“MESSIDONA” VIDEO + ARTFORUM QUOTE ON “REPERFORMANCES”

a/v,research,texts,theory — chris @ 10:26 am


“Much is being made of the decision to include what the artist calls ‘reperformances’ in Abramović’s retrospective. To me, this debate is largely beside the point: If you believe in the sacred authenticity of the original, then by definition no redo could threaten it; if you think performance is always already meditated, then live bodies are as much a form of representation as any other. More interesting than whether reenactments are art-historically correct is what they are asked to do– whether they close down or open up the potentiality of performance.”

Lambert-Beatty, Carrie. “Against Performance Art.” ARTFORUM May 2010; 209.

touches (13)
duration (13 seconds)
number of opponents (6)

ON BEING AN ARTIST, NIKOLA TOSIC

reblog,texts,theory — chris @ 9:11 pm

“”
you are not an artist if your goal is to sell or to be supported by an established institution.

i am sure of this.

these options can be a small part of a path to your true goal, but never an end goal by itself.

if you are just trying to sell you are a salesman, if you are trying to be supported by institutions than you are a politician.

what does it mean to be an artist?

i do not know.

i know it is not sales and politics.

nothing wrong with either, they are great, but they are not art.

but as an artist you can use sales and politics just as you can use oil and canvas.

life is to short not to be an artist.

are things so clear? can one be just an artist? i do not know. try and let me know.

(link)

EXCERPT FROM FUTURE SHOCK (1970, P. 283) TOFFLER, ALVIN

research,texts,theory — chris @ 7:51 pm

“”
The new society offers few roots in the sense of truly enduring relationships. But it does offer more varied life niches, more freedom to move in and out of these niches, and more opportunity to create one’s own niche, than all earlier societies put together. It also offers the supreme exhilaration of riding change, cresting it, changing and growing with it– a process infinitely more exciting than riding the surf, wrestling steers, playing “knock hubcaps” on an eight-lane speedway, or the pursuit of pharmaceutical kicks. It presents the individual with a contest that requires self-mastery and high intelligence. For the individual who comes armed with these, and who makes the necessary effort to understand the fast-emerging super-industrial social structures, for the person who finds the “right” life pace, the “right” sequence of subcults to join and life style models to emulate, the triumph is exquisite.
Undeniably, these grand words do not apply to the majority of men. Most people of the past and present remain imprisoned in life niches they have neither made nor have much hope, under present conditions, of ever escaping. For most human beings, the options remain excruciatingly few.
This imprisonment must–and will– be broken. Yet it will not be broken by tirades against technology. It will not be broken by calls for a return to passivity, mysticism and irrationality. It will not be broken by “feeling” or “intuiting” our way into the future while derogating empirical study, analysis, and rational effort. Rather than lashing out, Luddite-fashion, against the machine, those who genuinely wish to break the prison-hold of the past and present would do well to hasten the controlled-selective-arrival of tomorrow’s technologies. To accomplish this, however, intuition and “mystical insights” are hardly enough. It will take exact scientific knowledge, expertly applied to the crucial, most sensitive points of social control.

RECENT READINGS ON MUSIC, FILM, CULTURE & ECONOMICS-

texts,theory — chris @ 10:50 am

Conversation: Aaron Lake Smith talks to Sam McPheeters

Storming Heaven with Lady GaGa

A world of hits (Avatar)-The Economist

In which we ponder Brokencyde’s ‘Freaxxx’

Footnotes: Schubert and Beckett

Nikola Tosic on Avatar

Epic Pooh by Michael Moorcock

Extreme Market Research

The Poetics of Security: Skateboarding, Urban Design, and the New Public Space

IDIOTIC DIVISION OF FUNCTIONS

research,theory — chris @ 2:00 pm



-Barbara Wright
from the preface to Raymond Queneau’s Exercises in Style

SANDIEGO

a/v,theory — chris @ 1:00 pm



WATER/WAVES

a/v,theory — chris @ 12:43 pm



CUE “ROCKY” SOUNDTRACK MUSIC

texts,theory — chris @ 4:39 pm



PREFACE TO THE PICTURE OF DORIAN GRAY by OSCAR WILDE

library,texts,theory — chris @ 11:32 pm

“”
The artist is the creator of beautiful things.
To reveal art and conceal the artist is art’s aim.
The critic is he who can translate into another manner or a new material his impression of beautiful things.
The highest as the lowest form of criticism is a mode of autobiography.
Those who find ugly meanings in beautiful things are corrupt without being charming. This is a fault.
Those who find beautiful meanings in beautiful things are the cultivated. For these there is hope.
They are the elect to whom beautiful things mean only Beauty.
There is no such thing as a moral or an immoral book. Books are well written, or badly written. That is all.
The nineteenth century dislike of Realism is the rage of Caliban seeing his own face in a glass.
The nineteenth century dislike of Romanticism is the rage of Caliban not seeing his own face in a glass.
The moral life of man forms part of the subject-matter of the artist, but the morality of art consists in the perfect use of an imperfect medium.
No artist desires to prove anything. Even things that are true can be proved.
No artist has ethical sympathies. An ethical sympathy in an artist is an unpardonable mannerism of style.
No artist is ever morbid. The artist can express everything.
Thought and language are to the artist instruments of an art.
Vice and virtue are to the artist materials for an art.
From the point of view of form, the type of all the arts is the art of the musician. From the point of view of feeling, the actor’s craft is the type.
All art is at once surface and symbol.
Those who go beneath the surface do so at their peril.
Those who read the symbol do so at their peril.
It is the spectator, and not life, that art really mirrors.
Diversity of opinion about a work of art shows that the work is new, compex, and vital.
When critics disagree the artist is in accord with himself.
We can forgive a man for making a useful thing as long as he does not admire it. The only excuse for making a useless thing is that one admires it intensely.
All art is quite useless.

EXCERPT FROM “DENNIS OPPENHEIM” (1995) IERIMONTI GALLERY ART DIARY

research,theory — chris @ 12:24 pm

“”



Next Page »