't think Sotheby has a return policy like Walmart and I've never seen a support the store can as I've walked into Staples....but then again, Staples and Walmart don't serve wine and cheese either. And booze and dairy do go a long way. I once caught a play in Chicago called Cannibal Lesbian Cheerleaders Hooked on Crack. It was held in a converted loft and the tickets were something like $7 each. Was a pretty good show actually, some really fun bits, but the thing that irked me was the had a donation can as you left...like the money I paid for the ticket wasn't a donation enough. I've also been to a couple showings that charged a nominal fee. Not that I really have a problem with $7 for a medicore play or a couple bucks to see some decent paintings or pics...but its when you pay $80 bucks to see the tedious Sunset Blvd. because your mother wants to see a musical for Christmas and you contact a lawyer asking if its feasible to sue Webber for lost time, pain and suffering. Or you buy a $20 CD and find out the herion addicted lead singer's inaudible voice is only second worse to the boring repetitive musical accompinament and you feel as disappointed in it as you did when you learned the bullets struck John instead of Yoko, but you can't get your money back anymore than you can change what happened on that stairwell....lol...all said in good fun of course, though I dislike Yoko I don't wish her harm..lol...though a grazing wound, say to her vocal chords which would have silenced her forever but caused no other harm, would have been nice..lol
"museums, library, even browsing in bookstores, great ways to take in free art. (tho, time is money.) "
You must live in a better city than I because museums charge where I'm from...but I get what you are saying and agree. There are many ways to enjoy free art. However its not really enjoyable to read a whole book in a bookstore or a library...plus libraries aren't free either cause I don't know anyone who returns their books on time..lol...But my point was that if you do purchase art, say a book, you can't go to the author and say...ummm, this mystery novel was a little undercooked, could you either rewrite it or give me my money back, nor could I go to the ROM and say, your exhibit on ancient Egypt was not a good fit, may I have my $15 dollars back please. I once had to pretend I was dyslexic to get my money back from a foriegn film citing I didn't know it was in subtitles. Sad but true..lol
"i disagree with Trevor on the concept of art perhaps. i think some art gimmicks are brilliant and not just any schmuck can do it. "
I don't think we disagree, and if so, not by much - probably only on what gimmicks are brilliant and which ones aren't. Like I said earlier, I don't think any artist can deny ever being gimmicky. Lighting a piano on fire and recording it, is not all that brilliant and truly any body can do that. However, perhaps the thoughts behind it and inspired by it may be. Then we go back to intent and music...if I lit a piano on fire, I'd be a mad man because i'd be doing nothing more than burning an expensive instrument...Cage does it boom - brilliance to some. The same way a child hammers on the piano keys differs from Thelonius Monk's non linear ivory stroll. Perhaps with art, the means is not as important as the end result. The effect. Not what is created, but what is caused by the artistic creation. What it inspires. And if Cage burning a piano inspires more than Trevor burning his kazoo, then perhaps that is the brilliance in him burning a piano. I think in Cage's case, perhaps he is more of the art work than any of his gimmicks. But in a gimmicky case such as vomiting on someone else's art work, without their permission and calling it art, inspires absolutely no new thoughts for me other than vomiting on other people's possesions is not cool..lol.
What's also interesting is how some art loses its impact. It does not change its characteristics, though the audience has - thereby occasionally rendering the art impotent. The red spot on the wall is indeed different for everyone. Personally, something like Warhol is uninspiring and gimmicky. I understand why people thought it brilliant for its time, but its not brilliant anymore, we have surpassed it. Like anything that is "pop", it became quickly dated. His own artistic creation, pop art, was its own downfall by design...if it wasn't for ailing health from a gun shot wound, he would have outlived the life of his art. Well I don't know if that is entirely true, I think he will always be remembered as a forefather of pop art...perhaps a shared title with the creator of Bazooka Joe..lol But his films....ohhhh christ....I've seen grade school flipbooks of pole vaulters that are more entertaining and thought provoking...lol Then you get the Sistine Chapel, though religion and its followers (and non followers) have changed substantially, few do not stand in awe at the marvelous paintings that adorn its ceiling.
I think that's all I have in me this morn.
Btw Zyz, great M&R Laugh In pic