LiveVideo.com - The World is Watching

1 2

Posted Jun 23, 07 by thewarden

Posted Jun 18, 07 by fuzzypurpleroses
Hmm, this comment will be a combination of plagiarism and revolution relative to the comments below, I guess. ;-p

I think the issue is pretty complex. I think that one of the things we have to remember is that part of what has pushed art in the direction more...it has gone stemmed/stems from an objection to the mechanization/commodification of culture. In response, to avoid this, to protest it, artists today seem to go out of their way to avoid some of the old systems of aesthetics that are thought to have driven this. In this respect, I think that much of modern art is driven by a feeling that the art of the past was a symbol of, or claimed by, the elite. I think, though, that for the average joe, this pushing of the envelope, this journey into the unfamiliar, has the semblence of elitism in itself (however unintentional). This though, is in part caused by the commodification of culture--you are not supposed to think out of the box. Regardless, I think that this tends to push the initial reaction to much contemporary art to be the question mark. Not attuned to the mode of the message, the observer must first explore the message before reaching understanding. After that, I think that what the symbol becomes depends on the observer and the intent of the artist. If the observer is not willing to step out of his-/her-self, then, sadly, the symbol is doomed to remain a question mark. Otherwise, though, I would say that the symbol would depend on how well the observer has been able to understand the message, but also on how much they are able to identify with the message. Interestingly enough, I was at an art exhibit with my parents the other day, and as we departed my mother made a comment noting the distinction between thinking that various of the contemporary pieces were *good* art versus *liking* those pieces.

There is a certain irony in that because of how people are trained to think, certain value and meaning may still be attached to commodified symbols and art, giving a kind of common ground, but since different people can think so very differently the effects of trying to step into the other person's mind to understand an art piece can sometimes be jarring.

I would say that contemporary art remains a meaningful symptom and expression of the dislike of commodification of culture, and will probably always continue to add and propel the debate around this until the problem is alleviated. less

Posted Jun 6, 07 by thewarden
loved it

Posted May 15, 07 by luvdabun
its the age old statement.. art is beauty to our eye.. so beauty is in the eye of the beholder...
very interesting video
thank you for sharing
bunnies rule! 8-)

Posted May 20, 07 by TheJaguarPupShow
thank you, pal. well said. BTW, that's exactly one of the aspects of this "art' series that we're looking into: is art about beauty? And what's that about? More coming.

Posted May 15, 07 by Jayen
Interesting video ;-) HIT

Now this is an old debate, nice to see that you guys had the courage to take it on!

Jayen

Posted May 20, 07 by Jayen
LOL, No definitely courage!!!

Jayen

Posted May 20, 07 by TheJaguarPupShow
U R making me smile, Jayen. I don't know if it is courage or foolhardiness. We'll probably never get to share all we're learning; age old but still fascinating (a wide range of passions and philosophies). It's a blast.

Posted May 15, 07 by riptide57
Every time I try to define Art my head starts to hurt however, when I see Art I have no trouble recognizing it
Great Video
Bruce

Posted May 20, 07 by TheJaguarPupShow
Ha-ha. I jumped into this thinking we'll be able to rope it in - but the beast is much bigger than it's tail. Indeed, we do know art when we see it. I luve your statement.

Posted May 10, 07 by NarlyZX12
You guys are pritty funny, end of the clip last comment. Speak no evil second one is hear no evil and then see no evil. LOL halarious.

Posted May 13, 07 by TheJaguarPupShow
Thanks much. We try. And you are quite perceptive. Cheers M8.

Posted May 9, 07 by Evilwhiteclownpunk
The viewer should always start with the question mark, which symbol the viewer ends up at is dependent on the piece viewed. Hopefully, the viewer does not end up still at the question mark.
Evil.

Posted May 9, 07 by TheJaguarPupShow
These five artists agree with you; and it seems that such a position would give us the greatest opportunity to discover. I'm anxious to see how the experiment will turn out. We'll tally the results at the end. Thanks, my eeeevil friend.

Posted May 8, 07 by OrigionStudios
Great video. I'm happy that someone actually does this thing that you do. I see artist nowadays become more and more undervalue and some say it isn't worth anything. But those are the people who doesn't understand the art nor the artist and have a closed more...

Posted May 9, 07 by TheJaguarPupShow
Thanks much for the comment. You make a valid point. I'm raising all these issues with the team of artists, designers, etc. who is along with me on this project. Cheers, mate.

Posted May 8, 07 by Elixir1
When it comes to Art, I know what I like.
I do believe it's all plagiarism...there are only new ideas to the individuals who haven't checked their references.
I have yet to see, or, hear of any artist describing the invisible.

Posted May 9, 07 by TheJaguarPupShow
Aha! There, my friend, you stumbled upon something that intrigues me: no one has ever described the invisible. Uh! Now you've got my juices going - it seems it would be a futile task, but I must investigate. Thank you, my friend.

1 2