![]() 09/17/2015 at 09:05 • Filed to: None | ![]() | ![]() |
![]() 09/17/2015 at 09:08 |
|
I wish I could type that fast.
![]() 09/17/2015 at 09:11 |
|
I can, but the result would look like Kermit the Frog typing that fast.
![]() 09/17/2015 at 09:14 |
|
I’d get so much more done!
![]() 09/17/2015 at 09:15 |
|
inappropriate thing I reblogged on tumblr last week.
![]() 09/17/2015 at 09:16 |
|
I like how the whole typewriter moves rather than just the carriage.
![]() 09/17/2015 at 09:17 |
|
I just read a synopsis of Story of the Eye.
![]() 09/17/2015 at 09:29 |
|
Finally a liberal arts degree pays off!
![]() 09/17/2015 at 09:36 |
|
I had to read it for a class a few years ago.
![]() 09/17/2015 at 09:37 |
|
What class was it?
![]() 09/17/2015 at 09:39 |
|
It was just called “Contemporary Art.” If you google image searched the professor’s name, this was the first result:
![]() 09/17/2015 at 09:45 |
|
You had to read a book for contemporary art? HAHA.
![]() 09/17/2015 at 09:47 |
|
He gave us readings for every class. Most of them were exhibition reviews, artist interviews, etc. This was the only book we had to read (it’s a short read too, if you can sit through it. It’s a terrible read IMO and only finished it since I had to write a short paper on it).
![]() 09/17/2015 at 09:51 |
|
That’s only because you weren’t reading it in the original French, you Philistine.
![]() 09/17/2015 at 09:52 |
|
Contemporary? The book is over 80 years old. That’s like saying
Rite of Spring
is modern music.
![]() 09/17/2015 at 09:54 |
|
Damn, we had to visit a gallery/exhibition for every other class. I actually really liked that class.
![]() 09/17/2015 at 09:54 |
|
To be fair, the teacher was a crazed man.
One class, he showed us
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visitor_Q
![]() 09/17/2015 at 09:55 |
|
![]() 09/17/2015 at 10:00 |
|
… Art Theory pure and simple, words on a page, literature undefiled by vision… late twentieth-century Modern Art was about to fulfill its destiny, which was: to become nothing less than Literature pure and simple”
Tom Wolfe,
The Painted Word
![]() 09/17/2015 at 10:08 |
|
...without a theory to go with it, I can’t see a painting.
Tom Wolfe in
The Painted Word,
making fun of late 20th century art and its attached reams of text.
![]() 09/17/2015 at 10:14 |
|
In an English language edition, Roland Barthes and Susan Sontag provide critical comment on the events.
Because of course they do.
![]() 09/17/2015 at 10:19 |
|
I wonder if that art thing recently with the nude German woman “giving birth to” paint filled eggs over a canvas was meant to allude to this. Actually I don’t wonder - almost certainly. Still stupid, still pretentious.
![]() 09/17/2015 at 10:20 |
|
Someone needs to tell these people that Expressionism is dead. We’ve moved on to simple vulgarity, since nobody is shocked by anything any more.
![]() 09/17/2015 at 10:25 |
|
I like this from the Painted Word’s wiki:
An artist compared him to “A six-year-old at a pornographic movie; he can follow the action of the bodies but he can’t comprehend the nuances .”
![]() 09/17/2015 at 10:35 |
|
The art racket is largely about nothing anymore other than plumbing the depths of depravity (or meaninglessness) in exactly the same ways over and over and over. You make a statement about confrontation, blather about interrogating this or that, insert several unsupported assertions, and then do something that you hope nobody recognizes as having been done before. The patron system of old had its flaws, but usually a patron actually wanted something tangible as product. Now, with the public in revolt and leaving only the single largest political patron (government at large), only things that reassure faceless bureacrats that they’re supporting something “edgy” get any traction outside tiny circles of tens desperately inhaling their own farts. It’s all about geeking imaginary squares and talking about how meaningful something is, when it’s really just taking short essay subjects (the more stupider the better) and representing them in some form that (hopefully) doesn’t take more than a day to arrange.
![]() 09/17/2015 at 10:41 |
|
Y’know, cause porn has nuances and shizzle. Norman Mailer reviewed
A Man In Full
and made a long series of comparisons to “making love to a 300lb woman”, involving falling in love or being crushed, and a whole bunch of other really bizarre and vivid imagery. Wolfe (paraphrased): Wow, Norman Mailer has sexed a lot of 300lb women.
![]() 09/17/2015 at 11:44 |
|
Wait, I just realized a journalist(writer?) said art would turn into literature.
I’m glad I don’t care what art critics think.
![]() 09/17/2015 at 11:46 |
|
Probably a good thing. It was the shaping of art critics that spawned the literary art monstrosity in the first place - on which Wolfe was doing his snark piece.