Art
Re: (capital) A – R – T
by rublev » Tue Nov 11, 2014 3:51 pm
ok here i will expand
JAMES RICHARDS
i found the second viewing of this film much more enjoyable than the first. when i arrived there was a DJ playing music loudly one room away, and since the video was right at the entrance it was quite noisy, as well as busy with the door opening and closing quite frequently. this meant the whole experience felt really disjointed and frustrating. so much that i almost left. i found the photos of the sandpapered out explicit images a bit uncontroversial and trying, and the erotic video pieces with the flowers a bit derivative / nonsense. the sound in the film was fantastic, and although there was some competition from outside, there were parts that really made an impact on me. the sounds involving water and movement were incredible and i really wanted to hear it properly so i went back for a second viewing at the end which i'm very glad i did. the sandpapered images made a bit more sense and i liked it - it was interesting how you almost couldn't look away - you were made to look at these images that essentially weren't there. i think i read about richards saying the film was about the act of looking. so with these you're urged to search and stare into something quite limited. i also loved the scene with entwined arms rolling over the floor - no head or body etc, but just these arms. but the highlight for me was the last few minutes with the budgie - this very much felt like the crescendo of the piece. both the audio and visual parts became more intense, louder, more aggressive, disorientating, out of control, even beautiful. the images came up in quick succession like slides, and you had a continuous clicking along with a build up of noise, and finally really bass heavy thuds near the end. the music reminded of pete swanson (ex yellow swans) who makes this mash of beautiful noise under layers of other noise and often with 160bpm percussion running through it. for me this was the most affecting piece in the whole prize and for that i think richards deserves to win - it was the only thing that really made me feel something.
TRIS VONNA MICHELL
before i went to the exhibition from the reading i'd done this guy sounded proper mental, all fast talking, talking about his past and childhood, where he grew up... are the stories real or part of an imagination, a trick even. i was prepared to interested but i was completely underwhelmed by the whole thing. it felt predicable, disconnected and strangely impersonal considering it was meant to be a story about himself. the narration felt forced and the video and slides an after thought. the whole thing was also a bit frustrating and honestly by the end i hated him. if he was there i would have given him a scrunched up nose face before slowly backing out of the room, making sure he saw me, like i was washing off residue on my hand from a bin bag or eating something out of date by mistake
CIARA PHILIPS
if von michel was bad but frustrating, philips made me feel nothing at all. i almost walked through without stopping. i don't want to take anything away from the process of what happened ('social activism', 'grass roots movements' etc) with her work but it almost felt like she'd forgotten to take her art for the show with her. it was incredibly banal and lifeless. okay, nice colours, that's all you got? the spoken word piece in the booth… like, c'mon. you shouldn't get nominated let alone shortlisted for this kind of work. at least in the photos it made the coloured screen prints (floor to ceiling) look kinda cool and fun, but in person it felt like a substandard degree show. a bit embarrassing.
DUNCAN CAMPBELL
overall i thought his film (it for others) was pretty good if not a little self indulgent at just under an hour long. i'm quite interested in frankfurt school / horkheimer etc - and this is pretty much the crux of the film. the ownership of images and the narratives that come from it. but here campbell seems to make the film almost impossible to follow in an effort to make sure we knew it was an 'art film', something that was worthy of being shown in the turner. and i kinda hated it for that. but the film was much more subtle that i was anticipating, and different to the impression i initially had from reading about the piece. less a 'scathing attack' on the british museum and more a critique on western museum practices in general - if anything, a much wider concept and argument about the appropriation of african art and how institutions give their invented story to a historical object now outside its original surroundings. i thought the final IRA piece, about how images from the troubles were used for political and emotional purposes, and how we can't always trust images, was also excellent. i liked the ballet piece, even if it seemed drawn out. the piece involving soup cans tested my patience. and i think that was characteristic of the entire piece. it was on that line between being interesting in a challenging way, and being deliberately evasive. i wouldn't say i enjoyed it, and i definitely didn't have a eureka moment like during the richards film. but it was an intelligent and challenging film, and for it to be a nominee when you consider what else has been lately, i applaud.
but the use of the film in this way comes with baggage. french artist chris marker's film statues also die was about the colonisation of africa and the commercialisation of its art and campbell openly shows that he sees his film as a response to it, but it almost comes across as a riff on a classical piece of political cinema. the ballet was choreographed by michael clark, the images archival for the IRA and some of the african sections of the film. i suppose it feels like taking cues from someone else's creativity. it feels a bit secondhand. other peoples photographs, films, dance, ideas.
more generally i am a little concerned if this is the best of what british contemporary art has to offer. all a bit timid and sterile. i don't want to be shocked i want to be moved. if it were up to me i'd probably just give the prize to howard hodgkin again
slides from the second room for richards
crappy walls from phillips
the board outside where you could comment. in fact i think the board should win
JAMES RICHARDS
i found the second viewing of this film much more enjoyable than the first. when i arrived there was a DJ playing music loudly one room away, and since the video was right at the entrance it was quite noisy, as well as busy with the door opening and closing quite frequently. this meant the whole experience felt really disjointed and frustrating. so much that i almost left. i found the photos of the sandpapered out explicit images a bit uncontroversial and trying, and the erotic video pieces with the flowers a bit derivative / nonsense. the sound in the film was fantastic, and although there was some competition from outside, there were parts that really made an impact on me. the sounds involving water and movement were incredible and i really wanted to hear it properly so i went back for a second viewing at the end which i'm very glad i did. the sandpapered images made a bit more sense and i liked it - it was interesting how you almost couldn't look away - you were made to look at these images that essentially weren't there. i think i read about richards saying the film was about the act of looking. so with these you're urged to search and stare into something quite limited. i also loved the scene with entwined arms rolling over the floor - no head or body etc, but just these arms. but the highlight for me was the last few minutes with the budgie - this very much felt like the crescendo of the piece. both the audio and visual parts became more intense, louder, more aggressive, disorientating, out of control, even beautiful. the images came up in quick succession like slides, and you had a continuous clicking along with a build up of noise, and finally really bass heavy thuds near the end. the music reminded of pete swanson (ex yellow swans) who makes this mash of beautiful noise under layers of other noise and often with 160bpm percussion running through it. for me this was the most affecting piece in the whole prize and for that i think richards deserves to win - it was the only thing that really made me feel something.
TRIS VONNA MICHELL
before i went to the exhibition from the reading i'd done this guy sounded proper mental, all fast talking, talking about his past and childhood, where he grew up... are the stories real or part of an imagination, a trick even. i was prepared to interested but i was completely underwhelmed by the whole thing. it felt predicable, disconnected and strangely impersonal considering it was meant to be a story about himself. the narration felt forced and the video and slides an after thought. the whole thing was also a bit frustrating and honestly by the end i hated him. if he was there i would have given him a scrunched up nose face before slowly backing out of the room, making sure he saw me, like i was washing off residue on my hand from a bin bag or eating something out of date by mistake
CIARA PHILIPS
if von michel was bad but frustrating, philips made me feel nothing at all. i almost walked through without stopping. i don't want to take anything away from the process of what happened ('social activism', 'grass roots movements' etc) with her work but it almost felt like she'd forgotten to take her art for the show with her. it was incredibly banal and lifeless. okay, nice colours, that's all you got? the spoken word piece in the booth… like, c'mon. you shouldn't get nominated let alone shortlisted for this kind of work. at least in the photos it made the coloured screen prints (floor to ceiling) look kinda cool and fun, but in person it felt like a substandard degree show. a bit embarrassing.
DUNCAN CAMPBELL
overall i thought his film (it for others) was pretty good if not a little self indulgent at just under an hour long. i'm quite interested in frankfurt school / horkheimer etc - and this is pretty much the crux of the film. the ownership of images and the narratives that come from it. but here campbell seems to make the film almost impossible to follow in an effort to make sure we knew it was an 'art film', something that was worthy of being shown in the turner. and i kinda hated it for that. but the film was much more subtle that i was anticipating, and different to the impression i initially had from reading about the piece. less a 'scathing attack' on the british museum and more a critique on western museum practices in general - if anything, a much wider concept and argument about the appropriation of african art and how institutions give their invented story to a historical object now outside its original surroundings. i thought the final IRA piece, about how images from the troubles were used for political and emotional purposes, and how we can't always trust images, was also excellent. i liked the ballet piece, even if it seemed drawn out. the piece involving soup cans tested my patience. and i think that was characteristic of the entire piece. it was on that line between being interesting in a challenging way, and being deliberately evasive. i wouldn't say i enjoyed it, and i definitely didn't have a eureka moment like during the richards film. but it was an intelligent and challenging film, and for it to be a nominee when you consider what else has been lately, i applaud.
but the use of the film in this way comes with baggage. french artist chris marker's film statues also die was about the colonisation of africa and the commercialisation of its art and campbell openly shows that he sees his film as a response to it, but it almost comes across as a riff on a classical piece of political cinema. the ballet was choreographed by michael clark, the images archival for the IRA and some of the african sections of the film. i suppose it feels like taking cues from someone else's creativity. it feels a bit secondhand. other peoples photographs, films, dance, ideas.
more generally i am a little concerned if this is the best of what british contemporary art has to offer. all a bit timid and sterile. i don't want to be shocked i want to be moved. if it were up to me i'd probably just give the prize to howard hodgkin again
slides from the second room for richards
crappy walls from phillips
the board outside where you could comment. in fact i think the board should win
- 14
-
rublev - Political Editor
- Posts: 989
- Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 7:57 pm
- Reputation: 4234
Re: (capital) A – R – T
by Iliam » Thu Nov 13, 2014 7:41 pm
I'm not sure how much you already know about art, or what you've already been exposed to, or how interested you actually are in learning more BUT if you do want to learn more about modern and contemporary art then some good, even great, things to look at are:
by Robert Hughes.
In my young youth this tv series made me think about art seriously for the first time. Instead of doing my homework or thinking about what snack to have next or studying for my exam or trying to get megaupload to work, I'd watch this 80s incarnation of Robert Hughes explain and analyse the movements and cycles of modern art to me. I marvelled that these magical 1980s images and the engaged analysis of the past had been made accessible to me through the combined powers of steve jobs, whoever the youtube creators are, and some unknown, blessed individual who had transferred the original (home made? lovingly preserved ?) tapes of the show into a binary code of ones and zeros and then uploaded them to our society's collective repository of visual culture, youtube.
The show charts the birth of modern art/ avant garde movement at the turn of the century, watches its growing confidence, its establishment-isation and ends with at the contemporaneous artists of the 80's. It's organized 'thematically' (and only loosely chronologically) which lets Hughes tie together a lot of disparate ideas in art history with ease and with his unique, erudite flourishes. A lot of the ideas, artists and approaches to art that come from modernism are still relevant and hashtag influencer(ing) today. The best thing about knowing this kind of stuff is that when you see some contemporary art, you can understand where its 'coming from' (art) historically and then you get to roll your eyes because, of course, its been fucking done before by Duchamp or Bruce Nauman and doesn't anyone realise that(!!)? Abstract, conceptual, performance, pop and many other modernist movements in art are still being lovingly flogged to death by contemporary artists and art students in western, 'first world' countries. I can’t recommend Shock of the New enough really. I love ’im.
by John Berger.
I haven't watched the series but I have read the book based on the series (which I'd recommend). It's a great introduction not even introduction just good thing for ways of thinking about art. They still show this series in a lot of 'intro to art' -type classes. From memory, he discusses how reproduction and (pre-internet) technology have changed our relationship with art, feminist perspectives of art history and some other interesting things which I've temporarily forgotten. Despite a lot of changes in the way that art is approached and thought about inside and outside the academy, John Berger is still pretty well regarded, even 30 years after this first aired. Highly recommended.
Grayson Perry's .
Grayson Perry presented last year's Reith lecture series. Unlike Hughes and Berger, both of whom were writers, Grayson Perry is an artist and so has a different perspective of art and art history. He won the Turner Prize in 2003, and is art famous for his ceramic works, printmaking, and tapestry as well as for cross-dressing. In the lectures, he attempts to tackle what is art?, why do we make art?, what is 'up' with the art world today? and how can we judge art in the (seeming) absence of all standards? It's the most light-hearted as well as the most contemporary of the stuff here. Perry's a good speaker and obviously knows what he is talking about. The lectures are written (I think) for a general-not-necessarily-art-knowledgeable-though-art-interested audience in mind (i.e. you [hopefully]). All the Reith lectures are available in podcast form, so you can listen to it on ur train 2 london-town, and by the time you get to the Turner prize exhibition you'll be well up on (and critical of) the contemporary art ideologies.
And, after all that, if you're still wanting plusmore knowledge, NY Magazine/ Vulture's art critic and modern-day-robert-hughes, Jerry Saltz did a Reddit AMA where
Nothing is going to replace actually going and seeing the art. then standing in front of it for long enough to feel something (or nothing), and then thinking hard about why and how it makes you feel (or not feel) that way BUT the above .mp3 files should give you some mind-thoughts to entertain as you look into the (literal) and/or give you something vaguely impressive to say to any potential romance-partners wandering around those alienating gallery spaces.
And, now that you're finally 'in the know', it's time to laugh at the !
- 16
-
Iliam - Posts: 284
- Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2014 12:25 am
- Reputation: 1948
Re: (capital) A – R – T
by rublev » Fri Nov 14, 2014 6:01 pm
.
- 11
Last edited by rublev on Fri Dec 30, 2016 6:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
rublev - Political Editor
- Posts: 989
- Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 7:57 pm
- Reputation: 4234
Re: (capital) A – R – T
by rublev » Fri Nov 28, 2014 5:15 pm
.
- 13
Last edited by rublev on Fri Dec 30, 2016 6:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
rublev - Political Editor
- Posts: 989
- Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 7:57 pm
- Reputation: 4234
Re: (capital) A – R – T
by klonopin » Mon Dec 08, 2014 4:10 pm
So i'm cataloging part of my boss's personal book collection and he has some ridiculous number (like 50 or something) of Lawrence Weiner books which are just incredible to flip through. One of them has a full (probably?) transcription of his 1969 "Notes On & About Art", and although parts of it are pretty ubiquitous (even aphoristic) in "contemporary art discourse" I don't think the piece is frequently read or published as a whole (i think its also in the Phaidon book edited by Buchloch, but i haven't seen it). Anyway its a beautiful text but full of contradictions and ambiguities. I can't stop thinking about it so i typed it out below and maybe other people can help me parse it or just enjoy it themselves. (I think this version was translated to spanish and then back to english because elsewhere i've seen "capabilities" written as "possibilities" but i don't think originality is really at issue here. there were also boxes around some paragraphs that i can't reproduce with my keyboard.)
- 5
Last edited by klonopin on Mon Dec 08, 2014 4:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
klonopin - Posts: 62
- Joined: Fri May 30, 2014 12:59 am
- Reputation: 240
Re: (capital) A – R – T
by pei » Mon Dec 08, 2014 4:24 pm
i make art too i guess
about to finish my first semester of art school and it's going p well i guess! i mostly do sound, performance, video, and new media but i do enjoy doodling a lil bit
here's some stills of some video performances i worked on
video
2 channel video
3 channel video
my work used to be focused on using natural resources (see first pic) but now i'm more interested in synthetic objects, feelings, and concepts!!! ahhh
about to finish my first semester of art school and it's going p well i guess! i mostly do sound, performance, video, and new media but i do enjoy doodling a lil bit
here's some stills of some video performances i worked on
video
2 channel video
3 channel video
my work used to be focused on using natural resources (see first pic) but now i'm more interested in synthetic objects, feelings, and concepts!!! ahhh
- 8
:0)
-
pei - Posts: 99
- Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2014 12:28 am
- Location: scatman's world
- Reputation: 1238
Re: (capital) A – R – T
by rublev » Fri Dec 19, 2014 5:39 pm
.
- 11
Last edited by rublev on Fri Dec 30, 2016 6:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
rublev - Political Editor
- Posts: 989
- Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 7:57 pm
- Reputation: 4234
Re: (capital) A – R – T
by donut_milk » Sun Dec 21, 2014 10:20 pm
I went and saw a now permanent installation of James Turrell's Breathing Light at LACMA a few weeks ago:
A bit upset at myself for not going when they had his full exhibition earlier this year but at least this is part of the permanent collection now. Felt very calming yet unnerving at the same time being in that room, bathed in light that was extremely saturated.
I am looking forward to seeing Pierre Huyghe's work which is on display now -
A bit upset at myself for not going when they had his full exhibition earlier this year but at least this is part of the permanent collection now. Felt very calming yet unnerving at the same time being in that room, bathed in light that was extremely saturated.
I am looking forward to seeing Pierre Huyghe's work which is on display now -
- 9
-
donut_milk - Posts: 119
- Joined: Tue May 06, 2014 11:47 pm
- Location: bae area
- Reputation: 496
Re: (capital) A – R – T
by pirxthepilot » Tue Dec 23, 2014 5:35 pm
little video interview with my friend, talking about working by the river thames
http://mirrorcity.southbankcentre.co.uk ... ma-mcnally
http://mirrorcity.southbankcentre.co.uk ... ma-mcnally
- 3
-
pirxthepilot - Posts: 507
- Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2014 7:26 am
- Reputation: 2022
Re: (capital) A – R – T
by sunblam » Fri Jan 02, 2015 5:02 pm
I apologize for being so absent from this forum for so long! I have been writing two theses :| They're about art, though! Here are some things that aren't in my theses.
"Untitled," William Eggleston (1965-68 and 1972-74), from Los Alamos.
"100% Permission from Roddy Buchanan," Yang Jiechang (2005), ink and mineral colors on silk.
"Winnipeg, Manitoba Canada," Neil Farber (2009).
"Inward Vision No. 1," Yayoi Kusama (1953).
Xu Gu, "Cat and Butterfly" (19th century).
"Bus Stop," Neil Farber (2010).
hmu if you want to know everything about Chinese contemporary ink art or Yayoi Kusama!
"Untitled," William Eggleston (1965-68 and 1972-74), from Los Alamos.
"100% Permission from Roddy Buchanan," Yang Jiechang (2005), ink and mineral colors on silk.
"Winnipeg, Manitoba Canada," Neil Farber (2009).
"Inward Vision No. 1," Yayoi Kusama (1953).
Xu Gu, "Cat and Butterfly" (19th century).
"Bus Stop," Neil Farber (2010).
hmu if you want to know everything about Chinese contemporary ink art or Yayoi Kusama!
- 10
Hello hello
I love you I love you
(maybe)
I love you I love you
(maybe)
-
sunblam - Posts: 115
- Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 5:05 pm
- Location: City of Angels
- Reputation: 482
Re: (capital) A – R – T
by momjeans » Sat Jan 03, 2015 4:51 pm
i've been getting really into may wavers work lately.
[youtube]Cd3YYpldENs#t=33[/youtube]
she also has a piece called Ok Cupid Interview that I really like: http://okcupidinterview.net/
[youtube]Cd3YYpldENs#t=33[/youtube]
she also has a piece called Ok Cupid Interview that I really like: http://okcupidinterview.net/
- 2
-
momjeans - Posts: 84
- Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 12:39 pm
- Reputation: 225
Re: (capital) A – R – T
by exprof » Fri Jan 09, 2015 6:31 pm
all about canadiana, shout out to suzy lake
- 2
-
exprof - Posts: 517
- Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 7:32 pm
- Reputation: 4715
Re: (capital) A – R – T
by rublev » Sat Jan 10, 2015 4:23 pm
alexander archipenko
ivan puni
lyubov sergeyevna popova
ivan kliun
alexandra exter
alexander rodchenko
olga rozanova
El Lissitzky
lajos kassak
theo van doesburg
george vantongerloo
and heaps more if you don't care about labels that much!
no sorry, didn't make that show. i'm in glasgow and rarely get down to london to see things :( only other thing i saw was the new hodgkin exhibition. heard mixed reviews of the mirrorcity show but we all know that doesn't mean anything.
- 6
-
rublev - Political Editor
- Posts: 989
- Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 7:57 pm
- Reputation: 4234
Re: (capital) A – R – T
by rublev » Sat Jan 10, 2015 4:58 pm
oops also meant to post about the rietveld schröder house, which is amazing!!!
- 6
-
rublev - Political Editor
- Posts: 989
- Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 7:57 pm
- Reputation: 4234
Re: (capital) A – R – T
by sunblam » Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:14 am
OK so I got a couple requests to talk more about Yayoi Kusama so I'm going to do that now. This is basically a summary of fifteen pages so bear with me.
Kusama began working in Japan in the 50's with the backing of a really wealthy family, but she wasn't particularly successful, so she moved to New York. In New York, she was very successful, popular especially for her happenings, in which she would paint polka dots on the nude bodies of participants. Now, two important things about Kusama:
1. She has really bad OCD, and because of this is very prone to repetitive actions.
2. She had "hallucinations" when she was young that were really just lights effecting her eyes, but led her to repeating the pattern of the red spots she saw in her work. The circle to her represents purity and oblivion.
In the 1970's after a very successful 60's when Kusama established herself in New York, she went back to Japan for a while and checked herself into a mental hospital. Kusama did super well after doing so, and went back to having tons of exhibitions and making lots of art in the 1980's. At this time, her artwork changed a bit. Kusama started out making works with dots, as well as sort of mangled phallus shapes; she was incredibly afraid of phalli and these phallus works sort of acted as an exposure therapy, which is pretty common in treating phobias as well as obsessive compulsive disorder. The dot works were an act of obsession, not really a therapy, but an outward expression of her disordered thought. SO ANYWAYS after she checked herself into the mental institution, she stopped making so many phallo-centric works and kinda kept to the dots. In her old age, she has been making works that combine the dot with the phallus, which to me is sort of a reflection on how fears and beauties can coexist.
Kusama is now known around the world as "the dot artist" as well as "that crazy Japanese lady," which is really dismissive of the empire that she has created. Kusama has designed (for Louis Vuitton, most recently), published a series of acclaimed novels, and established herself as one of the most renowned contemporary artists in the international art world. Although she remains in a mental hospital, she is very aware of her condition and consciously incorporates its effects on her into her artwork.
here's a ton of images:
Kusama began working in Japan in the 50's with the backing of a really wealthy family, but she wasn't particularly successful, so she moved to New York. In New York, she was very successful, popular especially for her happenings, in which she would paint polka dots on the nude bodies of participants. Now, two important things about Kusama:
1. She has really bad OCD, and because of this is very prone to repetitive actions.
2. She had "hallucinations" when she was young that were really just lights effecting her eyes, but led her to repeating the pattern of the red spots she saw in her work. The circle to her represents purity and oblivion.
In the 1970's after a very successful 60's when Kusama established herself in New York, she went back to Japan for a while and checked herself into a mental hospital. Kusama did super well after doing so, and went back to having tons of exhibitions and making lots of art in the 1980's. At this time, her artwork changed a bit. Kusama started out making works with dots, as well as sort of mangled phallus shapes; she was incredibly afraid of phalli and these phallus works sort of acted as an exposure therapy, which is pretty common in treating phobias as well as obsessive compulsive disorder. The dot works were an act of obsession, not really a therapy, but an outward expression of her disordered thought. SO ANYWAYS after she checked herself into the mental institution, she stopped making so many phallo-centric works and kinda kept to the dots. In her old age, she has been making works that combine the dot with the phallus, which to me is sort of a reflection on how fears and beauties can coexist.
Kusama is now known around the world as "the dot artist" as well as "that crazy Japanese lady," which is really dismissive of the empire that she has created. Kusama has designed (for Louis Vuitton, most recently), published a series of acclaimed novels, and established herself as one of the most renowned contemporary artists in the international art world. Although she remains in a mental hospital, she is very aware of her condition and consciously incorporates its effects on her into her artwork.
here's a ton of images:
- 4
Hello hello
I love you I love you
(maybe)
I love you I love you
(maybe)
-
sunblam - Posts: 115
- Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 5:05 pm
- Location: City of Angels
- Reputation: 482
Re: (capital) A – R – T
by smiles » Thu Jan 15, 2015 1:26 am
Going to see an exhibition of Nobuyoshi Araki's work tomorrow, and then there's an exhibition with Ren Hang and Li Lang opening on Saturday. Probably going to be less naked people than would be expected of most of these artists.
Excited for Nobuyoshi, There's going to be some works from 'Sentimental Journey, Winter Journey', which is my favourite of his. Never seen Ren Hang in person so that will be good. Anyway, I'm liking a lot of photography stuff right now.
Excited for Nobuyoshi, There's going to be some works from 'Sentimental Journey, Winter Journey', which is my favourite of his. Never seen Ren Hang in person so that will be good. Anyway, I'm liking a lot of photography stuff right now.
- 7
草地跑過的腳印
-
smiles - Posts: 992
- Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 10:25 pm
- Location: BK
- Reputation: 6585
Re: (capital) A – R – T
by klonopin » Fri Jan 16, 2015 12:18 pm
Is queer terrorism the future of art??
[vimeo]http://www.vimeo.com/57882032[/vimeo]
[vimeo]http://www.vimeo.com/57882032[/vimeo]
- 0
-
klonopin - Posts: 62
- Joined: Fri May 30, 2014 12:59 am
- Reputation: 240
-
areo - Posts: 63
- Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2014 9:32 am
- Reputation: 193
Re: (capital) A – R – T
by schiaparelli » Sun Jan 18, 2015 8:33 am
my new favorite tumblr: . the viewpoint of works of arts stored in museums (largely the met). the juxtaposition is hilarious and awesome and it feels like this lovely childlike exploration of the secret lives of portraits and sculptures. reminds me a lot of the harry potter idea of portraits flitting to other frames to socialize and hang out and act out their own little dramas.
that poor girl, staring into the abyss of humanity.
that poor girl, staring into the abyss of humanity.
- 11
-
schiaparelli - Posts: 448
- Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 7:00 pm
- Reputation: 2974
Re: (capital) A – R – T
by Iliam » Tue Jan 20, 2015 4:40 am
went with to the 'Commune' exhibition at White Rabbit Gallery, which shows Chinese contemporary art.
We also watched 's Assembly Line Interview Series. Probably my favourite.
We also watched 's Assembly Line Interview Series. Probably my favourite.
- 4
-
Iliam - Posts: 284
- Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2014 12:25 am
- Reputation: 1948
Re: (capital) A – R – T
by rublev » Sat Jan 24, 2015 5:02 pm
.
- 16
Last edited by rublev on Fri Dec 30, 2016 6:29 pm, edited 2 times in total.
-
rublev - Political Editor
- Posts: 989
- Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 7:57 pm
- Reputation: 4234
Re: (capital) A – R – T
by australia » Mon Jan 26, 2015 2:27 am
Any thoughts/recommendations/sites for purchasing art (originals, re-prints, copies, posters) in the $50-500 price range.
Looking to fill up two walls of a bedroom I'm moving into shortly. Colour scheme will be fairly simple (creams, white, greys, black). Wooden floorboards, plain white/cream walls.
Already have been browsing http://www.artelino.com/default.asp as I love Japanese ukiyo-e style, though these seem quite small in general.
Looking to fill up two walls of a bedroom I'm moving into shortly. Colour scheme will be fairly simple (creams, white, greys, black). Wooden floorboards, plain white/cream walls.
Already have been browsing http://www.artelino.com/default.asp as I love Japanese ukiyo-e style, though these seem quite small in general.
- 0
-
australia - Posts: 44
- Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2014 1:19 am
- Reputation: 50
Re: (capital) A – R – T
by AmericanPie » Thu Feb 05, 2015 1:42 am
I have a small show up right now, and I wanted to share the things I make with the c-t.
Pics of each individual piece here:
Pics of each individual piece here:
- 6
-
AmericanPie - Posts: 238
- Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2013 1:44 am
- Reputation: 2022
Re: (capital) A – R – T
by ramseames » Sun Feb 08, 2015 10:06 pm
http://rr-ho-presi.tumblr.com/
also the last page is fucking annoying to load
pls spoiler or make an imgur album guys cmon its not hard i swear
also the last page is fucking annoying to load
pls spoiler or make an imgur album guys cmon its not hard i swear
- 3
-
ramseames - Posts: 2235
- Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 6:14 pm
- Location: vancouver
- Reputation: 6690
Re: (capital) A – R – T
by CleanThug » Sat Feb 14, 2015 11:45 am
Anybody like Alex Grey? He does really psychedelic stuff akin to what you (apparently) see while on DMT.
super cool stuff
super cool stuff
- 6
-
CleanThug - Posts: 336
- Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2014 10:23 am
- Location: I'm so Northern California
- Reputation: 807
Re: (capital) A – R – T
by rublev » Mon Mar 16, 2015 1:40 pm
spoilered 'cos there's quite a few but here is some of my most recent stuff !!!
- 13
-
rublev - Political Editor
- Posts: 989
- Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 7:57 pm
- Reputation: 4234
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests