Modern Art

Crewdson is currently showing at White Cube Mason's Yard

i did not know that, while have a cycle down at some point.

Lets go tomorrow

it's not like his usual work though.

boom

http://www.stumbleupon.com/su/1fZFvT/www.good.is/post/image-of-the-day-bicycle-drawing-machine/

Certainly not modern, but none the worse for that, is Mick Rock's photography show, on here http://www.ideageneration.co.uk/. We went the other night. All his iconic 70s shots are there, including all these. Really very good.

Without opening a can of worms, I wouldn't classify Mick Rock's images as art, maybe more documentary.

Not sure I would either, but the satisfaction I get from looking at them is enough for me.

Without opening a can of worms, I wouldn't classify Mick Rock's images as art, maybe more documentary.

Too late, please justify this claim.

Im not being an arsehole, but this is my area of study so im genuinely interested in why you wouldn't class documentary photography as art.

I think opening a can of worms can be art. If it is done in a challenging way.

Without opening a can of worms, I wouldn't classify Mick Rock's images as art, maybe more documentary.

He has created numerous iconic images, images that are now engraved into the rock'n'roll psyche... How is that not art? Hmmm?

I think opening a can of worms can be art. If it is done in a challenging way.

if you document it, then yes. Though I'd feel bad for the worms that were forced in to the can in the first place.

I think opening a can of worms can be art. If it is done in a challenging way.

That's a bit of a can of worms.

Martin Luther opened a can of worms didn't he?

Martin Luther opened a can of worms didn't he?

Do you mean the rewormation?

C'mon Oli, you can work it out.

C'mon Oli, you can worm it out.

Ugh, I'd rather not.

is that a tape worm?

Too late, please justify this claim.

Im not being an arsehole, but this is my area of study so im genuinely interested in why you wouldn't class documentary photography as art.

With out sounding like i'm indulging in oneupmanship but I'm also studying in the area of art, and i totally agree it's very interesting. As i've said before, I believe art is subjective, but don't let that sweeping statement instantly make me sound credible. In answer to your question:

'Why wouldn't you class documentary photography as art?'

I'm not saying I wouldn't class documentary photography as art. All photography, by its nature appropriates reality which could be considered a document and my most recent series of work does just that. I'm saying that i personally wouldn't consider Mick Rock's images as 'art' because they tell a story more than they do express something transcendental than the form they are being presented in. Also on a knee-jerk reaction is to associate Mick Rock's images with NME more than lets say the tate.

He has created numerous iconic images, images that are now engraved into the rock'n'roll psyche... How is that not art? Hmmm?

'Iconic' is a definition influenced by personal preference, it's not objective. Our/your society may suggest that these images are engraved in our psyche, but so is the mc donalds logo.

Ugh, I'd rather not.

I is disappoint.

Fuck me!

Whats the fuck is wrong with this place????????

Fashion, Leather cunting shoes, modern art... Im fucken out.

OUT!

Harden the fuck up, London.

And allusions to 16th century religious arguments. Not that anyone got them.
I'm out too.

This diet a death, didn't it?