Accidental Cleanliness Destroys $1.1m Art Installation

[Treblaine]

$1 million for something that a person who ACTUALLY WORKS AND TOILS FOR A LIVING thought was just a mess... that just shows how overvalued this work is and while I have begrudging respect for Modern Art I think their valuations show all the indication of an "Art bubble".

Modern Artist are failing to be relevant, and such hyper valuations are BAD for their art-form of "installation artwork".

If these artists are REAL artists they could use this turn of events to be an artistic expression, maybe for a second they could step back an look at how introspective and ponderous they have become that they have become the worst thing art can possibly be: irrelevant. Meaningless.

I'm sorry, just because "I'm an artist" that doesn't automatically make your work profound. It needs to stand on its own merits. Where is the democracy of this? Where is the appeal to anyone who hasn't been "briefed" on what is art. Here is the problem, these art installations DO NOT speak for themselves. Their context of the galleries were they are installed are far more important to give relevance and significance to their work than the actual installations themselves.

 

[Thedutchjelle]

I like how 20 centimeters got translated into inches here. :-( When will you guys ever learn?

The story itself is funny, at least to me. Probably not to the janitor.

 

[ILikeEggs]

Wow - so much raging.

This is a sculpture by Olafur Eliasson... and it's fucking amazing when you see it in person.
But sure... trash everything because you 'hate modern art'

Fuck the world would be boring if you guys were in charge.

If "we" were in charge as you put it, people would be ignored and scoffed at(as if they already aren't) if they tried to pass off a large cube of gnawed chocolate as art.

As for your example of Olafur Eliasson, I would put people with work like his in a grey area. I'd be more inclined to call him a (interior)decorator than an artist, as such. No doubt, his work is impressive, and does indeed look nice, but I'd still hesitate to call it art.

But again, your using him as an example falls flat on its back because his work actually serves a purpose other than to "convey a message" if at all, it does that. His work serves as decoration, and I'd say 'The Weather Project'(ignoring viewers lying on their backs, etc) is more of a realist "sculpture" than the modern art I so loathe. I'd actually be pretty ok calling this one a piece of art, because it functions even without all the interpretation and theory one would read into it.

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

Modern Art: indistinguishable from trash.

Thread winner. Modern are is shit. I like art that has some kind of talent behind it, not something that anyone could put together for £20 and 30 minutes, give it a really deep title and sell it for £30,000.

Thats all modern art is judged on, its the title or explanation of what it represents.

 

[HDi]

If "we" were in charge as you put it, people would be ignored and scoffed at(as if they already aren't) if they tried to pass off a large cube of gnawed chocolate as art.

As for your example of Olafur Eliasson, I would put people with work like his in a grey area. I'd be more inclined to call him a (interior)decorator than an artist, as such. No doubt, his work is impressive, and does indeed look nice, but I'd still hesitate to call it art.

But again, your using him as an example falls flat on its back because his work actually serves a purpose other than to "convey a message" if at all, it does that. His work serves as decoration, and I'd say 'The Weather Project'(ignoring viewers lying on their backs, etc) is more of a realist "sculpture" than the modern art I so loathe. I'd actually be pretty ok calling this one a piece of art, because it functions even without all the interpretation and theory one would read into it.

You would put this kind of stuff into a 'grey area'?

Seriously?

Really?

Honestly?

For what it's worth, I don't think the sculpture I posted has the purpose you seem to think it does. It's set up in a dark room. Focus is trained completely onto the mist and the colours that appear in the spotligh. There's nothing there to decorate and essentially, there is no interior. It's a non-space with an object in it.

I gave it as an example of 'modern art' - which it clearly, plainly and obviously is; and used that example to try to negate the 'modern art is trashy pretentious bullshit' commentary that this thread is full of.

But sure, a lot of art isn't great. Many many movies are complete shit and there's a hell of a lot of bad games, books and music out there. But noone's stomping around the place going 'Arrgh... all music written in the last fifty years is a waste of time!' (That's actually not true, I know a few people who say that - but my point still stands.)

Some people don't like some stuff... and cool, whatever. The world's full of different petople and opinions and it would be shit boring otherwise and all that. The thing that bugs me though is the fucking vitriol... the hardcore judgement that people dole out to stuff they're not keen on.

That artist put time and effort in. They made something and put it out into the world. And if you think that's worth absolutely nothing, then fine. But you're a douche if you're gonna scream about it over and over again. And if you really think you can earn millions of dollars packaging your own faeces, then fucking go right ahead. I can pretty much guarantee that you'll fail. It's not that simple.

I just realised that I sound super angry... I'm really not. And that last paragraph wasn't directed at anyone in particular (especially not ILikeEggs)

But anyway, since you seem pretty adamant about what you do and don't consider artwork ... you have me all curious about what parameters you use to define these things. You mention 'function'... I don't really agree that art needs a function (or a message for that matter).

(I'm not trying to be a dick, by the way... I'm genuinely curious about other people's takes on these things)

Besides there's already a lot of people here scoffing at figuratively gnawed chocolate... so I'm just gonna post Mona Hartoum's Light Sentence... because it's also awesome.

TL;DR - live and let live... you might stumble across something great.

 

[CosmicCommander]

This is art. And it's modern-ish.

This is what you see on acid.

 

[DarthSka]

Well that's........something someone made all right. Technically, since art is practically impossible to define and just about anything can be artistic, it is art. Still, I think I'll compare it to most popular songs today. Yeah it's music, but it doesn't mean it's good music.

 

[Sporky111]

Umm . . . "irreparable damage"? It was supposed to look like dirty water. Put in some dirty water. Problem solved.

 

[SyphonX]

I don't want to live on this planet anymore....

Spoiler: Transferral sequence activate

[http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/502/theelderscrollsvskyrim.jpg/]​

Okay. I'll stay a while yet.​

 

[sketch_zeppelin]

I don't have anything against expressing somthing through art (i'm a student of art). As an artist you should be able to make a peice however you want.

That being said, i do have a problem with how the fine art community (who are largely trendy ass fucking morons) decides to value said art. Case in point, how do you justify saying that the peice was worth $1.1 million when it could be mistaken as literal filth.

A peice with no historical signifigance and one which only a small fraction would ever see if not for this incident (hell the poster of the artical couldn't even find a pic of it)

This is why presently comics are a supior art form then the fine art. Not because fine art is no longer important to culture. but because for every peice that someone see's in a gallery and is inspired or moved by, a 1000 people will read a comic and be inspired.

Art has to be seen if its to be appreciated and because of the trendy fucks surounding how and who see's fine art and what art is more important over others, almost no one will see a peice of fine art outside of the historically famous ones (even then only in text books)

At least comics are avialble everywhere to every one and for the most part its how popular a comic is that dictates its importance.

and even if you can't get a comic pubished on paper we now have the internet, which is the one saving grace for the world of fine art. Sites like deviant art and the like, once again allow the masses to look upon art and decided for themselves what is important to them. Now if we could only get the rest of the world to figure that out.

...well that was sort of a rant...*shurgs*

 

[ILikeEggs]

There's nothing there to decorate and essentially, there is no interior. It's a non-space with an object in it.

I gave it as an example of 'modern art' - which it clearly, plainly and obviously is; and used that example to try to negate the 'modern art is trashy pretentious bullshit' commentary that this thread is full of.

Just because it isn't being used to decorate something doesn't mean it isn't decorative. Additionally, just because something is decorative, it doesn't mean it's art.

Like I mentioned earlier, even certain abstract paintings can look nice in the right environmental context(being decorative, in essence), but that doesn't make them art.

Just to give you a sense of perspective, take pearls, for example. Peals look pretty and are decorative. Yet you wouldn't call a pearl a work of art.

That artist put time and effort in. They made something and put it out into the world. And if you think that's worth absolutely nothing, then fine.

If we're basing everything off effort here, the realists, illustrators and digital artists these days deserve ten times the fame, money and acclaim that the conceptual, abstract and shock artists have.

Effort doesn't really come into the picture. A terribly drawn house with a terribly drawn car in the driveway might be a monumental effort for a toddler, but I don't see parents the world over trying to get their children's scrawls into art galleries.
You might mention putting it up on a refrigerator or something of the sort, but that has nothing to do with its "artistic merits" or the effort put into it; it simply holds sentimental value.

But anyway, since you seem pretty adamant about what you do and don't consider artwork ... you have me all curious about what parameters you use to define these things. You mention 'function'... I don't really agree that art needs a function (or a message for that matter).

You didn't read my post properly. I didn't say art needs to serve a purpose apart from being emotionally uplifting. However, it can have a function such as social commentary, but that is secondary to the emotional impact it has.

I'll give you my definition of what is not art. If a work of "art" needs an explanation or interpretation to be appreciated, it is not art.
An ideology or message is not a necessary component of art, and is most certainly not the foundation of art. If that were true, the Mona Lisa, Michelangelo's David, Whistler's Mother and countless other pieces would not be art.

TL;DR - live and let live... you might stumble across something great.

Sorry, but this sort of subjective mindset has grated me for far too long. Why must everyone be a unique snowflake, why is everyone's opinion valid, why are we so afraid of calling people out for their idiocy? Are these modern artists mentally and emotionally fragile children who we must protect from the "harsh", "cutting" criticism of ordinary people?

To give you an idea of my stance on the whole thing, I may not consider Olafur Eliasson's works(and similar others) art, but some of them do look nice, if nothing else. I'm not saying decorative works such as those need to go away, they aren't an eyesore. Similarly, I have no problem with abstract paintings that may indeed catch your eye momentarily, but I won't call them art. On the other hand, when you have waffleheaded idiots calling a glass of water an oak tree, or putting up large arcs of metal on sidewalks and calling it art, that's when you have a problem.

 

[Taunta]

I can lol about the pretentious art world and then walk off and be fine, but the thing that is preventing me from doing so, is that I can go to school for several years, then work forty years at a dead-end job because getting job openings are slim nowadays and the older you get, the slimmer your chances are at getting a good job because employers want young people. I can die never being able to retire because I wanted to raise a family, and there are people like this who make a million dollars for nailing a bunch of sticks together, but now it's ruined because someone cleaned up your puddle of dirt water?

What. Utter. Bullshit.

And for all those are like "Well make your own pile of sticks then", let me preemptively call out that bullshit too. Art critics are extremely fickle, and an Average Joe will get nothing for their pile of sticks cause they haven't kissed enough asses on their way to the top. There are stories in this very thread of critics hating pieces of art, then instantly changing their tune as soon as it's revealed to have been made by a famous artist. Or stories of art critics praising an art because they think it was made by someone famous, and it turns out it was made by a monkey.

My problem is not with modern art in general, it's with the whole industry.

Spoiler: In conclusion

 

[Drejer43]

"The world has lost a valuable, irreplaceable piece of art", no it definitely has not. If your "art" is indistinguishable from trash, you are a failure. You are a drain on society and a waste of space. Go get a real job loser.

This is pretty much my opinion, when I see "mordern art" I see "oh another bum who is trying to sell trash to pompous rich people, great"

 

[Mike Fang]

Oh man, that's priceless, even after the cleaning lady was done with it. XD

 

[Drejer43]

In this thread: a large group of people who don't understand art. I am completely and totally shocked.

Well enlighten us then

 

[DarthSka]

That is worth $1.1 Million!?

BRB gluing a bunch of sticks together so I can get myself set for life.

Oh dear, the usual indignation at how much is spent on art, simply because you don't see the artistic merit in what is made.

At the risk of becoming unpopular since it seems like everyone is saying the same thing, I often like to refer to this pic when these kinds of comments crop up:

Spoiler

As for the installation, weak sauce, but it could be an interesting exercise for the original creator to see how he cam make a new one, and how close it comes to the original. Either way, I am sure he will live. The art gallery will have some serious issues to face, however.

Is it art? I don't know, but I do know that most people who ***** about modern art don't even bother to try and get themselves involved in it, even as amateurs. Much easier to shout from the sidelines.

I don't do it because if I did, I would be laughed out of the auction house. These people usually have connections or know the "right" people. Bascially, whatever they do is going to be praised as 'ingenious.' On the other hand, I'm not going to say this isn't art, it is. Technically, anything can be art thanks to its very loose definition, but it doesn't mean that it's really groundbreaking.

 

[veloper]

"The world has lost a valuable, irreplaceable piece of art", no it definitely has not. If your "art" is indistinguishable from trash, you are a failure. You are a drain on society and a waste of space. Go get a real job loser.

This is pretty much my opinion, when I see "mordern art" I see "oh another bum who is trying to sell trash to pompous rich people, great"

It was in a German museum, so tax money was wasted on this crap. That's the real issue.

 

[Monsterfurby]

To this cleaner, I say:

 

[MarsProbe]

If I was in Germany, I'd buy that woman a beer, or whatever it is she likes to drink.

Perhaps this will teach these so called "artists" to actually create a real piece of art as opposed to this sort of nonsense.

Speaking of which - I was making some sandwiches a few minutes ago and I still have a chopping board with two kitchen knifes and some tin foil sitting on top of it. What should I do - tidy it up or see if it'll cut the mustard at the modern art gallery in the city tomorrow?