OK, that's better.

WC


> 
> 
> "Fountain" was a coup de thiatre, a declaration of
> the license of names.
> 
> But what Duchamp did is not like what Warhol did.
> Who ever mistook the
> Brillo Boxes as found objects? They were painted to
> look like their
> model, but they are clearly not actual cardboard
> boxes with steel-wool
> pads in them. It was the banality of their models
> that was the crucial
> factor in their succhs de scandale. Moreover,
> Warhol's boxes were
> *made* to look nearly identical to their models. He
> didn't just buy a
> box and put it on a plinth. The Brillo Boxes have
> more in common with
> Johns' Ballentine or coffee cans than with
> "Fountain." I don't see
> Warhol's works as instruments of anti-art, as
> "Fountain" was, but a
> bazooka assault on what remained of the theory of
> genres, high art
> decorum, even the vaunted network of "taste" that
> enveloped artistic
> sensibilities at mid-century.
> 
> 
> | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> Michael Brady
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to