| Submit your comments on this article |
| Europe |
| *snicker* Janitor Mistakes 'Art' for Trash (I sympathize, heh) |
| 2004-08-28 |
| via Wash Times Cleaner throws out bag of trash in artwork August 28, 2004 LONDON, England, Aug. 27 (UPI) -- A janitor at a London museum threw away a bag full of paper and cardboard, not realizing that it was part of a work of art. Recreation of First Public Demonstration of Auto-Destructive Art by Gustav Metzger was part of an exhibit Art and the 60s at the Tate Britain gallery. Metzger has since replaced the bag, the BBC reports. Metzger, now 78, invented auto-destructive art in 1959. The work also includes a piece of nylon that is gradually eaten away by acid. The gallery told the BBC that the work is now covered at night and that museum staff have been told that the rubbish is part of the art. Metzger is not the first modern artist to have confused housekeepers. A work that consisted of a pile of beer bottles and other trash was thrown out at a London gallery while a conscientious janitor in Germany scrubbed out a dirty bathtub that was part of a gallery installation. Lol! Make that man / woman an honorary simplisme American. Trash is trash. Get a clue, Gustav, you're a twit. |
| Posted by:.com |
| #22 My wife, a colleague, and my son made a mural of Mt. Susitna (the Sleeping Lady across from Anchorage) under a midnight sky on the double width garage door on our log house. |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul 2004-08-29 12:45:18 PM |
| #21 Damn Lucky! Way good! I'm still trying to watercolor a green canoe on its side on the patio in the rain. 14 tries... none get the gray green air color right. It's the oaks and moss deal. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2004-08-29 12:27:48 PM |
| #20 And to add to that. I have painted many civil war battle scenes. trying to capture the vivid stories I have read. But the most compelling pieces I have done are imposters. Remakes of sketches by Alfred Waud. His compositions are genious. Throw the paint down and they stare. Yes the color, brushwork, light even my adjustments to the composition. But the genious was done by a genious. I just glomned on. I have some good compositions. Sold some, been commisioned some. But I'm in awe of the genious, I'm not that, and I'm okay with that too. |
| Posted by: Lucky 2004-08-29 12:37:51 AM |
| #19 I struggle with art. I paint stuff. A good painting is a good composition. A well painted piece means squat. A well constructed composition is hard. Really hard. Show a well painted, poorly constructed piece and people will blink and move on. Not only that they will pick out every flaw, miscue, and bump. But a compelling composition will grab the viewer, flaws be damned, how, why, who knows. But thats what an artist is after. A compelling piece. I'm not an art historian, but check out Vermeir. Thats why you need to listen to the Beachboys. "My darling your so fine." |
| Posted by: Lucky 2004-08-29 12:24:27 AM |
| #18 Hey, back off, man!!! I'm an auto destructive artist!!! |
| Posted by: tu3031 2004-08-28 2:04:18 PM |
| #17 Modern art and crap are the same thing! Too true, too often. Besides the elephant dung on the Madonna thing, there have several "art" works using this exquisite medium. These works, of course, tell us far more about the audience than the "artists". |
| Posted by: Xbalanke 2004-08-28 1:40:34 PM |
| #16 NOOOOO, I passed the art test. Pray for me 12/16. |
| Posted by: incarnateofleeatwater 2004-08-28 1:20:42 PM |
| #15 Back in the old days the arts were supported by patrons, somebody who wanted the art enough to pay for it. The Church, the Medicis, that sort of thing. Now there is much less of a connection between the paycheck and the final art. |
| Posted by: RJ Schwarz 2004-08-28 12:12:32 PM |
| #14 I tried to google it up, but couldn't. Several years ago there was an incident wherein the patrons of an art gallery were admiring an "installation", and it turned out to be the maintenance man's tool cart. I flunked the art test, too, because I figured it was a trick question -- I thought they were all Art. I figured nothing was too stupid to be modern art (and I'm right). |
| Posted by: Plancks Constant 2004-08-28 12:10:24 PM |
| #13 Bulldog - I fear that they're wearing you down through habituation, heh. Keep your guard up - and enjoy the classics! |
| Posted by: .com 2004-08-28 11:16:44 AM |
| #12 9/16,I guess I'm not nuanced enough to know art when I see it. Wonder what that bag of trash would go for at a Southerby's auction? |
| Posted by: raptor 2004-08-28 10:07:12 AM |
| #11 Bombed out on the quiz too. Then the answer hit me. Modern art and crap are the same thing! How could I have been so dense? Crap. |
| Posted by: DLS 2004-08-28 9:25:13 AM |
| #10 The work also includes a piece of nylon that is gradually eaten away by acid. Damn! They've got to get that air conditioning leak fixed or the floor will be ruined! |
| Posted by: BigEd 2004-08-28 9:00:07 AM |
| #9 I flunked the "art test." I am a philistine I fear. |
| Posted by: Sock Puppet of Doom 2004-08-28 7:36:14 AM |
| #8 Reminds me of the Emperor's New Clothes story... Actually, I'm not as anti-modern art as I once was. The Tates attract vast crowds - and that helps alleviate overcrowding in the galleries hosting the good stuff. They're like sink traps for philistines. :) |
| Posted by: Bulldog 2004-08-28 5:10:07 AM |
| #7 I have had many, many art students in my geology classes over the years, most of whom had little interest in the subject but were desperately anxious to share their (mostly self-inflicted) internal torment with an uncaring world. My favorite, a genuinely talented if somewhat eccentric young chap, came to my lab (of all places) one day to show me his new creation, a 1/10 scale model guillotine. This was a perfect replica in every respect but the colors were off....and vividly bright. The wood was blue, the blade was orange and the numerous blood splotches were a hideous green shade. I asked what this meant and he asked me to turn on the ultraviolet lights. I did, and the colors turned true. He entered this wonder in a contest but his art instructor rejected it. The winner was a shopping cart full of empty grocery cans and boxes. |
| Posted by: Atomic Conspiracy 2004-08-28 5:03:24 AM |
| #6 Test your knowledge, take the "Art or Crap" test. |
| Posted by: Atomic Conspiracy 2004-08-28 4:45:17 AM |
| #5 Reminds me of the story about the art critics and professors who were invited to give their opinions on a work of modern 'art'. After they'd given their learned opinions and come to their conclusions, it was revealed that a chimpanzee had been trained to throw paint at the canvas and they were evaluating the result. (This could be an urban legend. I like to think it's true.) |
| Posted by: Bryan 2004-08-28 3:08:21 AM |
| #4 Millions of pompous nematodes mistake trash for art, so it is only natural that some honest working person would eventually turn the tables on them. See Brian Yoder's Art Gallery and Critic's Corner, where the amusingly opinionated neo-classicist Yoder castigates modern art, including a section on "bad art and non-art praised by various twentieth century charlatans". This section includes the works of such icons as Picasso and Jackson Pollack. |
| Posted by: Atomic Conspiracy 2004-08-28 1:31:47 AM |
| #3 I'm sure that with a year and a $100,000 grant, the artist can recreate the bag of trash. |
| Posted by: ed 2004-08-28 1:08:34 AM |
| #2 If you have to tell someone that your pile of trash is art, it clearly is not. True art can be seen without need for placards or signs reading "Not trash, please do not toss in the bin." Looking at something like Rembrandt's "Night Watch", there's no need to tell you it's art. |
| Posted by: Silentbrick 2004-08-28 12:53:24 AM |
| #1 If you can't tell whether it's art or not, it's not. (My pet theory is that "artists" are constantly trying to one-up one another to see how low they can go and still wow the art critics. So far they've never hit bottom.) |
| Posted by: PBMcL 2004-08-28 12:51:52 AM |