Modern Art

csbx3

Isn't that the perfect storm... A reeeeeeeCSB ?

It is a CS though. Mmmm biscuits.

Why the fuss?
It's just art on top of art. It' more interesting now then it was. Palimpsest of art.

Would Rothko have considered it damage? Would he have cared? It's only 'criminal damage' because its now an object of high financial value, rather than an object of art. I'm more disappointed that it's primary purpose has changed than by the guy's vandalism.

Yes Rothko would have cared - definitely. So do I as it happens. They guy's a self serving bell.

2 years though. Oof.

It is about cultural capital and not financial capital: As part of the original acquisition agreement, the Tate are contractually obliged never to sell the Rothkos anyway.

As for them being "more interesting now", you will find educated / considered opinion stacked heavily in favour of the opposite view... And given the notoriously pedantic instructions given by Rothko at the time of the acquisition, concerning the hang / lighting / wall colour / context, etc, I imagine he would care a great deal. Either way, as Rothko's dead now, it's up to Serota and the Tate trustees to decide if this is worth caring about.

Would you like Mr Umaniec to tattoo something on your forehead whilst you were asleep? Or might you think you're face was fine without it?
Especially if your face also happened to be one of the most highly regarded and popular artworks of the last century. Which it isn't, of course.

Thanks for the reply. There's a decent amount of information in there that I didn't know, so thanks. As you can probably tell, I'm not an art buff, or "educated/considered" concerning modern art in any way.

I'm not fussed about 'educated/considered' opinion so much. Tate is a body publicly funded by DMCS, and it serves principally as a host of art for the public. I would say it's primary purpose is to be publicly accessible. I'd definitely say it's more interesting to the public now, and definitely more interesting as a whole. It's deserved audience isn't just the educated/considered, it's everyone who paid for it. How many lay people like me gave much of an arse about the painting even if it is a Rothko. I'm fairly confident it's garnered a lot more interest now that it's been 'vandalised' than it did beforehand. I'm not saying that the Tate exists purely to get as many people as possible through its doors, but I stand by my point that it is "more interesting now".

Fair point about Rothko's instructions. Didn't know, and it's interesting.

Thought you made some fair points until you mentioned a tattoo on my face. That would be a question of assault leading to bodily harm and not a question of vandalism. Incomparable and silly.

Important: I'm not saying the guy's not a dick.

It's deserved audience isn't just the educated/considered

It never was.

http://www.news.com.au/weird-true-freaky/artist-spends-138-hours-on-21m-dot-drawing-to-help-amnesiac-man/story-e6frflri-1226539535258

All that work and he composed it like a goon. Using a technique called 'cropping the bloke's head off'.

I dont know about these things

Many would say I don't either. He gives good dottage though.

it's a copy of a photograph. He could have just used a photocopier.

)

(

He missed a bit though. Needs moar .:...:::::::::::.....:::

Saw this today at Tate Britain. Total nonsense-

http://www.tate.org.uk/whats-on/tate-britain/display/art-now-jess-flood-paddock

the blurb-

"Leather saddles are highly sought after by cyclists. Easy to steal, they can be resold quickly, stolen and resold again, and have become an alternative currency of exchange. Flood-Paddock has framed these works with a series of photographs taken in London’s Broadway Market, an area in the grip of rapid gentrification and marked by the proliferation of chained-up saddle-less bicycles2

'alternative currency'

Tomoko takahashi > Jess flood-paddock

Do you think there should be art police who can retire said works with fire?

^^^ Are those chair size?
Can't quite get a sense of the scale.
A lot of hate for JFP - I haven't seen said travesty, but it seems interesting to me.
Maybe because I'm not from there, or just ignorant; theft of any kind when it comes to cycling just boils my gizzard and I'm curious to hear what an artist has to say about the commodification of stolen saddles, and her attempt to scale that up.

current exhib at All Visual Arts is worth a look - some excellent drawings by people you've heard of people you haven't. probably. also interesting to see one of Wrongcog's older ones.

http://www.allvisualarts.org/exhibitions/BetweentheLines/Images.aspx

Oh Hai ! Weird thing about it is that I used to have pics of Robert Longo's work hanging on my studio wall at art school and now we're hanging together in that show.

Thanks for posting this! My fave in the show is that fabulous Leger. The Dix is fucking amazing too. You?

In other news. Kiera Bennett at Charlie Smith (above the Reliance) on Old Street is quite quite wonderful. Oh and if Susan Hiller and Mike Nelson is still on at Matt's Gallery it's very well worth a look. Marcel Dzarma opens imminently at David Zwirner too.

like this allegory

^^^ fave is Seunghyun Lee Masterpiece Virus 008 (Self-portrait, Gogh), wasn't so keen on others in the same series but just really love this one.

also really like this Dali:

Wolfe von Lenkiewicz stuff is pretty cool.
Paul Noble is incredible - it's hard to believe it's a pencil drawing, looks like an etching.
kind of an interesting range of work though, some of it technically really impressive, some of it leaving me totally cold.

^^ Went to the Susan Hiller/Mike Nelson exhibition a couple of weeks back, recommended.

Has anyone been to the Duchamp exhibition yet?