mel jacobson on tue 11 may 10
there is a general argument that happens all the time in
art. `i want credit because i worked so hard on this piece.`
(this fits in very well with `my mom said i am wonderful`.)
it is sort of like: `i did a concert of mozart music on the piano,
and it was not very good playing, but i worked so hard preparing
for the concert..so, i want praise anyway.`
results are what count. what is the total affect, does it work
and is it a success? what does your audience think?
an artist could work five years on a piece and have it be a total
failure.
just like a play, hours of rehearsal, and then it is a bomb.
we get to take the great bows when the audience is thrilled
and stimulated. no one cares how long you rehearsed.
but, if the work is so personal, so much you, how does one
expect an audience to know what is going on? it is part of the
concept artists theme. me, me, me, me. `look what i did. i just
puked and pooped on the floor.` gutsy? no, no one cares.
it is very hard to fool a mature audience.
folks `get it`, more than many people think.
i gave up a great deal of faith in `concept/performance art` when an
artist threw human blood on an audience at the walker art center.
then the director tried to defend it as `personal expression`.
it was just plain bad. i still do not know how many people had
their clothing replaced. but, it must have cost the museum a great
deal of money. there was some really pissed off patrons that night.
and, of course i have seen some very delightful and thoughtful
modern/concept art pieces. they had value as they made the
audience think and react. but, shock for shock is not my thing.
i don't want to hear people laying the F bomb on live TV. it means
nothing. it is just bad taste.
mel
from: minnetonka, mn
website: http://www.visi.com/~melpots/
clayart link: http://www.visi.com/~melpots/clayart.html
new book: http://www.21stcenturykilns.com
alternate: melpots7575@gmail.com
| |
|
