Show us your... creative process!
It isn't long ago when, for one night, people screamed on streets of New Orleans "show us your tits!" and threw beads at the ecstatic women who happily (some proudly as well) showed what their mother gave them.
This photo here is not mine; it's taken by bizele, an Albanian girl who lives happily in sunny Florida. According to her, these are drawings made by a choreographer named Trisha Brown. Apparently, she's somewhat famous for her dance style. According to Wikipedia: "Brown has continued to explore the nature of motion and to choreograph dances based on everyday movements. Her style has developed from carefully built-up, repetitive gestures to its current fluid virtuosity." I haven't seen her shows but this sounds like ppl pay good $$ to see people on stage doing stupid repetitive, everyday gestures. Interesting... I could stand on a New Yrk city intersection and see this crap for free!
Anyway. From what I can see from these photos, my 18-months old daughter can draw fairly better than this 70 year old lady. My point, however is somewhere else.
bizele said that this exhibition is part of a whole "show" where people "study" this waste of trees (paper), then watch a performance, and a movie to understand this lady's "creative process."
So here is my biased opinion about art and "creative process" crap: First of all, I'm very much not a foe of modern art (of any kind), as long as I find something there which means something to me or attracts me somehow. Tripping on buckets of paint on a super large canvas means absolutely nothing to me.
By the same token, when I look at something, I do not try to figure out "what did the artist try to say with this." Pasting feces on a canvas will simply tell me what that "artist's" menu was the day before - and I really don't give a crap (pun intended) about that. If a so-called artist decides to create something, and it doesn't "talk" to me, why should I care to figure out what the "artist" was thinking when he/she decided to create that? Hence, I'm not really interested in the creative process, I just want to see a piece of art (and not crap) which means something to me. I'm not interested to see what kind of hallucinating drugs the artist takes to become creative, etc.
So, there you have it. Now you know a little bit more about me.
Some may ask: "so... what's the relation between New Orleans and this lady." I don't really know, I just felt like saying TITS! :)
This photo here is not mine; it's taken by bizele, an Albanian girl who lives happily in sunny Florida. According to her, these are drawings made by a choreographer named Trisha Brown. Apparently, she's somewhat famous for her dance style. According to Wikipedia: "Brown has continued to explore the nature of motion and to choreograph dances based on everyday movements. Her style has developed from carefully built-up, repetitive gestures to its current fluid virtuosity." I haven't seen her shows but this sounds like ppl pay good $$ to see people on stage doing stupid repetitive, everyday gestures. Interesting... I could stand on a New Yrk city intersection and see this crap for free!
Anyway. From what I can see from these photos, my 18-months old daughter can draw fairly better than this 70 year old lady. My point, however is somewhere else.
bizele said that this exhibition is part of a whole "show" where people "study" this waste of trees (paper), then watch a performance, and a movie to understand this lady's "creative process."
So here is my biased opinion about art and "creative process" crap: First of all, I'm very much not a foe of modern art (of any kind), as long as I find something there which means something to me or attracts me somehow. Tripping on buckets of paint on a super large canvas means absolutely nothing to me.
By the same token, when I look at something, I do not try to figure out "what did the artist try to say with this." Pasting feces on a canvas will simply tell me what that "artist's" menu was the day before - and I really don't give a crap (pun intended) about that. If a so-called artist decides to create something, and it doesn't "talk" to me, why should I care to figure out what the "artist" was thinking when he/she decided to create that? Hence, I'm not really interested in the creative process, I just want to see a piece of art (and not crap) which means something to me. I'm not interested to see what kind of hallucinating drugs the artist takes to become creative, etc.
So, there you have it. Now you know a little bit more about me.
Some may ask: "so... what's the relation between New Orleans and this lady." I don't really know, I just felt like saying TITS! :)
Labels: artists, stupid art, tits
This entry was posted
on Sunday, March 04, 2007 at 12:14 PM.
You can skip to the end and leave a response.
ByI guess it's not what the "creative person" does or means, it's the "art" label attached to nonsense we are supposed to fall for. That is supposed to make it a "performance" worth seeing/paying for.
And some "art" is supposed to irritate, annoy, make no sense and thus be remembered. All publicity... and so on.
Personally I'd rather watch wallpaint dry instead of experiencing someone's creative process.
By
you made a good point here Shqipo. Art is supposed to be an expression of soul, I guess. what is happening in modern art is rather expression of someone's (sickenned) EGO.
By
shqipo you made me laugh with your description of modern art. i do agree with you though that people now days are doing anything that doesn't speak to any of us and call it "art". its absurd but true, plus if it sells these artists don't care whether it means anything to us. strangley enough there are crowds that would go for this crap of art.
By
kind of dissapointing that none have argued...if you don't mind I can do it, not for the sake of any monolithic conviction which I am lazy to confess , but only for the passionate fun of it.
By
@memo: not sure what you mean, but feel free to argue :)
By
While I believe that it's a smart- because ambiguous and amusing- way to periphrase the "comments" under the expression "n-number of people liked to argue",I decided- inspired by the same spirit(which the afermentioned expression let be percieved)- to act as that was a premise, as it was to be taken literally. In view of the fact that none have really "argued" I thought you might give me a chance. I proceded to explain that I would have not argued because of any of my beliefs or artistic creeds, but only because I think it possible and I would have had fun. The permission was granted and I thankyou. Was I clear this time?
By
It gives me bunches of great laughter to see that my pictures at the museum ticked you off enough as to initiate this post. I understand your concerns for modern/abstract art. However let me explain once and again, that the artist featured in this exhibition was not being put on a pedestal for her talent as a painter. She was given the Distinguished Master Artist Award by the University of South Florida (award is given each year to very successful artists who have achieved great success in their careers and have a lot to contribute to their craft; as part of this they visit the university, lecture classes, hold workshops and symposiums, and at the end of this process give performances). The main reason why people were there was to see her dance company perform three of her most famous pieces of work. If you were there you might have not liked them, but that would not have been enough to discard her as an artist. At the end of these performances, a reception was held and people randomly walked by her drawings which I do not think anyone found spectacular or impressing in anyway, because they were not meant for that purpose.
p.s. how fun to be portrayed as the Albanian girl who lives happily in sunny Florida.
By
O Shqipo te marrte e mira ty me tere tits:)
Te mbeshtes ty dhe Arbrin per sa thoni ne lidhje me artet moderne kur perdoret vetem per egon e autorit/es
» Post a Comment