Michael,
Are you suggesting that there's no connection between ethics and aesthetics in
the work artists produce?
Bob
>________________________________
> From: Michael Szpakowski <szp...@yahoo.com>
>To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
><netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org>
>Sent: Saturday, 10 March 2012, 13:57
>Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Read this about Gilbert & George in the Evening
>Standard yesterday
>
>
>There's no equation, unfortunately, between good (by which I mean left)
>politics and good art.
>There are some artists with rotten politics who repay repeated, even lifelong,
>attention as artists.
>Morandi, fascist sympathiser, is one of them.
>There are some artists you'd trust with your life, politically, who are deadly
>dull as artists.
>
>I saw the huge Gilbert and George retrospective at the Tate a couple of years
>back and it was one of the most excruciatingly dull experiences of my life,
>though "excruciatingly" makes it sound several degrees more attention grabbing
>than it actually was.
>My beef with G & G is they make very dull art on an industrial scale.
>It hasn't always been the case - I love their early moving image stuff...
>
>
>For me there's something about good art, whatever the personality or views of
>the originator, that is inherently liberating, but that's another and longer
>discussion...
>
>
>
>cheers
>michael
>
>
>
>
>
>
>________________________________
> From: dave miller <dave.miller...@gmail.com>
>To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
><netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org>
>Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2012 11:00 AM
>Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Read this about Gilbert & George in the Evening
>Standard yesterday
>
>Hi Rob
>
>This makes sense to me - Gilbert and George have become the Terry
>Thomases of the art world.
>
>dabe
>
>On 6 March 2012 19:31, Rob Myers <r...@robmyers.org> wrote:
>> On 06/03/12 17:03, marc garrett wrote:
>>>
>>> I think it's obvious that G&G are elitists, and would not wish to lose
>>> any income from their bourgeois client base.
>>
>> Their original artistic gesture was to conflate aesthetic and social
>> form. This was interesting but over time it has led to their public
>> pronouncements increasingly being bad form, in the Terry-Thomas sense.
>>
>>> Who gives a shit whether they work from 5. am or not - many work just as
>>> hard for much less, and are losing their jobs, communities, and much
>>> more - they are not
relevant.
>>
>> Yes hard work is not
sufficient to explain personal wealth, whatever the
>> psychological needs of the rich or indeed the simply not impoverished.
>>
>> - Rob.
>> _______________________________________________
>> NetBehaviour mailing list
>> NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org
>> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>_______________________________________________
>NetBehaviour mailing list
>NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org
>http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>NetBehaviour mailing list
>NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org
>http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>
>
_______________________________________________
NetBehaviour mailing list
NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
