Episode 2 – Shock! Horror! (1998)
CollingsShrine
Source
Matthew Collings :: This Is Modern Art ep.2 (1/5)
Similar Posts
Hal Foster – Art, Theory and the Critique of Ideology
10 Ridiculous Works Of Art You’re Supposed To Take Seriously
4.2 New Museum for Contemporary Art in NYC by SANAA (Contemporary Architecture MOOC)
21 thoughts on “Matthew Collings :: This Is Modern Art ep.2 (1/5)”
Comments are closed.
can anyone identify the music at 9:10 ?
Hirst's shark rotted away eventually.
It's last owner had it's skin stretched over a fiberglass mold.
Hirst wasn't too keen about that, so had it replaced with a new one. lol
@Divertedflight I think the shark looks better when its rotting, Hirst should have just left it rotting until it was just bones, that would have been nice.
Hirst might have agreed with you, as he never replaced the shark when it was rotting. It was only replaced after it's new owner had messed with it.
when he said "the big meaningless VOID" on 6:00, and when Goya's painting zoomed in, I spotted a grey triangle shape in the middle.. And I realized its a stain on my monitor, and probably my own spit stain. Just a normal thing on anyone's screen, but in what a strange moment =)
My SPIT is the MEANING in the meaningless VOID!!!
who said Gods dead, you, they; Religion definately has a lot to answer for, but so do we, when the time comes, and it starts getting very dark, I guarantee, you will reconsider……..Balaclava Poet
it was only shown briefly here but god how i hate performance art!, in all its forms
same with video art
a video artist tried to tell me painting is dead (he couldn't draw obviously)
i nearly broke his skull in
@ShankingArmitage Painting is dead, deal with it.
@ROYALEFFEKT
The only people that say painting is dead are people that can't paint. Pretentious arsehole video and performance artists that feel the need to spout that rubbish to give their work creedence.
I like your arrogant tone too, because we all know people from Luxembourg really have their finger on the pulse!
@ShankingArmitage
Painting is capturing an illusion of a moment, nothing more. Everyone can learn to paint, dont fool yourself if you think otherwise. And further more, you don't need who know how much of the skill to capture it correctly. Problem to the people is what will they paint .
People got bored of canvas, oil colors. You live in digital, post-modern world, technologies provide us new kind of tool to work with.
As you can see in last 40 years, there is nothing outstanding in painting.
@ROYALEFFEKT
A good painting shows the skill it took to create the work and something more than the image itself, whether thats telling a story or creating an emotion in the viewer. That is the same with all great paintings since day dot.
But i do agree with some of what you said, modern art must embrace the digital or become marginalised.
I just think art should have an immediate impact on the viewer and not need a lengthy explanation to justiy it, as nearly all performance and video art does
…and sorry for my previous tone, its just something i feel strongly about.
@ShankingArmitage
No problem with tone, i was arrogant.
"whether thats telling a story or creating an emotion in the viewer."
It is important how will it tell a story, i can wright something down, and that will tell a story too. Every form of art does that, art would not have been art, if it didnt cause any kind emotions, or tell a story.
But that could be problematic, because ones with no skill can still make something that causes emotions.
Skill equals not art.
Skill equals craft.
@ROYALEFFEKT Try Daniel Richter, Peter Doig, Neo Rauch, Gerhard Richter etc. A lot has been done in the feild of painting.
@ROYALEFFEKT Sure, anyone can paint. It's the drawing part that requires skill. If you can't draw, you can't paint or do much else within visual arts. I have no problems with artists who abandon draftsmanship after acquiring it in favor of complete abstraction or instillation pieces. However, many art students these days struggle to render even simple spatial configurations, which places a severe limitation on what they can do and imagine (either in the real world or within a digital format).
Good painting has nothing to do with skill, it has everything to do with articulacy. If painting (or any other art or technology) is to progress a protagonist must learn to acknowledge the LESSONS of the previous times, but, please, leave the past alone.
I think its a shame when people try to justify modern art by making connections with the far off distant past.
LAURENT HAVAS PEINTRE IMPRESSIONNISTE
Intelligent host but missing the important artists such as Duchamp. He shouldn't focus so much on Hirst as meaningful or important. All of what he has done was done by someone else first; even the dead bisected animals were ordered from a catalogue and the ping pong ball sculpture? We did it 35 years ago in college.. He has gotten it all from other artists and marketed it very well, that's all.
The shark, dots, flywheel paintings, etc were all done by someone else first. Does this host know this? How could he say "Damian Hirst's shark is iconic" if he knew someone else did it first? Maybe he doesn't know…
kiitos