Previous: Birth of the Cool (36)
Next: It's always something (8)
Roundup
Post #1076 • October 19, 2007, 11:07 AM • 4 Comments
"MIT and ArtForecast.org challenge you to test your art prediction skills and to find out if you have an eye for art."
Tomorrow is 24 Hour Comics Day.
Jim Woodring makes BoingBoing.
"'When a person is in a space with a 10-foot ceiling, they will tend to think more freely, more abstractly,' said [Joan] Meyers-Levy. 'They might process more abstract connections between objects in a room, whereas a person in a room with an 8-foot ceiling will be more likely to focus on specifics.'" (Reddit)
Terry Teachout takes John Derbyshire to school.
Andre Emmerich on Greenberg and Frankenthaler. (JL)
"Toward the end of his life Charles Schulz, the creator of 'Peanuts,' wished he were Andrew Wyeth. What Wyeth did was fine art, he grumbled, while he was just a newspaper cartoonist, a draftsman, whose work would surely not last."
Department of Skills: Dave Brubeck.
2.
October 19, 2007, 11:45 AM
And thank God Shulz was not Wyeth!
"Snoopy's World"??
3.
October 19, 2007, 3:07 PM
The problem is that when so much (or enough) is fraudulent, dubious or something to that effect, then everything can become suspect, or potentially so. One can become so wary of con artists (and analogous critics, curators, dealers, etc.) that everybody can start to look vaguely compromised.
Of course, I expect the statement in question is something that was made for effect and, having apparently achieved it, continues to be milked for all it's worth. I doubt it deserved addressing.
4.
October 19, 2007, 4:43 PM
Thanks for the link. Whoo-hoo, getting close to 8 PM on the Friday night of the longest week of work I've had in this place and I'm still in my office. Surfing the net, now, true, but still can't leave for another 45 minutes or so at the least. Stinks.
1.
opie
October 19, 2007, 11:39 AM
The problem with Derbyshire's statement (and teachout's reaction) that "since the invention of photography, all art has been more or less consciously fraudulent" is that art cannot be fraudulent, except perhaps "fakes".
Fraudulence is duplicitious representation, something intended to deceive by the artist. But the intentions of the artist are beside the point. Art is either good or not. "fraudulent" art may be wonderful. "Sincere" art may be awful.