Mike, Very well put! Harvey Ferdschneider partner, SKID photography, NYC mh@... wrote: > > The "shocking" or controversial art that has received the art world's > attention has actually been good art (in my opinion at least) that has > value beyond being shocking. The manure piece that I mentioned is from > an artist that, as far as I can tell, has not received the art world's > praise (probably for good reason). I believe there are a lot of > shocking works of art out there that we have never heard about because > they have little to offer. So in that sense, the art world is working > I think. > > The people I find that don't like the more shocking yet praised artists > are the people who either can't get beyond the shock value and think > the artist's motives are purely for shock or fame (like most of the > list members here I suppose) or are offended by the material/ don't > want to deal with such issues in the art that they view (for example > religion, animal rights, sexuality). > > You guys can't have it both ways, you're saying that the high-art world > should concern itself with what appeals to the public at large but at > the same time think that anything that appeals to the media is bad. > Should we all take pictures of pretty flowers and paint watercolors of > Cape Cod? What appeals to the public is either folk art (craft) with > very little substance or something that is interesting via shock, > controversy, money, or fame. There are some exceptions of course, but > you get the genereal idea. > > Everyone complains when art is too boring (black squares) and when it > is too interesting (dead cows, vagina scrolls), where is the happy > medium? I am hoping that the happy medium is upon us and that the too > minimalist and too shocking periods are now in the past ; that the art > world is looking to the future. Maybe we will fit in there. > > I hope I am not coming off as offensive to anyone here, I just like to > voice the other side sometimes. A lot of times, the medium of > photography gets a bad rap in the art world, and the more we can think > in their terms, the better we will be, maybeÖ. : ) > > -mikeH > toomanyartists.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Message
Re: [Digital BW] ART-what is it?
2001-10-24 by SKID Photography
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.