I don't who that simpering fellow was who accompanied DH round his exhibition, but I was left wondering what his contribution was. His incessant fiddling with his hair - don't girls do that, and standing with feet turned in (stylishly gamin like if you're a young model), An opportunity to draw out the artist and explore the work was thrown over for sycophancy. Oh dear! His obvious adulation got no further than that - his obvious adulation. Perhaps they were both wearing new clothes.
-
-
Beautiful! But what did you expect?
-
This presenter was Noel Fielding of Boosh and Luxury Comedy fame, a comedian, musician and all-round surrealist of many talents. I'm no fan of Damien Hurst (as Adrian Searle said in the Guardian, the Butterfly room was macabre rather than beautiful - I would simply call it cruel) but I prefer to hear what he thinks about himself and his art, and Noel Fielding let him speak for himself. Paxman can be let loose on him some other time...Originally posted by John Ward Moorhouse View Post
Your comment about what girls do with our hair and feet, applied as an insult to an actually very attractive young man, represents the sort of outdated stuffiness that got Radio 3 into such trouble today, as it goes on trying, so misguidedly, to popularise, or populise, itself.Comment
-
"Noel Fielding of Boosh and Luxury Comedy fame..."
I'm none the wiser, I'm afraid!
Comment
-
... but considerably better informed.Originally posted by Simon View PostI'm none the wiser, I'm afraid!
[FONT=Comic Sans MS][I][B]Numquam Satis![/B][/I][/FONT]Comment
-
-
Boom boom, Mr Derek!Originally posted by ferneyhoughgeliebte View Post... but considerably better informed.
Comment
-
I know this whole computer thing is a bit of a trip into the future for those of us still in the 1950'sOriginally posted by Simon View Post"Noel Fielding of Boosh and Luxury Comedy fame..."
I'm none the wiser, I'm afraid!
but you might find that you can use the same machine that you used to write this to find stuff out !
It's much faster than a trip to the library (if one still exists where you live ?)
actually don't bother as it's all a con anyways designed to fool the gullible public
Hirst isn't a REAL artist anyway , who thought of having DEAD ANIMALS as the content of art ? what nonsense there aren't ANY pictures of those in the National Gallery
Comment
-
Oh yes he is, or perhaps, was. I'm sure he has talent. But he chose to go down a different route in order to make masses of money from poseurs and dic*heads. I expect he's a very good psychologist too.Originally posted by MrGongGong View Post
There are (though none by Mr Hirst, as far as I know, as he's a sculptor.) There are some wonderful ones, I believe, though it's a few years now since I saw them. Have a look - it's well worth it, as some are superbly executed by painters of immense skill.Originally posted by MrGongGong View Post
What there aren't there - or weren't at any rate - are boxes with the corpses of dead animals in, the placing of which involves little talent and skill at all.
That's because until recently everyone would have understood that sticking half a dead animal in a tank, whilst it may be many things, is not art. That's why it wouldn't have been put in the National Gallery, you see.Comment
-
Originally posted by Simon View Post
Oh Simon you love an invitation ........... after deciding what is "logical" and what is "music" you can now advise us on what is or isn't art
is there no beginning to your abilities, knowledge and talents ?Comment
-
I'm happy to advise on logic, as there are accepted definitions.Originally posted by MrGongGong View Post
Oh Simon you love an invitation ........... after deciding what is "logical" and what is "music" you can now advise us on what is or isn't art
is there no beginning to your abilities, knowledge and talents ?
The other two are of course more subjective, though I expect that my view on music is fairly typical of most with a moderate amount of experience of it. To be topical, a Schubert symphony is music; the sound of me breaking a window isn't.
As to art, it's fairly clear, I would have thought. But maybe I've had it wrong, along with many other millions of people down the ages. Perhaps you'd be kind enough to help by giving me a definition that I can use in the future?
Many thanks,
SimonComment
-
I'm not good on the history of art criticism but I'd guess that many people - members of the public and art critics - were saying similar things some years ago about a urinal closely grouped with some handlebarsOriginally posted by Simon View Post
It's easy to fail to recognise what becomes accepted later as important art. And of course it's also easy to assume too readily that anything styled as 'art' that is also novel, shocking and scandalous is necessarily 'important art'. In the end history will decide, but a lot of us won't live to be proved decisively right or wrong (i.e. in anticipating the verdict of history, for whatever that's worth
) in the views we are currently taking.
In the meantime the fun, such as it is, is surely to discuss and to register agreement or disagreement with the views of others without getting personally offensive and ad hominem
Last edited by LeMartinPecheur; 04-04-12, 21:24.I keep hitting the Escape key, but I'm still here!Comment
-
Comment
-
How about Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart's setting of the music to accompany the stage action and Lorenzo da Ponte's words (after Pierre Beaumarchais) sung in Act 2 of The Marriage of Figaro where Cherubino exits by a window (not usually opened) and further annoys the gardener by landing on and breaking his precious flower pots?Originally posted by MrGongGong View PostAll depends on where and in what context you break your window
"I like the sound of breaking glass"........sorry, showing my age.Comment
-
How wonderfully relative of you. Excellent non-answer.Originally posted by MrGongGong View PostAll depends on where and in what context you break your window
Comment
Comment