When someone vehemently vocalizes their opposition to the merits of conceptional art, a conceptional artist gets* their wings.
*Or, true to form, receives mimeographed instructions on how to harvest wings from household items.
1 Like
So do you want the points to be placed at random, or to be evenly distributed over the area of the wall? For only fifty points, you can’t really have both.
Precisely because it’s random, you’re always going to have some clumping and clustering in some areas, and larger empty areas in others.
And what does “All of the points should be connected by straight lines” really mean? Each point has to have at least one straight line to another point, or each point has to have a straight line to every other point? Because then that’s 1275 lines, which is a lot to have to draw.
3 Likes
It’s almost as if the ambiguity in the instructions will create different results.
4 Likes
But if it’s an art exercise for someone else to interpret, why is it considered his and not theirs? Bob Ross never laid claim to the works of those following along at home.
4 Likes
Quite the concept isn’t it? A score is instructions for music, but it’s still considered a work of the composer, so could not the instructions for a painting be considered the work of the painter?
2 Likes
I wouldn’t consider it the work of the composer if the score was on the level of “use a guitar to play some major chords of your choice, then some minor chords, then the original major chords again”. And most of us do give credit to the performers too…indeed, with a lot of modern recordings they get much more attention than the composer, although I think that can be taken too far.
3 Likes
There are pieces of Musique concrete where the interpreter is instructed to turn on a radio to a given channel for a period of time, then change.The sounds will be different every time. Who is the author? Who is the performer?
That you can find cases that are difficult to determine by pushing things right to the edge of what art is in the first place doesn’t change that this is one that seems pretty straightforward. Indeed, it’s probably a bad sign that you feel the need. My opinion is that Lewitt is telling someone else how he would like them to draw a picture, not making one himself. 
4 Likes
The only need I felt was to discuss art, on the topic of conceptual art. These are the questions raised by conceptual artists. I’m not trying to change your opinion.
Guess I, personally haven’t found straightforward conclusions about art and I’m jealous of those who have.
1 Like
- Simple brain: the dots and lines is the artwork.
- Brain level 2: the instructions is the artwork.
- Brain level 3: the process of turning the instructions into the dots and lines is the artwork.
- Galaxy brain: the argument about whether it’s art and where the art is, is the artwork.
5 Likes
BRB, Selling this as an NFT.
5 Likes
He’s a greedy little git, isn’t he.
4 Likes
… it seems like this is a very 20th-century concept of “art”
If it’s only valuable because people are talking about it, then it’s hardly distinguishable from any other pump-and-dump scheme 
2 Likes
The Impressionists, the Expressionists, the Fauves, the Cubists, the Surrealists, and the Situationalists are on lines one, two, three, four, giraffe, and six for you.
4 Likes
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!
Not my point.
It’s the falsification of dates, that is just greedy, greedy, grift.
2 Likes
Of course. The instructions, not the resulting painting, though. For that to be fairly attributed the way musical performances are, it would need to say something like, “‘Vague Instructions 1’ by (artist) as interpreted by (painter).”
4 Likes
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
