Top 10 Bizarre Artworks
- Published August 11, 2007 - 181 Comments
WARNING: Some adult and shocking content is featured here. This article shows some of the most bizarre art in modern history. Art has progressed well past the concept of recognisable structures to completely outlandish (and often nightmarish) images. Seeing is believing, so here is the list:
1. The Physical Impossibility of Death in the Mind of Someone Living [Wikipedia]
Artist: Damien Hirst
Damien Hirst (born June 7, 1965) is an English artist and the most prominent of the group that has been dubbed “Young British Artists” (or YBAs). He dominated the art scene in Britain during the 1990s and is internationally renowned. Death is a central theme in his work. He is best known for his Natural History series, in which dead animals (such as a shark, a sheep or a cow) are preserved, sometimes cut-up, in formaldehyde.
His iconic work is The Physical Impossibility of Death in the Mind of Someone Living, a 14-foot tiger shark immersed in formaldehyde in a vitrine. Its sale in 2004 made him the second most expensive living artist after Jasper Johns. In June 2007, Hirst became the most expensive living artist with the sale of a medicine chest, Lullaby Spring, for £9.65 million at Sotheby’s in London.
2. My Bed [Wikipedia]
Artist: Tracey Emin
Tracey Emin RA (born 3 July 1963) is an English artist of Turkish Cypriot origin, one of the group known as Britartists or YBAs (Young British Artists). She has succeeded in equalling, if not surpassing, Damien Hirst among the YBAs in terms of notoriety among the general public.
A drunken outburst on a Channel 4 TV discussion, and My Bed — an installation in the 1999 Turner Prize exhibition, consisting of her own unmade dirty bed with used condoms and blood-stained underwear — both caused a media furore.
3. Bend IT [Wikipedia]
Artist: Gilbert and George
Gilbert Prousch (or Proesch) (born in San Martin (San Martino), Italy, September 11, 1943) and George Passmore (born in Devon, England January 8, 1942), better known as Gilbert & George, are artists. They have worked almost exclusively as a pair. The two first met on 25th September 1967 while studying sculpture at St Martins School of Art, now Central Saint Martins College of Art and Design, one of six colleges in the University of the Arts, London.
They were initially known as performance artists. While still students they made The Singing Sculpture (1970), for which they covered themselves in gold metallic paint, stood on a table, and mimed to a recording of Flanagan and Allen’s song “Underneath the Arches”, sometimes for hours at a time.
4. Dolls [Wikipedia]
Artist: Hans Bellmer
Hans Bellmer (1902 Kattowitz, Silesia – 23 February 1975 Paris, France) was an artist, best known for the life-sized pubescent female dolls he produced in the mid-1930s. He is also commonly thought of, in the art world, as a Surrealist photographer. Since 1926 he had been working as a draftsman for his own advertising company. He initiated his doll project to oppose the fascism of the Nazi Party by declaring that he would make no work that would support the German state.
Bellmer’s doll developed from a series of three events in his personal life: meeting a beautiful teenage cousin in 1932; attending a performance of Jacques Offenbach’s Tales of Hoffmann (in which a man falls tragically in love with an automaton); and receiving a box of his old toys. After these events he began to construct his first doll.
5. Cadaver 3 [Wikipedia]
Artist: Gunther Von Hagens
Gunther von Hagens (b. Gunther Liebchen, January 10, 1945) is a controversial German anatomist who invented the plastination technique to preserve specimens and is heavily involved in its promotion. He developed the Body Worlds exhibition of human bodies and body parts. Von Hagens has a distinct German accent, and wears a black hat during his instructional cadaver dissection videos.
In January 2004, the German news magazine Der Spiegel reported that von Hagens had acquired some corpses from executed prisoners in China; he countered that he did not know the origin of the bodies and went on to cremate several of the disputed cadavers. German prosecutors declined to press charges, and Von Hagens was granted an interim injunction against Der Spiegel in March 2005, preventing the magazine from claiming that Body Worlds contain the bodies of executed prisoners.
6. Death II [Wikipedia]
Artist: Jack and Dinos Chapman
Jake Chapman (born 1966) and Dinos Chapman (born 1962) are brothers and English conceptual artists who work almost exclusively in collaboration with each other. They came to prominence as part of the Young British Artists movement promoted by Charles Saatchi. In their early career they worked as assistants to Gilbert and George.
The Chapman brothers were nominated for the Turner Prize in 2003. As well as including Insult to Injury, their Turner Prize exhibit debuted two new works Sex and Death. Sex directly referenced their previous work Great Deeds against the Dead. The original work shows three dismembered corpses hanging from a tree, Sex shows the same scenario, but in a heightened state of decay.
7. Janet
Artist: Clare Shenstone
Clare Shenstone completed her MA at the Royal College of Art in 1979. She was told that a ‘distinguished visitor’ had been looking at her degree show and left his telephone number. She phoned: it was Francis Bacon, who said ‘I love your work’. He wanted to by a particular piece titled ‘Janet’, this had been the artist’s first attempt at what she calls ‘cloth heads’.
Over the following two years she spent a lot of time with Bacon, making over fifty oil, gouache, pastel and pencil sketches of him. Since then Clare has exhibited widely across London and completed numerous other notable commissions including portraits of Zöe Wanamaker, Ronald Harwood and David Bowie.
8. Fountain [Wikipedia]
Artist: Marcel Duchamp
Fountain is a 1917 work by Marcel Duchamp. It is one of the pieces which he called readymades (also known as found art), because he made use of an already existing object—in this case a urinal, which he titled Fountain and signed R. Mutt. Marcel Duchamp had arrived in the United States less than two years previous to the “creation” of Fountain, and had become involved with Dada, an anti-rational, anti-art cultural movement, in New York City.
Like the use of the word “Dada” for the art movement, the meaning (if any) and intention of the signature “R. Mutt” is difficult to pin down precisely. Mutt and Jeff was a popular contemporary comic strip. It is not clear whether Duchamp had in mind the German “armut” (meaning poverty), but he did state that the initial “R” stood for “Richard”, which is slang in French for “moneybags”. It is also suggested that R. Mutt is a play off R. Mott, the company that produced the Paris sewer pipes.
9. Innocent X avec viande [Wikipedia]
Artist: Francis Bacon
Francis Bacon (28 October 1909 – 28 April 1992) was a gay Irish figurative painter. He was a collateral descendant of the Elizabethan philosopher Francis Bacon. His artwork is well known for its bold, austere, and often grotesque or nightmarish imagery. The philosopher Gilles Deleuze has contributed greatly to the interpretation of Bacon’s work.
This work, Completed, and delivered to the Beaux-Arts gallery in February 1953, of “Study after Velázquez’s Portrait of Pope Innocent X” (1953), Bacon said “I wanted to paint a head as if folded in on itself, like the folds of a curtain”. The Titian Portrait of Cardinal Filippo Archinto (c.1551-1562) is often cited as an ancestor to this device.
10. Vanitas: Flesh Dress for an Albino Anorectic [Wikipedia]
Artist: Jana Sterbak
Jana Sterbak (born 1955) is a Canadian artist best known for her works constructed from meat. Two sculptures, Vanitas: Flesh Dress for an Albino Anorectic (1987) and Chair Apollinaire (1999), were both works whose primary medium was cured flank steak.
Sterbak’s works deal primarily with issues of power, sexuality, and control, and she also explores the relationship between humanity and the technology it has created. Her Standard Lives – Abridged was displayed in the centre of Newcastle-upon-Tyne in September-October 1990.























August 11th, 2007 at 5:41 pm
Yup those are quite hideous.
I saw Gunther Von Hagens lay out some poor woman’s digestive system on TV a few years ago. I think it was about 27 feet long !!
My arty friend did this Reduction Scupture a while back, should it be on this list too ?
August 11th, 2007 at 6:39 pm
Very strange, but also interesting, what some people consider art.
August 11th, 2007 at 7:27 pm
It kinda makes me feel like I could be an artist!
August 11th, 2007 at 7:33 pm
PJB: I love the fact that the pins look like safety pins cut in half. Once your friend is world famous I will add him
August 11th, 2007 at 8:31 pm
Interesting. I was unaware of some of the artists on your list, and I thought I knew about art. Anything by Paul McCarthy would fit.
August 12th, 2007 at 5:49 am
hmm u should see dali’s hitler masturbating painting.. its hilarious… and disturbing at the same time
August 12th, 2007 at 7:27 am
yax: I didn’t know Dali had painted such a picture – I will see if I can find it online. Thanks.
August 12th, 2007 at 7:47 am
christian: wow – I hadn’t heard of Paul McCarthy – I looked up his work and it definitely IS weird. Thanks for the tip
August 13th, 2007 at 1:40 pm
wow, i never really thought that there were still artistic boundries that could be pushed. Thank you for making this list! Im definately going to be looking up francis bacon in the near future. Real interesting stuff.
August 13th, 2007 at 1:46 pm
zombiejorge: some of Bacon’s stuff is really outrageous. He was a great artist.
August 13th, 2007 at 10:06 pm
People will call anything art
August 14th, 2007 at 1:17 pm
i went to bodyworks last year and it was really interesting. something you dont expect when you enter the exhibit is the overpowering smell. Not really of anything recognizable ,but it’s very unsettling. May i suggest another art list?
August 14th, 2007 at 1:21 pm
zombie: definitely – I will have a think about who to include. Watch this thread as I will post here when I do one. There are a couple others I have to do first though
August 15th, 2007 at 8:07 am
I’ve been looking at these lists (the bizarre set) for quite a while now and I have been very impressed. I was happy to see this one and especially happy to see so many artists I really like listed here.
other artists you should definitely consider placing in here or on a follow up list:
Jeff Koons: Because of his origins and the fact that he almost does nothing with the creation of his work, I would consider him a marketing performance artist.
Orlan: this woman has undergone plastic surgery to make herself into a work of art, procedures are often filmed.
Matthew Barney: His Cremaster series is so entrancing in it’s beauty and oddness. He recently had a retrospective at the Guggenheim in New York.
I’m sure I can refer you to more but it is late and I’m losing my concentration on the matter.
August 15th, 2007 at 10:26 am
Tj: thanks for naming those artists – I will have to look at some of their work for inclusion in the next art related list.
September 17th, 2007 at 3:31 pm
This art is so cool, like this is what I consider to be art. But im not to sure about the 69 thing, thats not art its a position
September 17th, 2007 at 8:23 pm
FUN FACT: number 9 was in the good batman(tim burtons). the joker walks into a room and destroys paintings and one guys is about to spray paint it and he goes “not this one, i like this… aheheheheh”
September 17th, 2007 at 10:35 pm
Melissa G: hehe – ’tis in the eye of the beholder I guess
metal2death: thanks for sharing that – I don’t remember the scene but I haven’t seen that film in ages.
September 26th, 2007 at 11:42 am
in 2002 the Tate Gallery paid 22,300 pounds for canned feces of Piero Manzoni, an Italian artist. the gallery bought the “art” at a Sothery’s sale.
September 26th, 2007 at 11:46 am
2overpart: Sometimes the artworld just boggles the mind!
October 2nd, 2007 at 4:52 am
Oh my God!! I could exhibit my bedroom as a work of art. Not so much of the condoms and underwear, but books, magazines and about 3 weeks worth of clean clothes which still seem to end up on the floor. Not really to my taste, but I do think Damien Hirst does some really interesting work.
October 2nd, 2007 at 5:37 am
Barb: hehe – you sound like you are describing my room! I don’t have time to put clothes away – I am always here!
October 5th, 2007 at 2:29 pm
good list.
October 12th, 2007 at 5:05 am
how can you make a page about bizarre artworks without including HR. Giger. http://www.giger.com is infamously known for doing the artwork for alien and also for the Dead Kennedys’ album Frankenchrist, Landscape XX (nicknamed Penis Landscape) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_219:_Landscape_XX
Warning: NSFW
November 1st, 2007 at 6:58 pm
check out joel peter witkin’s photos… not at all for the faint of heart or stomach but like lots of other disturbing things they are very compelling.
and you can’t forget chris ofili’s poo-smeared ‘the holy virgin mary’… but you have enough members of the YBA movement on this list to get the point across lol
i must add that i have always adored gilbert and george, they’ve made their lives an aspect of their art and their ingenuity, dedication, and exploration of the seedy underbelly of human life are what make me love them so much. their video is fantastic
love the lists, they’re immensely satisfying
November 20th, 2007 at 12:51 pm
this crap isnt art, but it is the reason that art is dead, and every stupid butcher thinks they can be an artist. I think it is sad how far the art world has fallen, and how easily the masses can be munipulated to think something is art just because it is in a museum.
November 20th, 2007 at 5:05 pm
I would look so hot in a meat dress!!
November 22nd, 2007 at 7:25 pm
I smell bacon!!!!!!!!!!!
December 1st, 2007 at 12:06 am
I went to the Body World 3 Exhibition here in Vancouver but never saw one of a pregnant woman and the baby in her womb. Although I have nothing against those who donate their bodies to science, I find it difficult to see an infant used in display.
December 26th, 2007 at 7:20 pm
hirst recently unveiled a new piece called, “for the love of god.” it’s supposedly sold for $100 million, but many believe that hirst fabricated that for more publicity. here’s a new york times story on the piece: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/03/magazine/03Style-skull-t.html
December 29th, 2007 at 2:54 am
I went to Body Worlds, and did see an infant in it’s mother. In Portland at the OMSI, there is some of Von Hagen’s early work showing embryos and fetuses from weeks 2 through 40. I think it’s beautiful and respectfully done, and very educational. There has been some controversy, though.
I also didn’t think the exhibit smelled bad. Just a little plasticky.
December 29th, 2007 at 8:19 pm
I can’t even get this shit…Like the first one is the best one to me. But this meat dress is ridiculous.
December 30th, 2007 at 6:38 am
You have to check out the work done by a belgian artist : Wim Delvoye. His most unconventional project is the Cloaca, an installation that produces feces. He has done this job to laugh about our society of globalisation. Quite interesting…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wim_Delvoye
January 10th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
you really should include a top ten of haunted paintings. there are plenty of them, my grandmother owns a few
January 28th, 2008 at 9:39 am
i like andres serrano’s piss christ, which is just a crucifix in a jar of urine. really “pissed” a lot of people off. har.
god i’m funny.
January 30th, 2008 at 10:22 am
It’s amazing what some people are willing to call art.
February 5th, 2008 at 3:01 am
So you’re saying I can go into a store bathroom, steal a urinal, turn it on its side, put it under plexiglass and be recognized as an artist!? That’s insane! Art is no longer as artistic, it seems…
February 8th, 2008 at 8:23 pm
The Art in this list is just RUBBISH
February 9th, 2008 at 11:40 pm
The art itself isn’t meant to be viewed solely for it’s visual appeal, but for it’s gravity and purpose. The whole thing is very inflated and mixed, but it’s only meant to convey the artist’s emotions and the time period in which it was created.
February 20th, 2008 at 6:56 pm
The function of the artist is something that cannot be pinned down, and thank goodness for that. Some of you are outraged and confused, some are delighted. The function of *art*, on a very basic level, is to solicit an emotional response, to provoke. I would say the very fact that some have gotten their knickers in a twist is proof enough that it’s art.
March 30th, 2008 at 7:07 pm
What about that a-hole with the three basketballs in a half-filled fishtank, the biggest scam artist of them all? No name given here, the pr+ck doesn’t deserve the publicity.
March 30th, 2008 at 7:13 pm
he needs a good headbut to the face, dont he?
I was roomates with a fool who became one of his “artisan monkeys”
April 13th, 2008 at 7:11 pm
#5 is really creepy. I mean, it’s a pregnant woman cut open to reveal her baby… it’s just too frightening. I also saw the exhibition with the fetuses and it just gave me the chills… but i’m just like that, anyway.
April 19th, 2008 at 11:57 am
I saw the body work exhibit when it came to sydney, it was incredible… I hate the whole idea that people have these days that things like this aren’t art, that they themselves could easily have come up with this. The point is, they didn’t. John Cage, the controversial American composer came up with a piece he called 4′33, which is 4 minutes and 33 seconds of him, with an orchestra, standing on stage. He made millions. Anyone can create these things, but no one dares to, and the ones that do dare to, get criticised… It’s awful the way society perceives modern art.
April 19th, 2008 at 7:01 pm
I loveeeee the body work exposition it’s just amazing
April 27th, 2008 at 12:57 am
Didnt Duchamp also can some of his own shit and sign it.It is way sought after
April 27th, 2008 at 1:24 am
Correction it was piero manzoni.there were 90 cans produced in 1961.In 07 one sold for 70000.00
May 17th, 2008 at 5:15 pm
ObeyArtGuy: Duchamp did have a glass ampule (a vessel used in religious ceremonies or pharmasutical(sp?) purposes—looks like a christmas tree ornament) that he labled as “Paris Air” and signed with his “female” alter ego, Rrose Sélavy.
May 26th, 2008 at 12:33 am
Funniest hing… seeing the flesh dress piece as bizzare. On America’s Next Top Model they had to do a photo shoot where all the girls were dressed in meat…
May 29th, 2008 at 3:40 am
i once made art out of a dunny too, mine wasn’t white though
August 20th, 2008 at 2:45 pm
Dolls freaked me out. I really don’t like mannequins. I have no idea why
August 20th, 2008 at 2:46 pm
Shinigami Edo: my newphew doesn’t like dolls either – weird.
August 23rd, 2008 at 2:28 pm
Bizarre??? Apart from the cadaver, which is hardly an artwork, the rest is rather boringly mainstream. Utterly non-controversial. What century do most of you people live in? Still like pretty paintings of flowers do we? Diddums den. That’s not art now, that’s craft.
Imagine it in a music context. Those Rolling Stones? Ooooo, freaky! That Bob Dylan? Weird… “Funny what some people consider music”. You’d laugh, right? And sorry, anyone in the contemporary art world would laugh at most of these comments, and the decision to call these artworks bizarre.
August 23rd, 2008 at 2:57 pm
Brian: perhaps instead of ranting against the items on this list you could tell us a few modern artworks that you think better deserve a spot here.
September 4th, 2008 at 5:49 am
To some extent I would have to agree with Brian’s comment,but I quite like most of these pieces. Hans Bellmer’s dolls are pretty unsettling and Tracy Emin’s ‘My Bedroom’ is just plain crap. It’s not that I don’t believe that art has to ‘be’ something (one of my favourite pieces is called ‘Wind Table’, it’s just a white cloth spread over a small round table with a fan directed at it so the cloth blows!), I just cannot find any appeal in any of Emin’s work. I’m a pretty big fan of Bacon’s and while he may have been controversial once I don’t think he is anymore (I’ve been to see his studio at least 3 times). Hisrt is now so famous that I don’t think he CAN be controversial anymore. It’s like whatever he does is genius just because he did it. What about taxidermy art? The likes of Sarina Brewer, and some other guy whose name escapes me – Brian something I think. I guess Von Hagens plastination is still a bit controversial because he displays human bodies. But what’s the difference between going to see BodyWorld or a mummy/skeleton/bog body in a museum?
September 19th, 2008 at 9:25 am
Impressive. I actually found Francis Bacon to have some very interesting artwork.
October 12th, 2008 at 10:37 am
Bellmer’s dolls have been used in the second installation of Ghost in The Shell movies (again from director Mamooru Oshii).
October 28th, 2008 at 7:00 pm
Great list…Duchamp’s ‘Foutain’ is one of the most important pieces in the history of art.It really re-defined what ‘art’ is. Another great but totally bizarre artist is Patricia Piccinini…She makes the freakiest animal sculptures you’ll ever see!
http://www.cpluv.com/www/tag/Patricia_Piccinini
October 30th, 2008 at 10:50 pm
Nice list.
Also one to check out is #D Sidewalk Art by Julian Beever and others.
http://www.whatthefreek.com/pol2/3.htm
November 2nd, 2008 at 8:30 am
Cool.
November 17th, 2008 at 11:30 pm
If you want to argue over what is perceived as art, feel free. Art has always been subjective—”One man’s junk is another man’s treasure.”
But the idea about looking at art in a musical manner is enthralling. I have a friend who says that System of a Down is “just noise” but another who believes there are significant political messages inside the songs. Seems to me that we all see art differently because our minds are so different in social, cultural, mental structures—and that, I think, is what makes art of any kind notable.
November 21st, 2008 at 4:08 pm
Even though some of the art featured on this page might not be to some peoples taste, it is art. Think about what these works are doing to you mind, you might be offended you might be intrigued you might even be a little bit indifferent,
Art. Has. Evolved. the only reason daVinci wasn’t off painting Labia or melted clocks was because these things hadn’t been done before and in the times of the renaissance up until the start of the 20th century these things would be looked upon as the work of evil or lunatics, sometimes even satan.
The religious authorities also had a large say in what was deemed acceptable. Art is no longer just only about aesthetics, it now seeks to question society, relationships nature, the way the light falls on the cistern in the bathroom, anything. Within the space of 100 years the art world has seen a certain freedom, do what you like. Most artist you will find are creating art for art’s sake, but most have explanations and reasons into their works.
This does not mean you have to like a certain piece just because it is “art”, art still is subjective and I do not agree with the extortionate prices paid by uneducated hyped up media whores who love to be contraversial and thrive on the opulence of the art world.
Art is not dead, it’s just changed, for the better.
still, i hate them stupid squiggly line pictures you find in the likes or Argos.
January 17th, 2009 at 6:55 pm
I do not understand modern art, why these are considered “art” and why so much of modern art has to be so grotesque. To me a toilet called Fountain just conveys nothing. I was once told that the point is for the art to cause a strong reaction, positive or negative it doesn’t matter. In that case I’m going to find the grossest objects I can, throw them together, give them a weird and inappropriate name and charge $100,000 for the whole affair. Seriously though, I just wish I could begin to understand modern art.
January 28th, 2009 at 7:36 am
cool im an artist no matter what i do:P I just say its art, and then it is:-D next time I take a crap i will be the da vinci of the 2000 century
yae
January 28th, 2009 at 12:08 pm
I’ve just read 5 posts by yc, on 5 different lists, and all I can offer is condolences to his parents.
January 28th, 2009 at 1:05 pm
65. segue -
could not have said it better myself.
i’d actually pulled all yc comments to try and determine if they were spam or trolling or what. unfortunately no real justification for trashing comments or banning IPs for commentors who are just stupid.
damn shame that. course if i could..would eliminate a hella lotta commentary.
ROFLMAO!
January 28th, 2009 at 1:08 pm
Cyn, you’re rubbing off on me, and…oh damn, turkeys in the yard. gotta go get the rifle
February 1st, 2009 at 8:40 pm
33. nobody123456
Is this the same guy who made stool on a stool? I don’t know what the title is – that (unfortunately) was a description. It was crap on a stool, auctioned off at Christies. The bidding actually got up to $50,000 but the artist pulled it off because it didn’t make enough money.
51. Shinigami Edo
Dolls creep me out too! In a 20th century art class, we had watched an art house film clip which included a segment where they simulated cutting an eyeball with a razor. But what haunted me for the rest of the week was seeing an earlier slide of Bellmer’s doll works.
63. Dana
Modern art is hard to get because despite its ambitions to break down preconceived notions of art and art marketing, it became too clique-ish for the general public to understand. With this current modern era, it reflects current society and also creates commentary on history so that’s why it’s so hard to appreciate it without specific knowledge of either for that particular work.
I recommend trying a modern art history class, but don’t know how much it will help. I took three or four before I found an adjunct professor who made me understand and at the very least respect contemporary works. Or perhaps look for shows that may interest you and expand your appreciation from there. A few months ago I saw a show regarding the Iraq war. There were some really compelling pieces there and my cousin who went through the other rooms saying “this is boring, I don’t get this, why is this art” was actually enthralled by what she saw.
Lots of comments about Duchamp’s fountain. A little history into that… he was making a commentary on the narrowmindedness of the art world, particularly the snobbery of the art gallery. Duchamp was already an established artist at the time and boardmember of the gallery so any of his work could automatically make it in. It criticizes the mindset of those in the art community who proclaimed it “not art” and also the favoritism popular then (and even now)…it was an unknown artist “R.Mutt” therefore it was immediately rejected by all but Duchamp. What would have happened if Duchamp originally claimed it? What specifics define it as not artistic? That it isn’t pretty? Pieter Aertsen was painting images of skinned cow head and obviously dead chickens in the 16th century with such skill that you can almost imagine seeing flies swirling around the carcasses…this is long before the modernist gross-out tactics.
Same issues with Stool on a Stool. It’s a blatant commentary on the prices artists will set on their work and the people who spend crazy amounts on art. Gotta respect that even if I still think it’s disgusting. I’ve worked for a number of artists and it still astounds me how much they’ll charge. This one sculptress I worked for… She wanted to retouch this one stonework that had three lines of gold leafing. It was a bit old and the leafing dulled so we spent five minutes putting a new layer of gold leaf using barely a fraction of a $10 leafing kit from the art store and Artist wanted to jack up the price $250 more!
If you’re doing another bizarre art list, I suggest looking into the feminist art movement. There’s some wild stuff going on in there.
Sorry this is so long! It’s art…I always have a lot to say on the subject
February 9th, 2009 at 11:21 pm
gabi319,
There is nothing TO understand about art.
Claiming that people “Don’t” understand it is pretentious and ignorant.
Most of the work here is just garbage, not because I don’t understand it, but because it is crap, there is nothing to understand.
That doesn’t mean it isn’t art, because art is anything we want it to be.
If the people that buy this stuff REALLY love it, then good for them. But if they are just buying it because it is the “thing” to do, because it says so in the latest Art journal, well, that is just sad.
February 10th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
69. Okay: I totally agree, Okay. I happen to love non-representational art, while my husband is more into straight forward representational art.
I am a photographer, and I engineer my images into what one might call “Images on Acid”.
February 10th, 2009 at 1:05 pm
#69:
Don’t make assumptions based on what you skimmed from my post. I never claimed people don’t understand, I was empathizing with another poster who said he/she didn’t understand but wanted to and tried to give some logical suggestions on how he/she could approach modern art. I better not be ignorant seeing as I earned an art history minor to supplement my fine art degree. This isn’t the first time I’ve seen many of these images. I don’t particularly like most of them but I’m not going to disrespect someone else’s endeavors. It’s hypocritically intolerant of you to say “art is anything we want it to be” as well as calling these things crap and garbage. If you don’t think of it as art then fine but just because you don’t get the message doesn’t automatically give you license to demean other people’s work.
There IS something to understand about art or there would be no lectures in art history courses, no fifteen pound textbooks, no twenty-three page term paper about Aaron Douglass’s social contributions to the civil rights movement of the 20th century. Art majors aren’t looked upon as the best and the brightest but my three engineer roommates could vouch for the fact that my academic schedule was at times more rigorous than theirs. Some of it was spent making art but much of it was spent trying to understand art. Yes, it is more than possible to view art solely on a subjective basis and that is how it is done for hundreds or thousands or most of the however many people that hang artwork in their homes. But by viewing everything only subjectively:
-There’s just a series of randomly placed objects in a Northern Renaissance painting rather than hundreds of symbols and hidden religious agenda
-Van Gogh would never have gained posthumous fame because his work was sure as h*ll considered ugly during his time guaranteeing that he would’ve been another statistic of forgotten art had generations of people not looked at his work and tried to understand what he ‘saw’
-Klimt’s work is subjectively viewed by hundreds of teenage girls as romantic enough to buy in poster-form for their walls while others take into account his obsession with death, sexuality and occasional rant about women being evil to see the much darker undercurrents of his art
-Pollock was famous mostly due to the intellectual analysis of his paintings (and his wife’s excellent art management skills), noting particularly the sharp differences in art before, during and after sobriety.
-Political cartoons are a whole other mess if there are not to be understood the context of current events
…And there are hundreds more examples. It’s nice to see a pretty picture but trying to understand the artist’s process or social context in which the work is placed give them deeper levels of appreciation and expose new interpretations. Much of the art in the past was viewed with shock and disgust back then just as many contemporary pieces are viewed with shock and disgust today. What made them worthy of discussion and remembrance decades later is that audiences sought to UNDERSTAND them.
February 10th, 2009 at 1:30 pm
71. gabi319: I should have read your post before posting myself. I was still half blind from reading hundreds of posts on todays list…yawn.
I’m in a bad mood. Not enough sleep, intestinal problems, just beginning to get over shingles on one side, and feeling suspicious tingling on the other side.
Shoot me someone.
February 10th, 2009 at 9:22 pm
72. segue
None of that rant was directed at you! I actually hadn’t seen your post until much later because I read and reread my rant to edit out most of the childish name-calling before submitting. I don’t mind being called names or being given criticism when it’s warranted but Okay called me pretentious and ignorant without evidence to back it up. I’ve never been one to hide in a corner when the false accusations fly. In fact, TWICE I had criticized the snobbery of art market that he/she also shames.
And none of what you wrote was offensive. Different people are attracted to different art and you said it in a way that wasn’t rude to other people’s preferences. Different strokes for different folks, right? Sorry about the shingles. I hope the steroid shots make you feel better without giving you Mr. Universe muscles.
February 11th, 2009 at 11:19 am
gabi319, no worries. With a good night’s sleep behind me I can more rationally look at posts and see what is really going on. I’m much smarter when I’m rested and not actively sick.
Re: the steroids, no problem with the Mr. Universe muscles. There isn’t enough of me to “bulk up”.
February 12th, 2009 at 12:11 pm
Some of you have misunderstood what I posted above. I DO like most if not all of these pieces – it’s just that they’re not very bizarre!
And my point was: that to SEE them as bizarre implies a rather – er, bizarre – notion of contemporary art. I’m an artist, teacher and critic, and my students make works more bizarre than the things on this list before breakfast!
And I still think my analogy with music stands. The works on the list are main-stream, middle-of-the-road-ish, if not now rather passé, art! Still, the list got us going didn’t it…
February 12th, 2009 at 4:03 pm
There is a big problem with this list: NONE of this is Art, by definition.
February 12th, 2009 at 5:23 pm
definition of Art: Art is the process or product of deliberately arranging elements in a way that appeals to the sense or emotions. It encompasses a diverse range of human activities, creations, and modes of expression, including music and literature. The meaning of art is explored in a branch of philosophy known as Aesthetics.
76. Ty S, at which point do the offerings above fail to meet the definition? At no point does the definition of Art claim that it should appeal to everyone.
February 20th, 2009 at 9:41 pm
Additions for a possible second list!
Michael Joo – Sculptor and performance artist with very culturally minded approach to his work. He did some piece involving urine… titled Yellow, Yellower and Yellowist (yellow = Asian)
Mr. Toledano – “Hope And Fear Is The External Manifestation Of The Internal Desires And Paranoia That Are Adrift America” a series of photographs… kinda meh, kinda creepy.
Cai Guo-Qiang – recently in the news for his Guggenheim installation where he created 99 wolves running throughout the ceilings of the hallway that crash into a glass partition. I think the work is called ‘I want to Believe’
Jason Hackenwerth – balloon sculptures of crazy…vagina monsters…of epic proportions. I doubt that’s what he’s really doing but that’s what it looks like to me. I have no idea if the works have names
Mark Jenkins – created tape men, dressed them and placed them throughout Washington DC. Some portrayed beggars, some as pedestrians, one had his head stuck in an ATM. Perhaps not overly bizarre but the doll-like-essence makes them creepy to me…regardless, I still really like his work. He’s a street artist so I’m not sure how his work is labeled if at all. He’s being embraced by the DC community (someone liked his prostitute panda so much they requested a formal space for him to display it prominently) so if the older works aren’t titled, then the newer stuff might be.
That’s all I can think of right now! If I come across any older works that are may fit the category, I’ll add it in. It’d be nice to show that bizarre isn’t synonymous with just contemporary art.
February 22nd, 2009 at 12:10 pm
I miss H. R. Giger in this list. If his stuff isn’t bizarre, the i don’t know what bizarre is.
March 2nd, 2009 at 8:29 am
For a while at the Smithsonian, they had an exhibit dedicated to Dadaism. Marcel Duchamp’s “Fountain” was mounted high in the entryway to the next section where his “L.H.O.O.Q.” (the Mona Lisa postcard with the penciled mustache) was framed. Not many people noticed it.
Here’s a creepy one: Duane Hanson. Fiberglass people that look so real you would swear they’d get up and do something. They had his “Security Guard” at the BOCA and I actually gave it a “hey there, dude” nod before I realized what it was. Scared the bejeezus out of me. Look him up.
March 4th, 2009 at 8:55 am
“Seque: A Programming Language for Manipulating Sequences”, definition of Art: Art is the process or product of deliberately arranging elements in a way that appeals to the sense or emotions. Lets not argue about the proclivities of Natures Art. Does it arrange elements in a way that appeals to the sense or emotions deliberately? When one conducts ones morning ritual with the facilities available in ones bathroom does one do so with deliberation or is an automated response required. Such questions are fundamental to an understanding of “Art” Perhaps more apropos: “Aesthetics studies new ways of seeing and of perceiving the world.” As Arnold says “‘ll be back.”
March 4th, 2009 at 9:29 am
Alfredo you may not have acquitted yourself well in the “Godfather”, but I cant help but wonder as you do. Where is Giger. Perhaps his omission is not due to the lack of a certain nightmarish quality but due to the fact that he is an “artist.”
March 4th, 2009 at 9:46 am
“The Life of Brian” a victim of paranoia? What one wouldnt give to be in his sandals! Certainly these “works” do seem rather tame. I prefer my magnum opus, a conceptual piece entitled “Micks Dick”. Certainly I would have preferred to have displayed it as a splendid example of renaissant “Realism”, however, Mick seems wholly unwilling to part with “his appendage of commerce” despite the fact that it has come to the end of its “productive” cycle. It would have gone well with his butt painting.
March 4th, 2009 at 9:51 am
Gabi would this be Schindlers List by any chance? Why is Giotto so con.tro..ver…sial?
March 4th, 2009 at 9:57 am
Let us ponder the machinations of some two bit hooker. I have to say “My Bed” hasnt spoken to me in weeks! Ive no idea whats wrong with it, given that it has been veritably loquacious in time past. “Ill be back”
March 4th, 2009 at 10:39 am
Certainly if there is such a thing as “Art” one of its distinguishing features and the one that provides some distance from entertainment is that it does facilitate new ways of seeing and of perceiving the world.
“Art” is a recent phenomena and owes its existence as an entity to Aesthetics. I guess people have always known what it is but simply did not have a name for it. This particular philosophical branch enabled classification. There is a great deal of overlapping between art and entertainment, however, as I am sure many will agree they are not the same thing. More interesting than the question what is art perhaps is why art? To examine this we have to discover what is to be human.
March 4th, 2009 at 10:46 am
“My Bed” insisted that I was an artist and even though she remained unmade and new well that I had been “made” she was entitled to some attention.
March 4th, 2009 at 10:54 am
I argued inconsequentially. She was shocked to hear I did not consider myself an artist at all and that the millenium for such it seemed spent at the sorbonne and other “institutions” had sufficed to kill any artistry that had once been attendant upon me by a process I called “automatomic intellectualization”.
March 4th, 2009 at 10:59 am
Still she insisted “Sell Your Shit And Can It. I almost canned her and told her if she did not keep quite she would find herself “out of place” Shes been reticent ever since.
March 4th, 2009 at 11:03 am
Perfectly right seven lies, seven truths really. He did piss a lot of people off. I guess there still pissed!
March 4th, 2009 at 11:08 am
Obviously a man of questionable character like serrano de burgeiac imself. No doubt he is closer to the X than any of us. This sure is funnie wine.
March 4th, 2009 at 11:22 am
In my piece “Return to our self induced hynotic drunken stupor.” I raise that familiarly old topic and ask what is art if not art? Of course some may find this shocking and controversial and I have made every effort to be a disturbance, though I deny any responsibility since my intention was to shock and confuse a shocked and confused apparite audience by a device known only as the “anachronisia” for which I do not hold the patent.
March 4th, 2009 at 11:55 am
I hope you will join me in mourning one of the worlds finest conceptual artists of this or any time. Don Van Vliet, hes due out next year, though theres every possibility he’ll be late for his funeral. Probably as well to get it over with now, for who knows what the future may bring and I for one may not be around to mourn him then. Buy Now, may take a while but his paintings are worth a fortune, precisely because there honest and examine the fundamental question Who is Human! Technique is flawless, since he does not use any and the execution is harmless though profound. Unfortunately there is little probality that one will be around in the millenia to come to provide “circumstantial” evidence but he will. An added plus of course is that he dosent need the money and wouldnt know what to do with it anyway. One should look to ones own and try to overlook the fact that he dosent want it anyway.
March 4th, 2009 at 12:22 pm
Till the time of Giotto there is no real distinction between the word “Artist” and “Artisan” in fact the word artist is not used, the word used is craftsman and equivalents thereof.
“Art” has always been with us since the first thought occurred and without it we could not have progressed intellectually. It is our animal nature that requires art to enable our human nature to develop and progress. However what is now generally supposed to be art is a “Return to our self induced hypnotic drunken stupor.” which no doubt will one day find us out.
March 4th, 2009 at 12:32 pm
From ones esteemed position it is hard to understand the accolades thrown at ones feet for stating the obvious simply because no one had taken the trouble to state the obvious before. Perhaps they had better things to do! “Fart In A Glass Jar” is my answer to such illumined individuals. To be quite honest I neither have the time or inclination.
March 4th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
Contrary to popular belief Leonard is not a Jew, he isnt even Leonard. However, he is an Artist and I think thats important.
March 4th, 2009 at 1:04 pm
Andy is inconsequential I wouldnt have noticed the Jew if you hadnt pointed him out to me. I do so wish you hadnt, I have better things to do.
March 4th, 2009 at 1:11 pm
No doubt Adolf would have taken an interest being the rocknroller that David considers him to be. I prefer Goya, harmless execution and equally profound.
March 4th, 2009 at 1:14 pm
HiellaGuru-
what in the world…….
please tell me these comments are themselves some kind of conceptual piece you’re doing.
March 4th, 2009 at 1:19 pm
HiellaGuru: I’m not following…are you having a conversation with yourself? Not being rude…just trying to follow.
March 4th, 2009 at 1:22 pm
When I say Coca Cola the first thing that enters most peoples minds is a “broken closepeg”. Perhaps its on account of the “broken closepegs” reputation, worldwide marketing and distribution not to mention the general appeal of broken closepegs in general that has made them a household name. Theres more to the world than functionality!
March 4th, 2009 at 1:30 pm
to be honest, it kinda makes me want to hit the “abuse” button, but i’m not going to, not now anyway. because i think i know what you might be doing…..
still, not what i thought the comments were really for.
March 4th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
and it’s not my site anyway.
March 4th, 2009 at 1:48 pm
what the??
102. lo – “i think i know what you might be doing…..”
mind cluing us in?
80. quicksilvermad – “Duane Hanson”
Saw a piece by him at the Milwaukee Art Museum. It was at the closest exit to the door but I still took the long way out to avoid it.
March 4th, 2009 at 1:49 pm
Sorry Oouchan its just a stream of consciousness, through which I guess I am trying to understand and throw light upon what art is and what it is for. It seems to me that we are very much conditioned in the way we perceive things. Many of my “works” so to speak are eminently marketable as an examination of the art world will show. I do not take them seriously. But lets say you were determined, you had attitude, knew the right people, some training, I mean you could draw a line. As long as you had the answers or the ability to be equivocal, you would have no difficulty in being a much pontified and sought after artist. One of the points i’m trying to raise is that just because one has done something that no one else has done, in whatever context does not make it art or of any value. My conceptual piece which I have just created here on line “Fart In A Glass Jar” is far superior to anything Pietro Manzoni came up with during his tenure and has “meaning” within this given context. I’m sure the “work” is much easier than it looks!
March 4th, 2009 at 1:49 pm
*closest exit to the lobby
March 4th, 2009 at 1:54 pm
Makes one wonder what bizarre is dont it.
March 4th, 2009 at 1:58 pm
well, by all means, please continue if it suits you?
March 4th, 2009 at 2:02 pm
104. gabi319 “mind cluing us in?”-
“99. lo -
HiellaGuru-
what in the world…….
please tell me these comments are themselves some kind of conceptual piece you’re doing.”
-i guess i was right.
March 4th, 2009 at 2:06 pm
HiellaGuru: Thanks for clarifying. I understand your point and it makes your other comments more insightful. I agree…just because it’s new doesn’t make it art. I also believe its opinion based. What I like as “art” might not be the same as what you would like. These ‘bizarre artworks’ are not my cup of tea. I wouldn’t want to go and see them nor (if I had the money) purchase them. I prefer Da Vinci or Monet. I want to be moved instead of moving away.
March 4th, 2009 at 2:18 pm
Take lo for example she wants to hit the abuse button, but can you honestly say that anything that has been said by me here is in anyway abusive to anyone. Colorful perhaps, probing, not abusive. Fine to put Christ on the cross in a jar of piss, after all this art. Abusive to question the wisdom, validity, motivation of such “work”.
As Arnold says “I’ll be back.” That is until some fool cant take it anymore and presses the Dalek button, “Exterminate, Exterminate… lo”.
March 4th, 2009 at 2:34 pm
Exactly oochan, I like Pepperoni, Double Cheese. So while there is no doubt that art is to a large extent subjective, i.e. you may prefer Hawaian or Country Feast with extra cheese. Nonetheless we are talking about the same thing fundamentally. In this case we agree on the pizza base, no pizza without it, just a question of the topping. But what if there is no base surely then were not talking about pizza unless the nature of pizza itself has changed i.e. topping but no base.
Da Vinci is quite remarkable, in the Mona Lisa, hes not try to say anything, just trying to capture the elusive quality of his sitter. He does it so well that even now we are still looking for it! Looks great with a mustache too!
March 4th, 2009 at 2:40 pm
HiellaGuru, exactly! Like my Mona Lisa with a mustache…and double cheese! (couldn’t help myself)
March 4th, 2009 at 2:45 pm
111. HiellaGuru-
did you read the whole comment? i said i felt like hitting the abuse button, because i thought you were perhaps misusing the comments. i also said i was NOT hitting the abuse button because i thought you were doing a conceptual piece, which i understood and this isn’t my site so who am i really to judge what belongs in the comments.
sheesh, i was the first person to even get what you were doing (regardless of what i think of your choice to so it in such a matter) so don’t make me out to be some clueless censor.
March 4th, 2009 at 2:50 pm
-choice to do so-
you know nothing about me or my arts background, looks like you’re the one who’s judging and trying to look “hipper than thou,” which is sophomoric really.
March 4th, 2009 at 2:54 pm
The conceptual work “Micks Dick” admittedly controversial perhaps even egregious is why people head for the exit but “theyll be back”. Wonder who Mick is! Obviously influenced by Duchamp just as humorous and poingnant!
March 4th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
Lo as you say your the expert i’m listening.
March 4th, 2009 at 2:59 pm
HiellaGuru-
don’t you even have the integrity to admit you utterly misinterpreted my comments? some bold, honest artist you are.
March 4th, 2009 at 3:03 pm
Anyway i’m glad were buzzing.. love you really.
March 4th, 2009 at 3:08 pm
Honestly I dont take offence, i’m passionate so to speak about what I do “whatever that is.” I have no difficulty in admitting i’m wrong about something if that can be shown. “I have utterly misinterpreted your comments”… still think your cool though.
March 4th, 2009 at 3:14 pm
120. HiellaGuru-
well, how nice of you. art is many things, art is everything, and art is nothing. you made your point.
March 4th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
Art is as important as philosophy these days,one might argue even more so, since its in ones face as many would argue it should be, here we have the sword of Damocles. While philosophy is the base on which art is founded its nonetheless in the boiler room and in an unholy mess. Since philosophy and art are our main avenues for evoloution they are also the avenue to devoloution. I dont think art or philosophy should be looked at as a means in themselves. They are at the very core of what we are and are to become. I would consider therefore most modern artists as primative, neglectful, inconsiderate with little or no relevance to our development. Duchamps expansion of art into three dimentions is valid, however he misses the innumerable dimentions of someone like Dali. Just because something is presented two dimentionally dosent mean that it is two dimentional, only that the media is. Surely atrt transcends its medium if that is infact what it it.
March 4th, 2009 at 3:36 pm
Art really took its cue from the renaissance as a counterpoint to religious virtuosity. Even though the churches are empty it still raps on this theme… yawn.
It brought about a change in perception and revoloution!
March 4th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
So apropos what is art? What is its purpose? Can we discover its fundamental aspects? Plumbing is not thereoetical physics, which is coming to accept though light years from confirming what we knew all along. Something can be infinitely large and infinitely small simultaneously. Finally the world is coming to accept, perhaps influenced by my conceptual piece “Dinasaur Chicken” that birds have evolved from dinasaurs. Discover the artist within you and you wont need takeaways.
March 4th, 2009 at 4:07 pm
“I’ll be back.”… exterminate… exterminate… I am a Dalek!
March 4th, 2009 at 7:12 pm
I hereby throw down the gauntlet and challenge the very foundations of the art establishment, however high the brow, however erudite, to prove their metal. Perhaps a few Doctors of art, (generally more reasonable than the Doctorors of art)and of course the chuwawas of the art world, better known as the art critique for which I have the utmost respect. Established artists or otherwise at the high end are most welcome as indeed is anyone capable of decorum. Do bear in mind this is not a fishmarket, nor is one dealing with the Gestapo. Do forgive attendant errors in grammer and spelling, I am somewhat dyslectic though not intolerably so. However, more often than not spelling mistakes are not spelling mistakes at all but rather a device of color and sound to convey the ineffable. I wish to discuss “Distributed Being”, which I have aptly renamed “Tosspot” in defference perhaps even defiance of the author and which is a substantial conceptual piece. It is neither influenced nor has anything to do with the attendant sobriquet but everything to do with fine art and accompanies my minamilist composition “For Want Of A Better Word”. “I’ll be back”.
March 4th, 2009 at 7:24 pm
HiellaGuru may be a conceptual art piece, but not one which appeals to me. I understand it. I am capable of it, or at least I did it when I was young and inexperienced.
I take my art very seriously now, though seriously is the wrong word for something which brings such joy and playfulness to my life.
Let’s say I disagree with HiellaGuru stylistically. Doesn’t mean either of us is wrong. Just that we approach Art differently.
There is room in the world for all sorts of Art.
March 4th, 2009 at 7:34 pm
No doubt “For Want Of A Better Word” is not the final word on minimalism, which is an extremely complex form. Perhaps though not “perhaps” “is” the final word, if anyone can come up with a better one i’d love to hear it.
March 4th, 2009 at 7:35 pm
104. gabi31: Same here on the Duane Hansen. They had “The Swimmer” on the second floor and I nearly screamed when I saw it. It looked like the guy was about to stand up and start talking. I literally ran out of that section and hid in the one next to it. The friend who was with me at the time offered me $20 to go up to the “Security Guard” for a closer look and I flat out turned her down.
His work is more unnerving than wax museum sculptures.
March 4th, 2009 at 7:36 pm
segue-
i think i’m with you. your experience is probably twice mine (in years and in output -probably much, much more of the latter
i left sculpture, ceramics, and poetry for science -in the day to day, anyway!) and i sense HiellaGuru’s is less. and that doesn’t make me disapproving or a censor of his/her “piece,” it’s just not what i would have done, not now.
so HiellaGuru have fun, see where it takes you
March 4th, 2009 at 7:40 pm
HiellaGuru is not art she dosent even exist, she may well be an artist but her fluids are discreet.
March 4th, 2009 at 7:53 pm
Duchamp took to playing chess and did so with a plum.
March 4th, 2009 at 7:55 pm
I drove him to it. Generally speaking she drives one crazy and one cant help oneself.
March 4th, 2009 at 7:59 pm
Hiella is a concept by which one measures ones pane.
March 4th, 2009 at 8:02 pm
Sorry I havent been myself lately… “I’ll be back”.
March 4th, 2009 at 8:09 pm
But of course we’ll never survive unless we get a little bit crazy. I mean shes got to be pulling my leg or is she pulling hers?
March 4th, 2009 at 8:28 pm
No really i’m back, though not for good, I hope. Nothing like losing oneself for a while, its a pity one cant make a permanent departure and simply become selfless. I cant help feeling sorry for that poor distributed being. One thing i’m sure of they had potential. The distributed being in question was in a terrible state when he told his tale. He was mopped up with the others. Must leave now… but… “I’ll be back”.
March 4th, 2009 at 9:32 pm
130. lo – “i left sculpture, ceramics, and poetry for science”
I did the opposite! well…no…I double majored in art (concentration in oil painting) and biology (to be biochem) and simply dropped the biology.
129. quicksilvermad
I suggest checking ahead of time to see if Mark Jenkins is “exhibiting” before you go back to DC then. Most of his stuff is much more whimsical but occasionally one or two still scare me. Once I saw what I thought was a homeless guy in a blue hoodie sitting against a building and I thought “hmm, no beard…” and when I tried to look at his face as I was dropping some change and THERE WAS NOTHING THERE.
127. segue – “seriously is the wrong word for something which brings such joy and playfulness to my life”
But seriously, I understand. …It’s that yearning for creative challenge, comfort of being in my element and relishing the joy of making something I’m really proud of – that’s what gets me up in the morning.
Serious is the right word! Serious about finding joy and playfulness!
March 4th, 2009 at 9:45 pm
138. gabi319: Oh dear God… That is really freakish. I live in the DC Metro area and I tend to hang out in the National Portrait Gallery (I sit in the sculpture rooms and sketch) rather than the Hirshorn or the Eastern Wing of the Smithsonian Gallery. Mainly because I’m more a fan of portraits in general. I’m an illustrator/graphic designer just three weeks away from graduating with my BFA. I’ve never really been able to enjoy “modern art” as my personal gestalt is geared more toward Rockwell, Vermeer, and the daddy of all photorealists: Chuck Close.
Chuck has a paper pulp version of “Philip” on display in the “modern” section of the National Portrait Gallery (right across from another freaky Duane Hansen piece). I long ago made a solemn vow to see at least one of Chuck’s earlier nine foot portraits (the ones he did with just an eraser, a knife, and a tube of black paint) in person. His paper pulp work is close (from far away), but I want to be able to feel that punch in the chest of awe like I did with the first Norman Rockwell painting I saw.
March 4th, 2009 at 10:38 pm
139. quicksilvermad
O RLY?! I live around the area too! But when I can sneak into DC I usually gravitate between the East and West wing of National Gallery – ESPECIALLY on the weekdays because there’s less people to bother me. During summertime in middle school, I’d take art workshops and we’d take a Saturday to spend at the Gallery to wander, sketch, whatever. Without fail, half of us would come back with stories about how we’d be sketching and some tourist would either stand behind us and watch our every move or worse, stand next to or in front of the art, I suppose in hopes of being “drawn in”. I had the second. He must have stood there for nearly five minutes in what I assume was his thoughtful superman pose. Too bad I was sketching the piece next to the one he thought I was drawing.
I occasionally go to the Hirshorn just to see what’s going on in contemporary life but…meh. For some reason, the interior just seems so…depressing. I THINK I’ve seen that Chuck Close you talk about but wasn’t there a really really huge Chuck Close there? I could’ve sworn I had seen a huge Close self portrait there but it’s been a while since I’ve been to NPG so I might be confusing it with a different gallery… Were you there to see Stephen Colbert’s painting? I saw the tv segment about it and thought it was hilarious. They placed it between the men’s and women’s bathrooms and he was so proud because “it was the most visited portrait in the whole gallery.”
I can’t really say if I have a particular favorite painter because of my profession as a visual alchemist (technically scenic artist but I think visual alchemist sounds cooler). I make wood look like brick, foam look like rock and pvc pipe look like tree and the occasional painting-of-different-genres reproduction work that kind of demands me to be a jack of all trades in paint styles which kind of bled into a jack of all trades in terms of style and artist preferences…hence, there really isn’t much I won’t dismiss. But modern art was a hard one to venture into, so I definitely know what you’re saying! Congrats on almost graduating! You’re in a really good place to graduate; There’s a HUGE market here for graphic design.
March 4th, 2009 at 11:14 pm
140. gabi319: Oh man, I hate it when people hover when I’m sketching. They pace “nonchalantly” behind me for about ten minutes before I get tired of them and slap my sketchbook shut. I could spend all day in the NPG—it’s so huge—but my feet end up killing me after five hours.
I think they moved the other Chuck Close. Or it could have been in the Eastern Gallery for a while. I haven’t been back there since the Dada exhibit (and fulfilled every artist’s life quotient of seeing a Pollock, a Rothko, a Picasso, and a Caulder) so I guess I should check it out again. I go during the week as well and plan on doing the “gallery rounds” right after graduation. When it’s slightly warmer. Our portfolio show is actually on March 26th at the National Building Museum (quite the name, huh?).
I got to see the Colbert Portrait twice. I did a dorky photo with me holding up his book next to it. And this is the Close piece they have on display.
I’ve got two words for my personal “worst” example of “modern art.” Barnett Newman and his “12 Stations of the Cross.” It’s just twelve blank canvases. I have never understood how a blank canvas can be considered art.
March 4th, 2009 at 11:53 pm
138. gabi319-
well, i spent 2 years majoring in fine arts studio with an english minor beginning back in 1998. then i spent a year and a half as a ceramics TA/general studio assistant at another college where i wasn’t enrolled -i wasn’t in school at all at the time (hired based on portfolio and enthusiasm). then life took me many other places, now i’m back in school studying botany and plant & soil sciences with an end interest in non-traditional/urban & tropical agriculture.
i never gave up on loving and seeing art in my life, i just found something else to do that i also loved
and traveling and learning other trades just allowed me to see the art in even more of life’s strange realities.
March 5th, 2009 at 7:57 am
Bizarre! No doubt one is familiar with the erudition and sublime output of GG Allin.
A matchless performance artist that would put Andres Serrano to shame.
‘Madonna and Child II’ is simply breathtaking. In fact so shocking is the imagery that I have yet to catch my breath. Deeply disturbing Halo’s counterpoint innocente marbelesque ephemerati immersed in urinic gold. “Lay off the coke Andres try Acid” it seems he took my advice.
Allin has always been staunchly conservative, drawn to minimalism at an early age, he progressed rapidly to Neo Dadaism before finally finding his niche in “Performance Art”.
March 5th, 2009 at 8:15 am
I’m quite fond of blank canvases. The blank canvas is an attempt to have the last word on minimalism. However, since I have that “honour” it smacks of primate. He may argue a case of “conceptual” validation, but i’d take him apart. I display blank canvases sometimes and invite people to paint whatever they can’t paint. Kids love it.
March 5th, 2009 at 8:26 am
Now for something completely different….
“Deconstructional Mathemathics In Bra & Panties”. owes absoloutely nothing to Surrealism and wouldnt pay up if it did!
Deconstructional mathemathics is basically a method of philosophical and literary language which emphasizes the internal workings of language and conceptual systems, the relational quality of meaning and the assumptions implicit in forms of expression applied to mathemathical structure for which an empirical model is required. Perhaps this is oversimplistic…
When I first “saw” this conceptual masterpiece it didnt add up… It took a later work “The 21 dimentions Of Sal.” to convince me that it had effectively Deconstructed Surrealism.
Is it conceptual one may ask? Well not exactly. Its really a study of Relativistic Inconceptual Realism and as such belongs to this category. However, I feel the work itself would not take umbrage for being panned as “Conceptual” being more concerned with its attire.
Arthur Gobb (Art) and Hans Spittel (Flemish) both agreed that it was a “travesty of justice” which is not to be confused with Spittels “Travesty of Justice et Julienne” which Gobb has condemned as “a culinary distraction”. There damnably difficult to work with always at one anothers throats, its pathetic.
March 5th, 2009 at 8:43 am
142. lo
Weird, mine’s the COMPLETE opposite! Two years into Bio major right before redefining it into a biochem major (how they preferred to do things at that place) BUT I had to drop it because the Graphic design department stipulates that you cannot be a double major. It was a hard choice and though I love science, art has always been had the strongest pull on me regardless of whatever else I get involved in. That’s all pointless now since I dropped GD and went to visual art. I always said I’d give myself five years to see if I found this job worthwhile and if not I’d go back to school for biochem. Sometimes I think I’d go back to school part time even if I plan to stick with scenic art because on occasion, I do miss the rigid structure of the Scientific Method, haha
141. quicksilvermad
I am very familiar with Barnett…he doesn’t do anything for me either…but I’ll try to shed some light on his m.o. to see if that opens up a small level of understanding why he does what he does. Barnett (and a number of other artists like Frankenthaler, Stella) seem to play more mechanics than artists in the traditional sense. They don’t focus on the world surrounding them (basically art before 20th century), they don’t focus on surrounding world in a new perspective (impresssionist, post-modern, etc.), they don’t create art to explore the mind (Pollock, Dali, etc.) but rather take a mechanical engineering approach to art by simply studying what they have (i.e. the canvas, the paint, the brush). They create solely through those materials to explore the possibilities with just what is given to them rather than complicating it with what they consider are unnecessaries. In their minds (and technically, the goal of much of the art journey in the 19th and 20th century) the purest possible art that can be created. But again speaking technically, while purest that can be physically sought, it’s still not the its true purest form. Just as pure thought goes through some alterations on its journey from brain to mouth, there’s still something lost from creative idea to creative expression, which is why some artists are still seeking to find new ways to further the groundwork Barnett had explored.
March 5th, 2009 at 8:48 am
Quicksilver:
Brett Favre Packer Jersey?!?! oh you better hide that one, haha… I was living in Milwaukee when the Colbert painting was up (ONLY reason why I missed taking my picture with it). Just as the community mourned when he decided to retire (mourned, I mean truly MOURNED…the atmosphere was depressing)…they put as much energy into scorn and a little bit of anger at Favre’s decision to come back.
March 5th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
Damien Hirst better known as “Charles Saatchi’s barrel-organ monkey” ref item 1.
On 10 September 2002, on the eve of the first anniversary of the 9/11 World Trade Center attacks, Hirst said in an interview with BBC News Online:
“The thing about 9/11 is that it’s kind of like an artwork in its own right … Of course, it’s visually stunning and you’ve got to hand it to them on some level because they’ve achieved something which nobody would have ever have thought possible – especially to a country as big as America. So on one level they kind of need congratulating, which a lot of people shy away from, which is a very dangerous thing.”
Of course he later apologised they always do!
On one occasion he attempted to emulate GG Allin by putting a cigarette in the end of his apendage in front of journalists. Unfortunately it wasnt lighted and was inserted the wrong way.
Poor Damien “A dedicated follower of fashion.”
March 5th, 2009 at 12:56 pm
I guess what Damien would like to say as indeed would many modern artists is that Hitler was an artist. Why so shy?
Certainly a lot went into his “work”! Perhaps we’ll be the next exhibit.
March 5th, 2009 at 1:08 pm
Of course things are not always pretty but theres a difference between Saving private Ryan, The Grey Zone…
and saying “Way to go mate”.
March 5th, 2009 at 1:15 pm
Many raise the question of freedom of expression. It would seem that this freedom extends to crucifying anyone that has the audacity to embrace life… “I’ll be back”
March 5th, 2009 at 1:37 pm
So maybe this isnt rocknroll but then it isnt genocide either. “Art” is a “creative” mechanism. Truth is lies… Freedom is slavery… ring any bells? We’ll be the first to go.
March 5th, 2009 at 2:02 pm
These rather bizarre creatures would be very much at home as camp administrators, fortunately they do have this avenue of pretence to vent their frustration… ouvre le chein…
March 5th, 2009 at 2:07 pm
Theres only one question… Albert Camus implies in the “Myth of Sisphus” Live or Die or put another way Love or Hate or put another way create or destroy.
Camus is perhaps the most underated Philosopher and writer of the twentieth century.
March 5th, 2009 at 2:12 pm
A. R. Rahman made his choice (a matter of public record) and while I cant abide his airtel number… I mean its so sickly.. he made a choice hes not going to regret… Some good songs too, nothing terribly deep.
March 5th, 2009 at 2:17 pm
I’d quite like “Damiens Head” a conceptual piece though admittedly not one of my best… which consists of Damiens rotting head infused with live maggots and dead flies. Pretty much the state its in at the moment… “I’ll be back.”
March 5th, 2009 at 2:38 pm
Well thats certainly a point, but how can you kill something thats dead already!
March 5th, 2009 at 2:40 pm
Modern Art, Post Modern Art, dead and buried.
March 5th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
A clue…
“Full Throttle”, an unambiguous depiction of avant gaurd eclecticism. The use of suffused black unashamedly delineating the raw power of an antique enfield voluptuously consuming a robust conceptual skyline.
Eruditely applied rapid fire brushwork pulsates outwardly from this curious canvas.
Use the technique, paint it if you like it.
March 5th, 2009 at 3:06 pm
The concept isnt the paint, it isnt the media, these are the tools used to put it to rest.
March 5th, 2009 at 3:10 pm
Neither can I and I wouldnt if I could.
Not being able to paint is a distinct advantage since it enables one to paint what one cant paint.
In other words one has complete freedom of expression.
March 5th, 2009 at 3:17 pm
The most valued possession of an artist is ones integrity, lose that and one loses ones art. Duchamp lost his so he took to playing chess. In other words he could no longer be honest about his work. He did the right thing in continuing to be honest about himself.
March 5th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
I have reason to believe there is life on Alpha Centauri does any one have a telescope large enough to confirm the observation? Must leave now… but… “i’ll be back”.
March 6th, 2009 at 5:46 am
147. gabi319: *SHAME* Oh, please do not judge me for my Favre jersey. I mourned as well—more when Reggie White retired (and even more when he passed)—but still… I’ve been a Packers fan since I was a kid and finally had enough to get the jersey. Then he goes and “retires.”
Then joins the Jets.
And I hang my head in shame.
But at least I got a major portion of actual portfolio work done yesterday. That’s a load off my shoulders.
March 6th, 2009 at 8:42 am
Dan Sly, Stella Plop:
gee, thanks for letting me know I am schizophrenic… I’m sure my doctors are completely incompetent for never picking that up…*sarcasm sarcasm sarcasm*
In case you didn’t read the above posts, it’s a conceptual piece involving stream of consciousness. We haven’t necessarily agreed with any of it but a number of young artists simply feel the idealistic need to “go against the grain” and “attempt the ‘new’ and ‘original’”. She isn’t harming anyone so why not indulge her fancy?
164. quicksilvermad
hey, no shame. My dad’s a diehard skins fan so saying I liked Favre was kinda not allowed but that Seattle game last year kinda cinched it for me – I actually asked for a Favre jersey for my birthday last year, haha. I had the poor timing to ask the day before he officially retired so I definitely was not getting one. But it was a great game and my friends back here got to see how I did things in MLK.
I hope your portfolio show goes well! I’m not sure how things go from a week to week basis, but if it’s open to the public, I’ll try to stop by!
March 7th, 2009 at 9:33 am
~sigh~ I can see hell is still frozen over. So, I’ll be back. I’ll be back. I’ll be back. I’ll be back. I’ll be back. I’ll be back. I’ll be back. I’ll be back.
March 7th, 2009 at 11:10 am
segue-
no.
but apparently this list’s content section has become an art house chatroom.
or did i stumble into another dimension? *blinks*
no f’ing clue what most of the preceding comments have to do w/ this list.
think we need a list of ‘top 10 lists w/ comment sections that have totally gone off topic’ or something like that.
*sigh* apparently some folks have nothing better to do or worse yet, commandeer sites for free for their own use.
March 7th, 2009 at 11:24 am
Cyn, it’s as if someone who can’t *do* art has decided to *become* art, and failed miserably. Someone needs a dog.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:17 pm
167. Cyn – ‘top 10 lists w/ comment sections that have totally gone off topic’
Only 10? Good luck picking out ONLY 10!
March 7th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
segue – or a blog they pay for to post their ‘art’
gabi- ‘10′ being an arbituary #
& actually, lotta lists have drifted…considerably…but then either returned to the ‘essence’ of the original list or simply died due to lack of attention. i’m thinking of lists w/ comment sections that have evolved into whole different life forms *wink wink nudge nudge*
& thankfully not too many of those…..yet.
March 20th, 2009 at 9:12 pm
I’m pretty sure “My Bed” is a reference to Robert Rauschenberg’s work of the same title…
http://www.moma.org/collection/browse_results.php?criteria=O%3AAD%3AE%3A4823&page_number=4&template_id=1&sort_order=1
March 21st, 2009 at 11:53 am
171. agrivatedplatypus: Being very familiar with Rauschenberg’s work, I’d say you were right.
I used to go to his gallery openings at Gemini GEL, oh, so long ago. I knew that whole crowd, if only peripherally, but enough to get invited to private showings.
So long ago, so far away.
May 23rd, 2009 at 7:32 pm
Hieronymus Bosch has to be #1 and as an earlier poster said Geiger and of course Dali, art as they say; is in the eye of the beholder but the glorious minds which conceive them…aah…beauty!
May 23rd, 2009 at 7:56 pm
173. lostatsea: art as they say; is in the eye of the beholder…
****
Or, as the old joke goes, Art is a window washer in Seattle.
July 27th, 2009 at 7:58 am
The video for #3 – Bend IT was extremely trippy.
August 28th, 2009 at 8:50 am
Hmm, having bashed modern art for years, I’d actually love to have a good look at Hirst’s shark. But its the sort of thing that should be in a museum not an art gallery.
The problem with modern art is that there is rarely any sense of accomplishment in the productions.
Von Hagens stuff is possibly the most seminal work.
September 3rd, 2009 at 6:47 pm
Believe it or not, but Marcel Duchamps Fountain is voted as the most inspiring art in conceptual art ever
September 15th, 2009 at 4:45 pm
Art? Please…. A toilet? A dead shark? Meat? A dirty bed?
November 1st, 2009 at 10:55 pm
I love the work of the Body Worlds exhibit. I saw it while it was in my hometown and it was stunning and spectacular. It was bizarre, but so beautiful. An incredible view of the human body. Awesome job for including it!