h a l f b a k e r yIncidentally, why isn't "spacecraft" another word for "interior design"?
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
We have seen the displays of defeated military equipment in public squares on all sided of a conflict. Victory Debris makes the same statement but adds emotional and contextual elements that are missing from the parked wrecks. And it's art.
This is a large public sculpture suitable for the central
feature of a plaza or intersection. It is made from the twisted and tortured metal pieces left when a large explosion, like a mine or drone attack, blows a military vehicle up.
A 50' wire frame of the outline of the work is used as a form, and individual pieces of the destroyed vehicles are welded in place within the guides of the concept. When the internal form has been completed the outer guide frame is removed. Tweaking and tuning with smaller pieces are added to further define the sculpture.
Pieces from the defense of specific towns and villages can be used as sculpture there to commemorate the battle that took place there, using the debris from the actual battle for that town.
Cornelia Parker sculpture
https://chisenhale....ct/cornelia-parker/
[xenzag, Oct 09 2024]
Gansta trippin'
https://www.youtube...watch?v=3k1comdW1Ig
One of my favourite music videos [Loris, Oct 09 2024]
Don't need sunsets and palm trees.
https://www.artic.e...ks/118144/waterfall
[doctorremulac3, Oct 13 2024]
Splatter art can even be interestring.
https://jemurphy3.w...ings-chiriac-13.jpg
Long as it's not just a product of a government op. [doctorremulac3, Oct 13 2024]
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Destination URL.
E.g., https://www.coffee.com/
Description (displayed with the short name and URL.)
|
| |
Might also be used to supplement defense contractor advertising. "Even our budget-priced mine is no slouch. Here's what one did recently in [country]." |
|
| |
Might want to have a look at Cornelia Parker's piece of work detailed in the link. I think it's now permanently installed in The Tate Modern. |
|
| |
I would like this if it was made to look like something, hate it if it were just a pile of welded-together spikes or a mess. Modern "art" favors the latter. That sculpture is ugly and not artistic. It's trivial to duplicate in style and concept aside from the actual physical labor and adds nothing beautiful or thought-provoking to the world. |
|
| |
//That sculpture is ugly and not artistic.// |
|
| |
I dunno. I think the idea was that it looked like a shed blowing up. Quite how close it is, I don't know. If it were me doing it, I'd have tried to get slow-motion footage of the explosion, then tried to position the bits appropriately. I'm sure the artist did their absolute best, even if they were working to a different paradigm. |
|
| |
//That sculpture is ugly and not artistic.// |
|
| |
"Ugly" is a legitimate form of artistic expression. |
|
| |
//That sculpture is ugly and not artistic// Cornelia Parker is a brilliant artist who's work has got nothing to do with beauty or ugliness. I'm not surprised there are many here for whom that is a difficult concept. |
|
| |
//Cornelia Parker is a brilliant artist who's work has got nothing to do with beauty or ugliness. I'm not surprised there are many here for whom that is a difficult concept.// |
|
| |
Maybe you should explain, rather than just insulting people who don't get it.
Because I think for most people, art is all about beauty. If you're just going to hand-wave, I feel inclined to dismiss it as artwank. |
|
| |
[Voice] I saw this as pretty representational. Maybe a huge hero figure, or a hilly landscape with shrapnel, or a portrait at scale. You have seen the classic Renaissance face made of vegetables; kind of like that. The wire frame only acts as a boundary guide as the crap is fixed within the implied volumes the frame indicates. When completed the thing stands on its own, without the wire guides. Parker's expression is private and particular and the "meaning" is up to the viewer; my object is to take the war and make something we can live with afterward. |
|
| |
If meaning is given by the viewer the objects holds no meaning of its own and therefore is not art. Here's a list of 50 random words. Feel free to create meaning from them in your own mind, but please don't call me an author for pasting them here. |
|
| |
compete
temptation
tape
bank
intensify
dark
dramatic
oral
acquaintance
pan
responsibility
learn
agent
line
ballet
contrary
speaker
preoccupation
possession
philosophy
slave
export
seminar
elite
interference
proposal
snatch
convention
celebration
north
discount
reasonable
electronics
in
democratic
beach
jaw
job
protect
bulletin
perform
story
average
service
bush
marble
crash
television
dorm
pledge |
|
| |
It sounds like you believe meaning exists independently. How does that work? Does stuff come already meaning something? Is meaning assigned, enforced, and maintained by outside, disinterested, objective entities? Where do we figure into this, if we do at all? It is dangerous and surrenders all agency to abdicate the assignment of meaning to third parties, even if they are fine artists. Or politicians. Or religious leaders. |
|
| |
Does a color have meaning? A yellow sunflower? A photo of a yellow sunflower? A painting of a sunflower? The thought of the sunflower? The word s.u.n.f.l.o.w.e.r? Where do we get the meaning? |
|
| |
The discussion of whether art is art if is devoid of meaning is another issue entirely. Check with the Dada-ists for your talking points. |
|
| |
I promise not to call you an author. |
|
| |
//It sounds like you believe meaning exists independently.// |
|
| |
I think Voice is saying there should be an intended meaning by the author. |
|
| |
That is, I think that's the intended meaning of the initial part of their post. The second part of the post is a demonstration that it's possible to create something without an intended meaning, although one may be ascribed to it by others. |
|
| |
I think it's reasonable to say the intended meaning of a painting of a sunflower is that it's a representation of a sunflower. This is independent of the rendering quality - if a 4-year-old gave me a page with a strip of blue at the top, a vertical green line with a round yellow blob at the top, maybe I couldn't know it was meant to be a sunflower, a lollipop or perhaps a person or a lion in a green suit. But if they told me it was a sunflower, I would immediately accept that as the meaning of their art. |
|
| |
// feel inclined to dismiss it as artwank.// You have just proved my point. If you want to understand something like Cornelia's piece, I suggest visiting it in person then reading what she has to say about it. Meanwhile, the art world doesn't follow any particular set of fixed rules and values in my experience. In fact many pieces of work are calculated to challenge, provoke and undermine our perceptions. Like and dislike reactions are to many artists an irrelevance. The work gets made as a response to a compulsion to make the work. The responses to it that follow exist on another different value system. |
|
| |
//You have just proved my point.// |
|
| |
xenzag, you don't /have/ a point. You just have a moan. |
|
| |
I'm trying to separate content from meaning for this discussion. If I point at the child's drawing and say it is a sunflower, I am describing the content. That's all we've got. The definition of the content. Who knows what the child meant? Anything additional is stuff we bring to it. The meaning, emotional part, connections, whatever. Is it art? Why not? |
|
| |
Abstract art makes a point either of trying to convey loads of emotional content or denying any emotional content can be found in the work. Rotting grey umbrellas only point one way. |
|
| |
If everything is art, nothing is art. There must be a delineation. That delineation is what I call meaning. If there is no delineation then this half-eaten salad in front of me is worth as much, as an art piece, as anything you'll find in an art gallery. You can't even say some art is good and some bad without admitting that. |
|
| |
I like the concept.
I dislike the glorifying of war. |
|
| |
I'm not sure how to vote so I'm just not going to. |
|
| |
Sorry about that, but as a Canadian I feel entitled to politely remain non partisan and there's nothing you can do about it. |
|
| |
[Voice] Please post a picture of the salad so we can decide for ourselves. After you decide that everything IS art you can start to separate what is important to you from the chaff. Critics, museums, galleries be damned; there's a jungle of good shit out there. Someone said that if you sit silently without moving in the same spot for 15 minutes you will see something you have never seen before, something new. Maybe it is art. |
|
| |
[Fries] Will a sculpture of Hello Kitty made from broken tanks convey the same "glorification of war?" |
|
| |
//you don't /have/ a point. You just have a moan.// I made my point. You didn't understand it. [Loris] |
|
| |
// I made my point. You didn't understand it.// |
|
| |
xenzag, first you just insulted everyone with no explanation. |
|
| |
I asked you to explain what you meant. |
|
| |
You didn't do that, you suggested going to visit it.
That's not really an option for people outside London, is it?
Some of us live thousands of miles away. |
|
| |
The art world is filled with work and commentary made impenetrable on purpose to hide its shallow nature. This is artwank. |
|
| |
Suggesting to visit the work to appreciate it is all very well, but the fact that you didn't explain anything - not what it means to you, not what the author says about it, absolutely no actual information about what was requested at all does suggest that in fact you can't.
So I now think you're just pretending to be knowledgeable in an attempt to foster status. I can't speak for others, of course.
You can of course prove this wrong by actually explaining what people can take from this piece of art which is, in your words "ugly and not artistic". I would gladly mentally update, and thank you for it. |
|
| |
Lowering Our Resistance Is Seminal. |
|
| |
Xtreme Explanations Never Zero Any Gripes. |
|
| |
Those were my words, actually. |
|
| |
Sartorial tribunals oversell pickles. |
|
| |
//This is artwank.// Just make up insults to cover for a lack of understanding. This is a common reaction along with "anyone could do that". |
|
| |
Maybe you're not understanding the creativity behind Loris's creative term "artwank". I think it's kind of clever. |
|
| |
Anyway the only totally failed art is stuff that nobody talks about. That explains Jackson Pollock, it was designed to piss people off and in doing so achieved that primary goal of art, getting people's attention. (although designed might be too strong a word.) That and government agencies invading the arts for money laundering and attacking societal values and norms as a form of psy-op control. |
|
| |
With Pollock people would virtue signal that it was something other than an insult to the society it was created for by pontificating about it like it was something other than a mess of splattered paint made with absolutely no talent whatsoever. "I think it represents the platitudunal posocreativautonimy of eludividouluos scroenofucipitiousness." |
|
| |
I can only imagine the delight of Pollock as he watched the suckers say anything other than "Wow, what a piece of shit!" |
|
| |
Hahahaha - your knowledge of Jackson Pollock is indicative of years of dedicated research and analysis and the perfect example of "anyone could do that". I love it when people say that. It's so revealing and attitude confirming. |
|
| |
Hahahaha - your knowledge of Jackson Pollock is indicative of years of dedicated research and analysis and the perfect example of "anyone could do that". I love it when people say that. It's so revealing and attitude confirming. |
|
| |
Yup, anyone who “Understands” Jackson Pollock is superior. That’s what’s being sold, thank you for making my point. |
|
| |
(Only dumb people say)//"anyone could do that".// |
|
| |
Nobody but him could pull that off. It was a bold scam that’ll only work once and seeing how it’s bought by people like you, to call it anything but absolutely brilliant is a gross mischaracterization. He sold shit to sheep like it’s never been done before. The guy’s a friggin’ genius. |
|
| |
Ironically, I I understand Jackson Pollack. Having bought the product, virtue signaling bereft of any rhyme, reason or logic, you don’t. I think the only appropriately named piece of his is Hackscum Bollocks #2. |
|
| |
But I do find anyone who would get upset over someone’s view on art amazingly entertaining. One of the things that makes art fun. |
|
| |
Speaking of which, Picasso? More like Poo-Casso. But seriously, I say this sitting in the sun in the garden at our local art gallery. Love seeing people being creative and I’ve always supported art being taught in elementary schools. |
|
| |
Didn’t see that coming eh? |
|
| |
//as a Canadian... So there.// |
|
| |
I think you mean, "sorry" |
|
| |