OT: You Call That Art?
stoney
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/GiveMeABreak/story?id=563146&page=3
You Call That Art?
Observers, Artists, Critics Rank Children's Paintings With the Masters
Mar. 11, 2005 - People got very excited about Christo's latest public
art work, "The Gates," in New York's Central Park. For two week's
7,500 metal gates draped with orange fabric were staked along 23 miles
of the park's footpaths. Some people called "The Gates" a masterpiece.
Others called it an ugly nuisance.
New York Post columnist Andrea Peyser said all the orange fabric on
"The Gates" made it look like an ad for Home Depot.
New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg (R) was annoyed by the
criticism. "Nobody's criticizing this. Everybody likes it. And this is
certainly art," he said.
It is? Well, I kinda like it, but how does the mayor know that "The
Gates" is really art, and not just shower curtains on poles? Do people
really know what's art and what's just stuff?
We ran a test.
On ABCNews.com, we showed four reproductions of art works that are
considered masterpieces of modern art along with six pieces that will
never make it into any museum. We asked viewers to decide which work
was art and which was not.
I assumed the famous art would get the most votes if only because art
lovers would recognize them, but they didn't. Most got far fewer votes
than the winner.
The one that received the most votes as a "real" artwork was a piece
of framed fabric "20/20" bought at a thrift store for $5.
We also conducted the test with New Yorkers at Manhattan Mall. We
asked people to tell us which art works they'd expect to see in a
museum. We included copies of the famous paintings, plus some other
items.
How do critics and curators decide which is art?
How do they determine that Damien Hirst's embalmed shark and sliced
cow carcasses are art?
Why is Willem de Kooning's "A Tree in Naples," which we included a
reproduction of in our quiz, worth millions, when a more realistic
looking landscape, done by elephants with paintbrushes in Thailand, is
worth much less?
I asked an art historian: Why is De Kooning's "A Tree in Naples" art?
The work doesn't look like a tree, let alone Naples.
"But if you look closely, you might say this brown part is the bark of
the tree. You might say the blue is the sky. Maybe that's, maybe
that's the case and maybe it's not. But you bring to it whatever
feelings that this evokes," said Samantha Hoover, an art historian at
New York's School of Visual Arts.
What about Kasimir Malevich's Black Circle, which we also included in
the online quiz? "He was saying I want to free art from telling a
story," said Hoover.
So it's just all in the eye of the beholder?
"I wouldn't say it's all in the eye of the beholder," Hoover said. "I
think you need to know the story behind the work to understand its
full impact and meaning."
OK, I can get that concept. Watching Ed Harris' performance in the
film about famous artist Jackson Pollock, I learned that Pollock's
creative genius came from his tortured soul. That led to a big
breakthrough in modern art. But do the people who pay millions for
Pollock's work really see the difference between his dripping colors
and a child's painting?
Four of the art works in our test were done by 4-year-olds, and when
we showed their artwork on the Web, and showed it to people at the
mall, the kids' work ranked ahead of most of the masters.
I assumed real artists wouldn't fall for the trick, so we invited some
to take our test. Most of them also put at least some of the kids'
work up there with the masters.
One artist, Victor Acevedo, described one of the children's pieces as
"a competent execution of abstract expressionism which was first made
famous by de Kooning and Jackson Pollock and others. So it's emulating
that style and it's a school of art."
When I told him the work was done by a 4-year-old he said, "That's
amazing. Give that kid a show."
Actually, it was a collaboration. Maybe they should give Hannah and
Haley, the two 4-year-old girls who painted it, a show of their own.
More than 1,800 people said their work was great art.
And even Hoover, the art historian, ranked one of the children's
paintings among the real artworks. When I told her who did the work
she said, "It has good composition. I think it has good depth and
space."
So can anybody explain to me why people want to spend millions of
dollars on abstract art if any 4-year-old could create something
great?
"There's some art that's validated by the establishment or by the
media and then there's the rest," said artist Deborah Gilbert.
But maybe the establishment is out to lunch.
An artist who calls himself Flash Light told me, "The function of art
is to make rich people feel more important."
Well, if rich people want to spend their own money this way, fine.
But you should know that you're contributing your money too. The
politicians may say they're starved for funds, but they're still
giving your hard-earned tax dollars to museums that exhibit these
kinds of things.
Which makes me and some of our testers say: Give Me a Break!
Copyright © 2005 ABC News Internet Ventures
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
Vic Sagerquist
> New York Post columnist Andrea Peyser said all the orange fabric on
> "The Gates" made it look like an ad for Home Depot.
One man's art is another man's Schlockhouse.
--
Vic Sagerquist
aa#2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department
Plonked by Jason Gastrich for all eternity...
______________
As you were, I was. As I am, you will be.
--- Hunter S. Thompson
Kate
Museums display what people want to see. So if people want to see the
art, they get the art.
Here's a little insight into why this kid's art thing never works out.
It's not kosher to take kid's art and put it up next to a well known
artist, because it wasn't a kid who decided which work from a child to
use, it was an adult - probably one with a very good sense of design.
Art is not just the execution, but also the design - the decision what
to use, what to present and how to present it. This is why you can
take a toilet and present it correctly to get a reaction. It was the
decision that was art, not the chunk of porcelain.
If you have a 5 year old decide which of her classmates' art work
would be presented and decide how it would be framed, whether it
should be framed, etc. Do you think it would be so hard to discerne
which 4 art pieces were from the kids?
High priced art is the same as any other collectable. The price goes
up as more people are willing to pay more. Is one baseball card
really a more valuable piece of paper than another? Or does the
rarity and well known face on it have something to do with that. The
price of art has nothing to do with the artistic value, which is
subjective as hell. It has to do with the desires of those with the
bucks to put up for it.
I'm sure the childhood drawings of any famous artist would be very
valuable too, and not because they are any better than any mature work
from a lessor known artist.
raven1
>High priced art is the same as any other collectable. The price goes
>up as more people are willing to pay more. Is one baseball card
>really a more valuable piece of paper than another? Or does the
>rarity and well known face on it have something to do with that. The
>price of art has nothing to do with the artistic value, which is
>subjective as hell. It has to do with the desires of those with the
>bucks to put up for it.
Or, as has been said, things are worth what people are willing to pay
for them. I wouldn't give you a dime for any given baseball card, but
some people are willing to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for
rare ones, so that's effectively what they're worth.
Elroy Willis
> cob...@newscene.com (Kate ) wrote:
One of the shows I watched recently was about counterfeit baseball
cards, and how easy it is to make them these days. I can't understand
how somebody can pay so much for something that could actually be
a counterfeit copy.
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com