Author Topic: Self-destructing art  (Read 938 times)


Kim

  • 2nd in the world
Re: Self-destructing art
« Reply #1 on: October 06, 2018, 02:25:53 pm »
Sothebys had to be in on it, Shirley?  Probably the buyer, too.

Nice performance, thobut.
To ride the Windcheetah, first, you must embrace the cantilever...

hellymedic

  • Just do it!
Re: Self-destructing art
« Reply #2 on: October 06, 2018, 03:06:01 pm »
Banksy is a WICKED whizz!

I did post a reference in the 'random' thread...

Re: Self-destructing art
« Reply #3 on: October 06, 2018, 06:57:53 pm »
It just fails to make a significant point about art-as-art v art-as-commodity.  Amusing nonetheless.

Cudzoziemiec

  • Solar powered, tea fuelled cycle-wol
Re: Self-destructing art
« Reply #4 on: October 06, 2018, 07:32:47 pm »
It just fails to make a significant point about art-as-art v art-as-commodity.  Amusing nonetheless.
According to the article, it increases the commoditisation (although that's perhaps not strictly the term) of this particular art work. Still, I guess the KLF got there first.
An ungovernable laughter, a joyous agitation which makes the summer stretching before you seem like an unrolling canvas on which you might draw those first rude pure strokes that are free. (Capote)

Cudzoziemiec

  • Solar powered, tea fuelled cycle-wol
Re: Self-destructing art
« Reply #5 on: October 06, 2018, 09:54:22 pm »
An ungovernable laughter, a joyous agitation which makes the summer stretching before you seem like an unrolling canvas on which you might draw those first rude pure strokes that are free. (Capote)

T42

  • Gaulois réfractaire
Re: Self-destructing art
« Reply #6 on: October 07, 2018, 10:52:54 am »
Sly bugger. If he'd shredded the whole thing it would have just been a pile of strips on the floor. Leaving half of it intact means it's still a work of art.
I've dusted all those old bottles and set them up straight.

Kim

  • 2nd in the world
Re: Self-destructing art
« Reply #7 on: October 07, 2018, 01:54:10 pm »
Sly bugger. If he'd shredded the whole thing it would have just been a pile of strips on the floor. Leaving half of it intact means it's still a work of art.

Or he's set himself up for a career in the design department at Epson.
To ride the Windcheetah, first, you must embrace the cantilever...

Re: Self-destructing art
« Reply #8 on: October 07, 2018, 02:08:19 pm »
Sly bugger. If he'd shredded the whole thing it would have just been a pile of strips on the floor. Leaving half of it intact means it's still a work of art.

Even the pile of strips on the floor could be "a work of art".

Duchamp. Urinal. 100+ years ago.

https://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/duchamp-fountain-t07573

Re: Self-destructing art
« Reply #9 on: October 07, 2018, 02:35:52 pm »
Sly bugger. If he'd shredded the whole thing it would have just been a pile of strips on the floor. Leaving half of it intact means it's still a work of art.

Even the pile of strips on the floor could be "a work of art".

Duchamp. Urinal. 100+ years ago.

https://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/duchamp-fountain-t07573
I expect Bankie's heard of Duchamp.

T42

  • Gaulois réfractaire
Re: Self-destructing art
« Reply #10 on: October 07, 2018, 05:17:49 pm »
Sly bugger. If he'd shredded the whole thing it would have just been a pile of strips on the floor. Leaving half of it intact means it's still a work of art.

Even the pile of strips on the floor could be "a work of art".

Duchamp. Urinal. 100+ years ago.

https://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/duchamp-fountain-t07573

Yes, but picking them up would ruin it.
I've dusted all those old bottles and set them up straight.

redshift

  • High Priestess of wires
    • redshift home
Re: Self-destructing art
« Reply #11 on: October 07, 2018, 07:37:05 pm »
Sly bugger. If he'd shredded the whole thing it would have just been a pile of strips on the floor. Leaving half of it intact means it's still a work of art.

Even the pile of strips on the floor could be "a work of art".

Duchamp. Urinal. 100+ years ago.

https://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/duchamp-fountain-t07573

Yes, but picking them up would ruin it.

Whereas pissing on them would square the circle nicely.
L
:)
Windcheetah No. 176
The all-round entertainer gets quite arsey,
They won't translate his lame shit into Farsi
Somehow to let it go would be more classy…

Andrij

  • Андрій
  • Ερασιτεχνικός μισάνθρωπος
Re: Self-destructing art
« Reply #12 on: October 12, 2018, 02:57:08 pm »
Sly bugger. If he'd shredded the whole thing it would have just been a pile of strips on the floor. Leaving half of it intact means it's still a work of art.

Even the pile of strips on the floor could be "a work of art".

Duchamp. Urinal. 100+ years ago.

https://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/duchamp-fountain-t07573

Yes, but picking them up would ruin it.

Whereas pissing on them would square the circle nicely.

 ;D New keyboard, please!  ;D
;D  Andrij.  I pronounce you Complete and Utter GIT   :thumbsup: