From: Christopher Lovenguth (chrisml@pacbell.net)
Date: 02/24/02-11:20:50 AM Z
My last post might have been a frustration rant, which I didn't mean to
happen. It is that I get a little upset when people go around saying some of
the things said both here in the forum and in that column that started this
whole discussion. I have to admit that I didn't personally see the exhibit
either so I cannot say that this work was ingenious. When I look at
reproductions of his work online I can't say that I even like them, but I
have seen worse. I think (the more I read about Creed) that he is mocking
and commenting on exactly what most people are complaining about. I don't
think he is a "highbrow" sort of person. At the same time there is
conception and intent behind his work too. I at least would reserve true
judgment until I personally see his work.
I would also like to say the logic used in that article could apply to many
artists. For example just replace Martin Creed's name with Duchamp and
replace the work with R. Mutt. That was "uninspired crap" as well right? It
didn't just start a whole movement in art and thought. What about janitors
that clean the real R. Mutt's of the world? Why isn't that art too?
http://www.designboom.com/portrait/creed.html
http://www.ananova.com/entertainment/story/sm_471405.html?menu=
http://www.ananova.com/entertainment/story/sm_469929.html?menu=
http://www.ananova.com/entertainment/story/sm_469415.html?menu=
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 03/08/02-09:45:22 AM Z CST