Thread: Conceptual Art
View Single Post
zoobyshoe
#5
Jun30-11, 07:59 AM
zoobyshoe's Avatar
P: 5,625
Quote Quote by Evo View Post
I don't know that ridicule can be considered success, unless your goal was to be dismissed as utterly ludicrous.
The game with this kind of thing is to stir up a lot of negative reactions while maintaining a straight face, insisting your art is serious and has integrity. The more outrage the better. The outrage, itself, becomes newsworthy. The art must then be put in some prestigious gallery show where the public can have a look and judge for itself. Someone or some institution with money will then feel some pressure to buy some of this controversial art to commemorate its place in the history of art: "This is the piece that had the N.Y. Art Scene in an uproar in the summer of '72", sort of thing.

Not sure if you remember the artist who made such a stir a few years back by putting elephant dung on pictures of the Madonna. Catholics were up in arms, arm in arm with the non-catholic man on the street who just considered the idea repulsive. Plenty of artists were up in arms. It became big news.

The bigger the news the more prestigious the gallery that decides it would be good business to exhibit this art. Art museums, even, might arrange a special showing. Being ridiculed and called ludicrous, does, in fact, feed all this. It makes people who feel they are classier and more educated than the hoi poloi want to buy some of it, not because they like it, but because the average guy hates it so much, or maybe just to be a participant in something that is newsworthy.

I'm not sure how well this invisible art will do. It strikes me as somewhat too obviously a gimick to elicit the gut-felt rage against elephant poo on a sacred icon. But we'll see.

The best thing to do if you don't like it is to ignore it and not tell your friends and relatives.