Art with a capital F

Now that serious analysis of serious art has been effectively sidelined from the mainstream, what do the newspapers fill their arts pages with? Well, stuff like this, apparently. And this. (And many others that I can’t be bothered to look up and provide links to.) Pretentious gibberish? Well yes, of course it is. What else can one expect when significance is sought where there isn’t any? Of course, this kind of stuff is hilarious, but it’s sad to reflect that the laughs are actually unintentional. And sadder yet to reflect on what has been lost to accommodate this.


2 responses to this post.

  1. Posted by Erika W. on February 15, 2011 at 7:42 pm

    I am in complete agreement with you–what else can be said?


  2. Posted by alan on February 21, 2011 at 4:16 pm

    Sometimes there is leakage, and they admit the truth by mistake, illustrating how the principle of charity can be taken too far.
    This from a flyer by the ‘October Gallery’ about an Iranian artist called Golnaz Fathi (I don’t have a link):

    “…push the boundaries of legibility and intelligibility in their work up to and even beyond the boundaries of literal sense. The more extreme forms of this ‘automatic writing’ have sometimes been called ‘asemic’ – the term implying that it has no meaningful content at all. Fathi must rather be thought of as ‘polysemic’ – dense as it is with potential meanings and interpretive possibilities.”

    Indeed. This artist would have been better served by the gallery’s silence.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: