There is nothing to hold on

"Nothing but Heart, Low"

http://www.nictoglobe.com/new/room/New%20Room/ma201112.html

Best

A.

On Dec 17, 2011, at 9:42 AM, Pall Thayer wrote:

> When we create “art”, we strive to do something new. We put all our
> energy into compiling our emotions, our feelings, our experiences into
> a comprehensive whole. However, that comprehension is always personal.
> We can not separate our creative expression from our creative
> compulsions or energies. The outcome is what it is. It is a personal
> reflection of our personal interpretation of our time.
>  The notion of “timeless art” is a myth, perpetuated by who knows what
> (or who)... how can a work of art be timeless? It is always a product
> of its time. To perceive it otherwise would be absurd. If Les
> Demoiselles d'Avignon had never previously been produced, would we
> accept it today as a remarkable work of art? I don't think so. Its
> production was very much tied to its time. Its importance is equally
> tied to its time of production. It represents a break from its own
> contemporary tradition - but not even a drastic break. It falls within
> its own contemporary explorations into african art (which had already
> been pursued by Ingres, in his own manner and had also influenced the
> likes of Manet.... but we could go on forever). Picasso was not the
> only one exploring these avenues. But that is beyond my point. We live
> in a time. Yes, the period is supposed to be there. We live in a time.
> It is our time. As Lilly Allen stated, “No, you can't have my number
> 'cause I lost my phone.” Lost my phone? When I was her age, my phone
> never left my home! But times change. We live in an age where you may
> “lose your phone”.  And what goes with losing your phone? You lose
> your identity! No... you don't. Your identity is as secure as you made
> it... what?... your username was the same as your password? You
> idio.... you dear, dear child.
> I reviewed the work of an “internet artist” recently. Oh... here we
> go... someone addressing his time, his culture! He uses the fact that
> contemporary culture has provided us a plethora of personal imagery.
> This is good. His website contains compelling images of his own
> manipulations of images. His own manipulations of images.... his own
> man... Excuse me, what are you doing to these images? How are you
> choosing these images. Yes, your end results are compelling but what
> is your process? That would be far more compelling. Please don't tell
> me that you lost your phone. The only thing that truly speakes to your
> time, is your method. And you choose to veil that behind the eye-candy
> of your output? Um... ok.
> As I drunkenly leave my seat to explore the opportunities provided me
> by a destructive cannon of highly inflammabale tobacco, I deplore you
> to consider the issues; what exactly defines our time? Our culture? I
> think Lily Allen hit the nail on the head for her target group. As you
> consider where we might be, I'll be out on the stoop, smoking a
> cigarette. I expect a coherent answer when I get back.
> -- 
> *****************************
> Pall Thayer
> artist
> http://pallthayer.dyndns.org
> *****************************
> _______________________________________________
> NetBehaviour mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>

_______________________________________________
NetBehaviour mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour

Reply via email to