The "sitting and smiling" guy sat and smiled for 8 hours straight yesterday

It was. I really loved it and wish I could have gone to see it in person. But she had a long history of really putting herself out there in her works.


I remember when I was in 2nd grade or so, I was on a parade float. I don’t even remember what it was for. I was told to “smile and wave”. And being a rule follower I smiled and waved. I am sure it was like a 30 min ride at the most, and at the end my face hurt from smiling. Maybe I was doing it too hard.


Probably… past you should have learned from the pros!



I’m not grumpy about it; I don’t even dislike it. But not everything is art just because someone says it is. John Cage’s work made a statement within a form, a statement about art and music itself, ands in an artful way, at that. This is fine, but it’s not art, anymore than my drinking a beer and listening to Cage is.

Why do you get to be the arbiter of what is or isn’t art?

Also, didn’t Walter Benjamin fight a war from beyond the grave with Theodor Adorno over this? I seem to remember it happened in an arcade, and was something like mechanical reproductions of paintings vs. pianos at dawn or some such?


I’m not the arbiter, but be reasonable. It isn’t meant as art, it isn’t viewed as art, it hasn’t the intentions of art, etc.

Is it your contention that anyone can declare anything art, and that’s it? No arguing otherwise?

Meh, everyone here has better things to do than fuss over this. Enjoy the show, YMMV.

How do you know? Did he say it’s not art?

Some view it as art here, actually.

What does that mean? Is there a check list of what is or isn’t proper intentions?

I think the discussion over it is what matters. And what is art to one person, isn’t art to another. It’s what speaks to each individual that matters, in part because in theory, the division between art and artist, between gatekeepers and the “rabble” has completely broken down because any of us now have greater access to the tools for making art and the tools to share that art. I mean, this is the world that produced The Room!

And, yes that includes you saying that you don’t agree that it’s art. You are more than welcome to feel and believe that. I don’t think anyone is saying you can’t, but if someone finds artistic merit in it, then maybe it’s because it does speak to them in some way. If someone is moved by this work, then maybe there is something to it being a work of art…

This is the internet! No we don’t! :wink:


Art is in the intention of the creator and the interpretation of the viewer. Not everyone will agree. That’s OK.

They can declare it is art from their perspective. From your perspective, it may not be art. That’s OK.


There’s only one way to solve this…


Isn’t there some speculation that his channel is more performance art?

As in some episodes contain actual stuff happening. Someone breaks into his house. One time he wet himself. It’s all a little weird on top the already considerable weirdness.

1 Like

That doesn’t matter. It is in the eye of the viewer. Practical, every day items, or specific elements of it can be considered art. If you go to a modern art and design museum you will see telephones, cars, or even man hole covers whose design elements are considered note worthy.

Look - we had this argument in the art world decades ago: What is art?

For a long time Art was both an exploration of expression AND technique. Before we understood the foundations of how to draw and render things correct with perspective, proper composition, etc. people were fighting to figure that out. But eventually they did and then it was an effort to render subjects realistically, or apply the paint that works the best.

But eventually every well trained artist could draw well, and then the exploration became subject matter and technique. And from there people pushed the boundaries of “What is art?” From the Dadaists with the completely absurd and surreal, to the Pop Artists using popular culture and every day items, to abstract expressionists using no discernible subject, and everything in between. The whole Modern Art movement was rebelling against the previous movements, and contained a bunch of conflicting movements pushing boundaries.

When it all shook out, it became acknowledged that anything can be art. Anything. It just requires someone to experience and appreciate it.

Now, like I said, is it GOOD? That is completely subjective.


Is his channel monitized? That’s really all I need to know. You can make all the “art” you want and put it out there for the world to see but there is a fine line between doing it for the art versus doing it for the money. Yeah sure whynotboth.jpg. But in today’s world of Instagram, Twitter, and an attention span of 15 seconds it feels less like look at my craft and more like look at me.

But what do I know, I don’t get this “art”.

On his patreon channel he says that he does not monetise the videos as he finds the ads manipulative.


Ads, manipulative?! :wink:

1 Like

I guess that makes it slightly better? I mean if he’s doing it 8 hours a day he’s gotta eat somehow.

Please, nobody let him see a newspaper.

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.