Confused what I'm looking at here. Sadly not much different than my own acts of display and penetration.
Sometimes I just enjoy art for what it is, without having (or wanting) to be told what it's about.
One eyebleach please, and hold the philosophy.
I read the title and looked and looked at the photos and tried to figure out which part was the grape and what all of that other stuff was. Then I read the title again.
Pretty and disgusting at the same time. Giger would have liked it.
Way too much bio-ed made me examine the photos for their components... Cardiac tissue showing chordae tendinae... Lithops "stone plants"... Piece of fish showing skin, muscle, and cross section of vertebrae... Gummi candy?!?
Had a hard time plumbing the depths of intergender politics and whatnot.
What The Fuck, @Xeni?
Fuck this Jon Baker asshole if he's being exhibited and sold through the misogynistic Charles Saatchi's gallery. I actually find it impossible to believe you've posted this, considering your feminist stance on so many issues.
It's actually terrible art as well. Photography: art media of the untalented.
If" photography: art media of the untalented" then posting uninformed and uneducated comments is the literature of the untalented.
Aw, someone is upset. Photography can be good, but the ease with which an untrained person can capture an image of arguable artistic credibility means that the field is diluted to the point of most people being untalented and a very small number of people using the media in ways that are artistically relevant.
Why did the artist use photomedia for this work? Nothing about the work itself lends itself to the media. The guy realised he could make a mess and shoot it. Wow, thanks Jon... where would we be without this vital contribution to the field?
FWIW I have a degree in visual arts.... do you? You might rightfully be able to claim my 'literature' as untalented (though, believe it or not, I'm not exhibiting my BB comments in a gallery and having them blogged about), but you can't call my comments uninformed and uneducated... they're the exact opposite of that.
Pretty much what I was going to say. Whu....?
Am I the only one who got horny for this?
I'm no commenting on the photographs. Galleries are full of hackneyed works that are less than inspirational and even intellectually insulting on some levels no matter what media was used. "Photography: art media of the untalented" sounds as close minded and unaware of the history of art and the art making process as , "my four year old can do that". Yes, I have a degree in fine arts.
Then you've seen as much shitty photomedia as I have
Sorry, my knee-jerk reaction (I emphasise the jerk) is to snark on the subject because what was already a problem pre-internet 2.0 then exploded into an orgy of wannabe 'artists' applying the same filter to that picture of their feet on the beach then upping it to instagram for insta-art.
I should have said something like 'Photography: refuge of the artistically untalented' which isn't as seemingly critical of the media itself. There are people doing amazing things with photography..... just not this guy.
I agree. There are people who are afraid to pick up a pencil or brush or they know their eye/hand co-ordiniation limitations and/or don't know what they want say, not to mention don't want to put in the time looking and transferring (practice, practice) so they pick up a camera. We're on the same wave length.
Yes, this reminds me of Giger's "landscapes" as well as Helen Chadwick's "meat abstracts."
I do the same thing and don't try to hide, justify or deconstruct my revulsion.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.