Agreed, it's very well written. However, I believe Richard Prince is over-rated. That's not a critique on the article or its writer, though. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by louisruby
Agreed, it's very well written. However, I believe Richard Prince is over-rated. That's not a critique on the article or its writer, though. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by louisruby
\Quote:
Originally Posted by Pugwash
Thank you everyone for commenting, James too. :)
Pug, thank you for understanding. I went to sleep and it's always nice to wake up what the onther Prince, the musical artist known as Prince would call Controversy. But if people want something to get up in arms over and champion on this board, I think they've just received it.
Like I said, Gross' photo is child pornography but is Prince's photo of that photo? That's the question but it's for each of us to decide.
IMO any "artist" who's sole claim to fame is controversy is sorely over rated. It only shows more effort spent on getting a rise out of the audience then creating. Then the 15 minute wonders are forgotten.
Remember the dung madonna?
How a man can sell copyright infringements for the prices he does is incredible. And yes, photos of porn are porn. I'm not sure Gross's photo is porn though, and the law doesn't think it is either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Posh
Sure, it's not wise to post it here, but that doesn't give it pornographic status.
Anyway, it's a debate that's been going on long enough in the art world, and Prince merely used it to gain controversy. He's more exploitative than Gross was.
Madonna has to be commended on her music industry acumen. She had terms with her record company Maverick through Warner Brothers that mirrored those of Michael Jackson's MJJ with Sony, allowing her creative control and higher profits than many other artists, male or female, at that time. She is, if nothing else, a great entertainer, turning some second-rate dance moves, quasi-slutty clothes and one octave range into an almost a $850 million dollar empire, currently. Her net worth is quickly approaching that of Oprah and within five years she should have over a one billion dollars in assests; a fantastic legacy for herself and, most importantly, for her children. I may not like all her personal choices but there's one thing this woman is not and that is dumb. I respect her keen business sense a great deal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Anubis
As far as artists go, some actively court controversy because they have nothing else going for them. Richard Prince's message and motifs are MORE relevant now than they were even in the 1980s. The celebrity saturated, fame-at-any-cost and material goods obsessed culture we live in now is something he almost seemed to predict within his art.
That photo is the only photo of his that's ever caused a frackas and it never even cemented his own fame, which is probably the most ironic thing of all. His Nurses made him famous and for the right reasons.
Madonna != Dung MadonnaQuote:
Originally Posted by Posh
righty-o Pugs.
See? No-one remembers it today. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Anubis
it's like kicking dried up cow pies isn't it? :lol:
that painting was just horrid. the dung was just icing. the "painter" couldn't paint to save his life.
That's what I found odd about the picture too; it ISN'T considered pornography at all. Gary Gross was taken to court for the whole series of photos by Brooke Shields' in the 1980s and they upheld his right to show them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pugwash
Dung Madonna? Don't forget Andres Serrano's Piss Christ for old-fashioned, taxpayer-funded, sickening art.
I'll get her for using my name for her company ..... what about my rights? :mad: :mad:
http://usera.ImageCave.com/Iceman2/25054.jpg
Quote:
Originally Posted by Posh
only thing i liked was the Dodge Challenger.
Mademoiselle Posh,
I only ran across this scholarly oevre this afternoon. I wish I had an alert button for you on this site.
Once again I wonder where you find an outlet for those brains of yours. I doubt it was in the music business and BTW, Re Madonna, I don't confuse sheer ruthlessness for real intelligence. She's reminding me now of Norma Desmond, alive only when surrounded by her own image ( See ' Sunset Boulevard ', 1952 dir. : William Wilder ).
Sadly, since our Country installed the Patriot Act owners of these sites are under microscopic scrutiny by the government. Under the mission of fighting terrorism an oleo of various pestilences are covered, such as child pornography which is supposed to be rife....somewhere. I have yet to see an example.
I don't find the picture of Brook Shields pornographic at all.
I just finished a biography of Grace Kelly in which is included a snapshot of her and her parents and her family at the beach.
Grace, all of 7 years old is shirtless as is her younger sister.
Should this picture be banned ? No doubt some will say yes but really, America was much different, much more innocent years ago. I was there. As Anubis said, even everyday shots of kids are no longer allowed. Where are we heading with all this censorship ? No where good, that's for sure but we must play along to survive.
Nonetheless, you have functioned in a surrogate sort of way as Artist du Jour by forcing us to look at serious questions through fresh eyes. Bravo.
My own personal preference for Art ends with the Quatrocento, though of course I am not immune to later beautiful things so the name Richard Prince only rings a bell for a youth I met on the Naval base in Newport circa 1964, a long time friend of my cousin Art's ( deceased,alas ) whom he had had since living on the Coco Solo Base in Panama, CZ in the early 50's. Perhaps the same fellow.
I do know that he and my cousin were stark raving mad for cutting-edge things American, understandable for boys growing up American, yet so far from America.
I think the crux of your essay is that photography, for better or for worse, IS Art now.
It pains me greatly to name drop ( LOL ) but we're talking Art here.
I remember showing my self portrait to Andy Warhol. It was done very true to life, quite dramatic. I was at my physical best, a mere 19 years old and longed for approval from Le Maitre.
He said, very sweetly ( there wasn't a nasty bone in his body ) and a touch dismissingly : " Yes. But you know, photography made all of this obsolete."
I think my carreer in Art ended at that moment because he was right.
Do I take Richard Prince seriously as an Artist ?
No, but I take little that's au courant seriously as you shall do also after your odometer has the high miles upon it.
I think his 'Surfer Nurse' is beautiful...SHE'S beautiful, ideal. You could swim in her eyes, but it's an abberation in the style of a very nice illustration for an elite 50's magazine. And I roundly condemn him for taking a photograph of a photograph of little Brook Shields and showcasing it in a window in Greenwich Village.
That is theft, pure and simple. But that's modern life. We're looking back and only back. Rear view vision for a society which must dread what is ahead.
But thank you, Posh for ' going where others dare nnot to go.'
Art must provoke and in that sense you and Richard Prince have done a good job.
Norman
( BTW, 'Splendor in the Grass' is an excellent film and I endorse your seeing it heartily. Natallie Wood does a superb job of acting, really her performance is hyper-real.
I think Anjelina Jolie is attempting to trump her in her next film. I wish her luck.
He was wrong, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by normanduke
History has shown he was wrong, unless you're thinking of painting as a purely reproductive craft. If your self-portrait was merely a photographic rendition of your face, then yes, that form of documentary is all but obsolete[1], as the mechanism for reproducing what is in front of us has been vastly simplified by photography.
However, interpretative and expressive painting is still alive and kicking.
[1] Not quite obsolete if you consider courtroom artists.
Thanks for the thorough, if rambling ;), comment. You make some great points though, ones I hadn't considered. Your unique take on things never ceases to delight me. :D I think it's incredible you got to meet Andy Warhol! I Shot Andy Warhol is one of my favorite movies. I'm sorry he shot down your dream though. Did he at least offer you some acid afterward? LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by normanduke
No painting is not dead. But in some contemporary realms, its on life support. Everything is so mixed media now, I feel. A piece may be painted but it may also have a car sticking out of it. It's really crazy. It's like now who can take the biggest canvas (or biggest whatever) and put the most unexpected thing on it, be it paint, photo of a nude chick from a 1984 biker mag or toothpaste. Yes, I said toothpaste. Thank you very much, Kelley walker. :mad:Quote:
Originally Posted by Pugwash
OH MY LORD...
HELP ME MERCIFUL GOD!!! Is this thread for real????
What a waste of brain power......:rolleyes:
ART???
:D
You may be dead, Caravaggio, but you're still all the artist I've ever needed.:cheesy:Quote:
Originally Posted by caravaggio
Art, fashion, music, film: each one tied to the next like a string of pearls.
no offence...
but I am so sick and tired of pseudo-intellectuals who utilize brain energy to go off on a artistic voyage of theories, critiques and wordy extrapolations...
when all this time and energy could be used to help the less fortunate, search for the cure to terrible diseases, aleviate the pain of the suffering and end all wars....
Art is useless and is only amusing to the Bourgeoisie.
/sarcasm ???? no? If not, kinda sad, art in all forms is very important. Creativity is a necessary part of all forms of intelligence. This forum wouldnt exist without the appreciation of art, form and function. Are these timepieces we lust after on here not a form of art created by an artist?Quote:
Originally Posted by caravaggio
Say caravaggio, that is extraordinarily amusing coming from you....
I think I remember you declaring yourself an artiste, or was it art forger?
Lest I'm mistaken.
Well...Quote:
Originally Posted by Anubis
since that PM you sent long ago addressing my art skills, I have come to my senses and quit Art.
i am just a plain ordinary grade six teacher now, living paycheck to paycheck....
One would have thought art would have given you some resistance to criticism....:lol:
My apologies, if I'm mistaken.
Ya know something, you're right. If I was suffering, I wouldn't care about art either.Are you suffereing now? Is that why art is useless to you? Can I send you some food. You KNOW I'm not going to eat mine. I truly care about you. See this look on my face? This is caring, even though Botox makes my apathy face all I can show.Quote:
Originally Posted by caravaggio
My position has and will remain conscientious shallowness. :kiss:
botox that early? damn...you're gonna be extremely curious later on...:lol:
No need to apologize Anubis.Quote:
Originally Posted by Anubis
You are a wise man who does not chew his words and your words saved me alot of misused time.
I'll leave it at that for now...