Ferg: but as anyone who has ever gone to class without reading the required material for the day, or done a 10 page paper overnight and with little preparation knows, bullshit is an artform, too
sure this guy might the same as the countless other wannabe Duchamps, but i think it's pretty funny. and who says art can't be funny? he's not exactly the most clever, i think, as evidenced by his previous work (the naked, birthing Britney) at least he's got a sense of humor.
So to answer the question, it's both. It's a bronzed crap and it's art, art because it's commenting rather heavily that we live in a world that someone buying a celebrity child's bronzed shit sadly isn't all that far-fetched. Stranger things have happened.
[ QUOTE ]
"A bronzed cast of baby's first poop can be a meaningful memento for the family," gallery director David Kesting said, adding that he hoped the work would attract bids of between $US25,000 ($33,000) and $US30,000 ($40,000).
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm sure its a lot less of a "meaningful memento for the family" when you have it cast is bronze and up on ebay before it hits the floor.
The word "art" never crossed my mind while viewing that.
I think art has become a blanket word for anything nowadays.
I've seen pigeons display their "art" in greater style.
(I'd almost consider buying it just to ensure it was destroyed).
really who cares? none of you get to decide what is going to be in the history books. the reason this stuff gets so much attention is everyone gets so flustered over a "definition" of art that these guys get paid lots of cash to push yours and everyone elses buttons, hell if i could make 10s of thousands of dollars by dipping shit in gold i would be doing it all day and calling it art all the way to the bank.
i dont give a crap what art is, PAY ME!
Since when have all of your utter twats decided that art is a pretty picture, rather than perhaps an underlying message?
The sad thing about this is that Duchamp allready did this type of stuff a long time ago, and that this guy seems to be doing something awefully similar, albeit mixed with a poke at stardom.
Stop sounding like old men muttering about the good old days. Back when Art was Art! Back when artists did art for the sake of art, instead of just trying to earn some money for it.
[ QUOTE ]
Since when have all of your utter twats decided that art is a pretty picture, rather than perhaps an underlying message?
The sad thing about this is that Duchamp allready did this type of stuff a long time ago, and that this guy seems to be doing something awefully similar, albeit mixed with a poke at stardom.
Stop sounding like old men muttering about the good old days. Back when Art was Art! Back when artists did art for the sake of art, instead of just trying to earn some money for it.
oh wait...
[/ QUOTE ]
Umm... I'm pretty sure that there was a time when art was not a hunk of shit on a platter. This new modern art movement is erm... a modern thing. Crazy how that works, no?
Besides which, art is only art if the underlying message accurately affects the target audience. A pretty picture is often a good way to do that. A hunk of shit doesn't give much of any message unless you are taking stool samples for a doctor.
You can polish mud so why not a turd. I'd like to try polishing some dog shit, putting it on a red velvet pillow and sealing it inside a bell jar with a bronze plaque that reads "Polished Turd", yeah, I read Juxtapoz all the time
Bah! Don't bring Duchamp into this. Duchamp and the whole dada movement was more so about the tearing down of the preconceived notion of what art was, while it in fact is not really art. Calling it art would almost be doing the whole movement an injustice.
Though those polish balls of mud are pretty neat. I mean, yeah ,it's just a shiny sphere, but the fact that it's made of mud is rather impressive. Would I ever buy one? No. However I would sooner buy one that the leavings of a celebrity's child.
//edit
i read it a little bit more......................... and its from their baby? Ok, this goes beyond art and is just a little fucking crazy.
[ QUOTE ]
"A bronzed cast of baby's first poop can be a meaningful memento for the family," gallery director David Kesting said, adding that he hoped the work would attract bids of between $US25,000 ($33,000) and $US30,000 ($40,000).
[/ QUOTE ]
wtf?! it amazes me how infatuation makes people sick in the head.
at least the world isnt buying into it
[ QUOTE ]
As of today, it had attracted a top bid of $US41.
[/ QUOTE ]
pwned.
ill note too, i think it could be viewed as a great mockery of the art world, and before actually readin the acticle - i had thought that is what it was. But for it to be of your first 'star child,'seems a little creepy. I do not have children, but many friends who are now parents, and can understand (but not empathize) with it. But sculpting your baby's first shit? Maybe this is a secret glimpse into their sex life?
art is anything that someone adds meaning and value to over and above its utilitarean value. therefore whether or not you/i think this is good/bad it is art, now the pretty pictures people buy from Ikea et al is perhaps a different story as they are only valued for their wall covering prettyness in most cases.
Holy shit. (no pun intended) but seriously.
The art world is so stupid. I heard of a guy who painted a canvas a brighter white, and made 1,000 or so bucks off it.
What the hell? Even if I was some rich, pompous, asshole with the mansion the size of rhode island, I wouldn't by a statue of a babie's shit.
[ QUOTE ]
I guess it's not as bad as the woman who paints with her menstrual fluids.
[/ QUOTE ]
had a speaker when i did my undergrad who did that. cant remember her name though. used her's and other male/females fluids with her ceramics.
also had a friend in a drawing class who painted with his own feces. covered it in plastic and sprayed it with orange air freshener before critique. professor thought he wqas joking until then.
Replies
(this post may be too politically incorrect; take lightly)
difference between bullshit and art.
[/ QUOTE ]
*babyshit (jk i know what you meant)
In the eye of the beholder
He used to be an decent actor right?
sure this guy might the same as the countless other wannabe Duchamps, but i think it's pretty funny. and who says art can't be funny? he's not exactly the most clever, i think, as evidenced by his previous work (the naked, birthing Britney) at least he's got a sense of humor.
So to answer the question, it's both. It's a bronzed crap and it's art, art because it's commenting rather heavily that we live in a world that someone buying a celebrity child's bronzed shit sadly isn't all that far-fetched. Stranger things have happened.
That said, I think this is a viable comment on the madness of celebrity, and society's everyday obsession with it.
"A bronzed cast of baby's first poop can be a meaningful memento for the family," gallery director David Kesting said, adding that he hoped the work would attract bids of between $US25,000 ($33,000) and $US30,000 ($40,000).
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm sure its a lot less of a "meaningful memento for the family" when you have it cast is bronze and up on ebay before it hits the floor.
I think art has become a blanket word for anything nowadays.
I've seen pigeons display their "art" in greater style.
(I'd almost consider buying it just to ensure it was destroyed).
art is an emotion
[/ QUOTE ]
Bullshit. If art was an emotion then watching a movie is art.. you will feel an emotion.
look, it's simple : you can say *anything is art as long as one other person agrees with you
i dont give a crap what art is, PAY ME!
The sad thing about this is that Duchamp allready did this type of stuff a long time ago, and that this guy seems to be doing something awefully similar, albeit mixed with a poke at stardom.
Stop sounding like old men muttering about the good old days. Back when Art was Art! Back when artists did art for the sake of art, instead of just trying to earn some money for it.
oh wait...
Since when have all of your utter twats decided that art is a pretty picture, rather than perhaps an underlying message?
The sad thing about this is that Duchamp allready did this type of stuff a long time ago, and that this guy seems to be doing something awefully similar, albeit mixed with a poke at stardom.
Stop sounding like old men muttering about the good old days. Back when Art was Art! Back when artists did art for the sake of art, instead of just trying to earn some money for it.
oh wait...
[/ QUOTE ]
Umm... I'm pretty sure that there was a time when art was not a hunk of shit on a platter. This new modern art movement is erm... a modern thing. Crazy how that works, no?
Besides which, art is only art if the underlying message accurately affects the target audience. A pretty picture is often a good way to do that. A hunk of shit doesn't give much of any message unless you are taking stool samples for a doctor.
You can't polish a turd.
[/ QUOTE ]
You can polish mud so why not a turd. I'd like to try polishing some dog shit, putting it on a red velvet pillow and sealing it inside a bell jar with a bronze plaque that reads "Polished Turd", yeah, I read Juxtapoz all the time
Though those polish balls of mud are pretty neat. I mean, yeah ,it's just a shiny sphere, but the fact that it's made of mud is rather impressive. Would I ever buy one? No. However I would sooner buy one that the leavings of a celebrity's child.
though you know, all of this really reminds me of this:
http://www.anti-social.co.uk/modernart.shtml
//edit
i read it a little bit more......................... and its from their baby? Ok, this goes beyond art and is just a little fucking crazy.
[ QUOTE ]
"A bronzed cast of baby's first poop can be a meaningful memento for the family," gallery director David Kesting said, adding that he hoped the work would attract bids of between $US25,000 ($33,000) and $US30,000 ($40,000).
[/ QUOTE ]
wtf?! it amazes me how infatuation makes people sick in the head.
at least the world isnt buying into it
[ QUOTE ]
As of today, it had attracted a top bid of $US41.
[/ QUOTE ]
pwned.
ill note too, i think it could be viewed as a great mockery of the art world, and before actually readin the acticle - i had thought that is what it was. But for it to be of your first 'star child,'seems a little creepy. I do not have children, but many friends who are now parents, and can understand (but not empathize) with it. But sculpting your baby's first shit? Maybe this is a secret glimpse into their sex life?
whether the "art community" recognizes it or not, there is a difference between bullshit and art.
[/ QUOTE ]Hate to sound like an ass, but there isn't, never was and never has been.
'Art' is only and has only ever been 'art' because someone says it is (the 'establishment' IOW); 'good' or 'bad' doesn't enter the equation.
no, it is cruise's kids piece of shit....bronzed. did ya read the article?
[/ QUOTE ]
Of course i did, excuse my smart ass remark :P.
I just pictured tom cruise jumping around, high five-ing the staff, making phone calls to have this piece of turd immortalized.
think i might bronze this post
The art world is so stupid. I heard of a guy who painted a canvas a brighter white, and made 1,000 or so bucks off it.
What the hell? Even if I was some rich, pompous, asshole with the mansion the size of rhode island, I wouldn't by a statue of a babie's shit.
r.
wow shit disguised as art ! omfg i want one....
[/ QUOTE ]
yeah maybe but i want art disguised as shit that would be like 1000x cooler
must not post after more than one bottle
I guess it's not as bad as the woman who paints with her menstrual fluids.
[/ QUOTE ]
had a speaker when i did my undergrad who did that. cant remember her name though. used her's and other male/females fluids with her ceramics.
also had a friend in a drawing class who painted with his own feces. covered it in plastic and sprayed it with orange air freshener before critique. professor thought he wqas joking until then.