This Is Art?

[Lady's Human]

In 100 years will anyone remember him?

Probably not.

[Miss Z]

Sick? Yes, a little. But dead and decaying things are used by many artists across the globe. If people want to pay big money to see something from a dustbin and kid themselves there's some inspirational meaning to it, then they can do as they so please, I will not be joining them!

The thing that irks me about art like this is 'artists' can stick every day objects in an exhibit, give it a fancy title, and somebody with more money than sense will say they 'understand' it. It doesn't take a lot of talent, just wit. And there'll always be really, really talented people out there who can draw and paint and sculpt magnificently, yet they'll never taste the cash raked in by the guy who painted a blue square and labelled it 'To the end of infinity within the chasm of the mind' (made that up, lol ).

Guess I'm not very good at seeing with my mind.

[smokey the elder]

Well, relics of Saints were big business in the Middle Ages; this is different how?

[lizbud]

Well, relics of Saints were big business in the Middle Ages; this is different how?

What do you mean "big business" ?


Relics were kept in churchs & chapels as objects of reverence. They were
not displayed as Art.

[K9soul]

I find it disturbing. It seems to me some "artists" just try to find something macabre and shocking in order to gain an audience and a name rather than truly trying to create something artistic. I don't see a correlation between saint relics which, although they may have been a business and been used by swindlers, was supposed to represent a holy and sacred object. I also don't feel this has any purpose the way a scientific type exhibit does that shows what the inside of the human body and organs look like. That's how I see it.

[Jessika]

I don't know. I have mixed feelings. I wouldn't go see it, but then again I really really wanted to see The "Bodies" display when it was in Branson, Missouri. I'm actually kicking myself that I DIDN'T go see it. So... I'm not sure. Art is in the eye of the beholder.

[TamanduaGirl]

Stewie just hopes no one makes fun of his paintings. He tries really hard.


Actually in theory I might go see such a thing but in reality, who has time and money to waist on it. One of my favorite artists is Alexis Rockman. He did paintings of animals sewn together and other weird things. But they did make statements some being inspired by actual nasty lab experiments. He did some really pretty art too. So it would be of interest to see but it would be better if it were actual taxidermy of them or even use the new freeze dry process. There's no real skill to just sewing them and sticking them in jars.

[lady_zana]

Stewie just hopes no one makes fun of his paintings. He tries really hard.

Why would anyone make fun of Stewie and his work? It's beautiful and so is he! What a lovely and unique boy!

I can see the point between this and the saints' relics - most of the 'relics' were old bones dug from the trash or the hearts and gizzards of animals. I think it's the same as this in that people are willing to be okay with keeping thing and viewing things that we would find macrabe because we think there is a 'point' to them rather than just being something dead.

What do you mean "big business" ?


Relics were kept in churchs & chapels as objects of reverence. They were
not displayed as Art.

Actually, the relics could be bought by anyone. Pardoners (like in Chauncer's Canterbury Tales) would sell "Saints Toes" or hearts or pieces of clothing to peasants as a way to resolve them of their sins. Naturally, they weren't really the saint's toes - unless it's common for saints to have twenty toes on one foot! They'd need at least that many for all the peasants who bought one to have one!