I think anti-art is actually art in linguistic sheeps clothing. the only
time it ever comes up is when an artist, or someone being called an artist,
feels he/she has to clarify that their "art" is not Art but anti-art. and
that only comes up in art contexts. You don't have to define art as
Anti-plumbing, or anti-vegetation or anything like that.
Personally, I think Duchamp, the OG anti-artist, made his anti-art
statements just to cause trouble, much like he did with a lot of his other
art. Like saying he was giving up art for chess when actually he never gave
up art. To me that was just part of his art, watching people twist around
trying to define his work.
just my opinion, or anti-opinion,
Alex
>From: "Josh Ronsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>What is anti-art?
>
>At what point does anti-art become art?
>
>-Josh Ronsen
>http://www.nd.org/jronsen
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------
>--== Sent via Deja.com ==--
>http://www.deja.com/
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
