Cindy Shercrap
normn...@my-deja.com
show suck big time. Here work, well technically nicely printed
(probably the part she does not do) is bad in about any terms you can
think up. The compositions are terrible, the ideas are terrible, the
cliches of types of women that she plays are stupid, the whole premise
is outdated and hinged on the stupid version of feminism. It really is
offensive. The show would work just as well if the photos were cliche
types of men as played by a man, or it would work and does on a daily
basis in most off-broadway shows in new york, bad actors playing cliche
types of men and women. Please would someone please tell her to go
away and tell the idiot critics who keep reading into her work all the
good ideas of feminist writing, critique, and deconstruction to find a
better artist. She's never cared much about art, and from a friend of
mine who went to school with her, she worked about 1 week a year and
spent the rest of the time partying. Why do you think she never allows
anyone to interview her? Because she's an idiot through and through.
This latest work proves it.
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
jeff_l...@my-deja.com
I advise that you immediately sell your collection of her work. I gather
her prints are very suddenly worth a lot of money these days.
What exactly is your question?
I find your posting interesting as an art student who's been accused of
being a 'sad bastard' for doing 'too much work'.
Jeff
http://www.themodernartsite.com/
----------------------------------
Scarlett
than you.
Here is a suggestion: Don't go to these exhibits. You sound like
you would greatly enjoy one of those "I'm a poor oppressed white
male" theme shows popping up in the art world.
And yet another male arguing on the aesthetic merits of feminist
content....
--
Scarlett
Website:
http://ScarlettDecker.homestead.com
"Do you know what he needs?
Two or three shock treatments," Mary George said.
"Get that artist business out of his head once and for all."
(from "The Enduring Chill" by Flannery O'Connor)
<normn...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:934j98$f67$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
: I took a class to the latest cindy sherman show and oh my god
Laurie S.
wrote:
>You are right, of course. The entire art world is much less smart
>than you.
>
>Here is a suggestion: Don't go to these exhibits. You sound like
>you would greatly enjoy one of those "I'm a poor oppressed white
>male" theme shows popping up in the art world.
>
I think I'd pass on either. From what little I could glean from norm's
obviously biased reactions (not that I'd take any of them at face
value), I might not like such a show myself. Most feminist arts and
literature annoy me, much to the chagrin of my male friend who devours
Nancy Friday books.
>And yet another male arguing on the aesthetic merits of feminist
>content....
>
Why shouldn't a man comment on feminist content? Conversely, why
shouldn't a woman comment on anti-feminist/masculist content? I find
as much disagreement among women and women, and men and man, as I find
among women and men.
Then again, I don't make a whole lot of friends among either the
strongly feminist or strongly anti-feminist crowds. Only a few
enemies, though. ;)
Laurie
>--
>Scarlett
>Website:
>http://ScarlettDecker.homestead.com
Laurie
---
www.geocities.com/tobyneige/life.html
---
"If you can't believe in yourself,
believe in someone who believes in you."
normn...@my-deja.com
MALE AND FEMALE were equally disgusted with how bad her work was and
how it didn't hold up. You sound like one of these artists who
believes every piece of crap that comes along in Art in America or a
few of the University presses. Once one begins to really question much
contemporary art, regardless of how well it sells, one often finds
answers quite opposite the marketing sales pitches of which the art
magazines and critics take part. Go back to your little ivory tower
and believe we live in 1960 when feminism is alive and well and then go
pay your ten bucks to see your beloved R rated movie where you enjoy
seeing the continual negative stereotypes of half naked, passive
women. I'll bet you are so full of contradictions like this its
horrible.
Laurie S.
Who are you replying to?
Laurie
jeff_l...@my-deja.com
> Who are you replying to?
>
> Laurie
>
Laurie
He reads me like a book, and with so little to go on!
Shall we check through in case we've missed any rants against work that
doesn't sell too good?
Jeff
http://www.themodernartsite.com/
--------------------------------
mdeli
>The large majority of my students who were at the show with me BOTH
>MALE AND FEMALE were equally disgusted with how bad her work was and
>how it didn't hold up.
The reason is simple, Cindy has no skill or talent. Artists like that
make it on luck and connections. For every C.S. the are about 10,000
failures who get no place and spend their lives complaining.
Whether an artist is a man or a woman is of no consequence. What
counts is what's on the wall. If its crap its crap, no matter who did
it.
...no skill no art
Modern Academic Art is incompetence in search of an idea.
Tired of Modern Art? Check out my web page!
" "
It was a sort of programme on how to get on in art without going to Uni. I
loved it, and actually printed it off. It now hangs in the liferoom at
Loughborough University, UK.
any more like that?
as for the sexist angle in art, it is the last bastion of sexism. I tire of
seeing shows billed as an exhibition of x amount of women artists looking
at......... why does it matter what gender the artist. Its the art which
mattes surely. If they tried it with a group of male artists there would be
uproar. the same goes in British T.V. we can apparently have programmes
called BLACK ON BLACK, but were someone try calling a programme WHITE ON
WHITE I wonder what the reaction would be?! I'm sorry, I have digressed,
but you know what I mean.
"mdeli" <hug...@interlog.com> wrote in message
news:3a5ff292...@news.psi.ca...
mdeli
wrote:
>I once read a huge rant of yours on modern art and the lack of skill needed.
>It was a sort of programme on how to get on in art without going to Uni. I
>loved it, and actually printed it off. It now hangs in the liferoom at
>Loughborough University, UK.
>
I hear its banned in the University of Artspeakenstein
>any more like that?
Very large canvases are indeed a major expense but an absolute
requirement for all Modern Art aspirants wanting to impress those in
power. The norm for this AE style is buckets of cheap wall paint. Of
course this is a sure guarantee that your work will fall apart rather
sooner than later, but that too is in the AE tradition and helps keep
our best restorers busy.
Now you may ask how did Kline, Rothko and all those more minor
schmierers get those broad strokes? Well here's the secret. Its done
by joining House painter's brushes together in series. I've seen
this done in many ways, sloppy and cleaver. The best way is to use
metal mending plates or wood stripping. Five even ten brushes can thus
be joined side to side to make an instrument of immense size.
There are also several tricks to properly charging the brushes. One
way is to paint the large brush ends with smaller brushes dipped into
different colors. Multi charged brushes are one of the big secrets of
AE schmierers. Another way is to uses plastic lined V-shaped troughs.
Pour in different color paints and dip your monster brush. It is good
to have a spare wall to take off the excess paint off before hitting
the canvas.
A few quick schmiers will usually do. Check out Franz Kline, Still,
Motherwell and the usual lesser-known clap-trap at your local museum
for inspiration. This method should leave you with lots of time to
make connections or get as drunk as many real AE
successes.
Remember that the most successful Post-Greenbergian Gigantism requires
immense amounts of wall space, and also possess an anemic lack of
spatial content. Only then will your works give the feel of a tribe of
anorexic giants all suffering from similar hormone symptoms.
mdeli
common?
Most faithful believe what they are told and avoid anything that might
challenge their faith. Kosher foods and holy water in order to be seen
as genuine require that some holy wearing a funny hat mumbles a verbal
blessing over the stuff. If you ask the consumer what change he
believes took place, you will usually hear that the blessed stuff
gained some sort of spiritual superiority.
AE is the culmination of a half century march toward nothingness
blessed by critical Artspeak incantations of the high priests of
Modern Academic Art who don't usually wear funny hats. Only work able
to attain a steady stream of holy critical blessings is considered fit
to remain in the holiest sections of museums. Should these priests
stop muttering their blessings the stuff becomes passé and goes to the
basement to join the rest of the avant gone.
Here reside the stacks of paintings that have lost their holiness done
by artists whose names are practically forgotten, names which can
still be found in old art magazines if you take the trouble to look.
" "
new suit. I think modern art education is much the same. Figurative art is
sneered at in most educational establishments, but a small article in a
magazine came to my attention where it described a Brighton student. She had
problems with her tutors because she just wanted to sculpt the figure but
she got the last laugh when she was the only student to sell ALL of her
degree show!! She will make a living after Uni., whilst others will work in
supermarkets, incapable of skilful work, or will teach more unfortunates and
so continue the downward spiral in education.news:3a622447...@news.psi.ca...
Katheryn
a real gift for expressing your views that I can only envy. I bow
before a 'Master'.
I even enjoyed looking at your artwork. I didn't understand all of it
but it was interesting and thought-provoking. At least it kept my
attention long enough to actually look at it rather than merely glance.
It's so refreshing to find someone who has a slightly twisted sense of
humor and doesn't take themselves too seriously to poke fun at the world
around them and themselves in the process. Someday I hope I can achieve
that level of self-confidence. I'm a late bloomer I guess. I really
enjoyed your site and your post.
Katheryn
normn...@my-deja.com
down to any junk that comes along as long as AMERICAN ARTIST magazine
likes it. It's time for artists to begin to think again for themselves
and obviously YOU are one of them. There is hope.
Mani, modernism is dead...dead...dead. Do you hear me or do you work at
Sothebys or Christies auction house?