Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Basically, the thing with the Fountain is that Duchamp and a bunch of his friends had set up an alternate, non-judgemental counterpart to the New York Art Shows, which were very elitist and judge-based. Also very corrupt and nepotistic.

Anyway, Duchamp wanted to challenge just how much his compatriots were actually open-minded and non-judgemental, so he submitted the Fountain. Then, when they predictably removed it, he resigned from their art circle in exaggerated shock and offense. It was that reaction, the satirical challenge he forced on them, that was the actual "art". The Fountain itself is just facilitating that. He was showing how they were hypocritical and focused on their alternativeness rather than being non-judging.

But it's also a piss-drinking joke because it's a urinal turned over and called a fountain.

[Spehss _]

OHMYGODPLEASETELLMEYOUSTILLHAVETHEWORLDIWANNAPLAYTHATSOBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD

Oh hai, I missed this.

Here's a link to the zip file I uploaded. readme.txt included with general info. Be prepared for weirdness.

[Dutchling]

Well, I didn't expect this.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

[Helgoland]

What's up with that anti-modern-art circlejerk in here? Now you've made me feel elitist.

[Xantalos]

What's up with that anti-modern-art circlejerk in here? Now you've made me feel elitist.

We somehow ended up defending Hitler's painting skills.

[MagmaMcFry]

Well, I didn't expect this.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Ah yes, a statistic with no background information whatsoever, sponsored by a biased organization, and published on the Internet. What a fine and trustworthy source of legit.

[Helgoland]

What's up with that anti-modern-art circlejerk in here? Now you've made me feel elitist.

We somehow ended up defending Hitler's painting skills.

Well, that's completely reasonable - I meant the other stuff...

[StupidElves]

I walked outside of the bathroom and my dog looked at me like "What died in there." Did it really smell THAT bad?

[Graknorke]

I walked outside of the bathroom and my dog looked at me like "What died in there." Did it really smell THAT bad?

Uh, SE...
I'm not sure if you knew this, but dogs can't speak.

[StupidElves]

I walked outside of the bathroom and my dog looked at me like "What died in there." Did it really smell THAT bad?

Uh, SE...
I'm not sure if you knew this, but dogs can't speak.

He looked at me, and the look told me that's what he was thinking. He didn't actually speak.

[hops]

Has your dog been looking at you like "I serve none but Korrok" lately?

[StupidElves]

No, he's been looking at me like "I serve none but the cat."

[Graknorke]

I walked outside of the bathroom and my dog looked at me like "What died in there." Did it really smell THAT bad?

Uh, SE...
I'm not sure if you knew this, but dogs can't speak.

He looked at me, and the look told me that's what he was thinking. He didn't actually speak.

Well I was going to find something about the emotional range of dogs, but then discovered that dog owners who take them to shows and stuff are apparently deficient in sanity. Saying that dogs can in fact understand English (as in, whole sentences and the meaning behind them), for example.

[scrdest]

What's up with that anti-modern-art circlejerk in here? Now you've made me feel elitist.

I actually like De Stijl. Whether this counts as art proper is another matter, but nonetheless.

Now regarding those stupid performance art things, I just thought of an interesting problem:

An artist makes something like the slashed toilet paper and claims that it's about the life problems of Mr. Jon Whateverson from Garden Ave. 23. But the piece itself does not, in itself, easily present that message. The meaning is non-obvious to an observer, even critics wouldn't know if the artist didn't tell them straight away.

So, there are two ways to treat it: traditional, which means it's a piece of garbage, because it doesn't present itself clearly, or postmodern, allowing you to excuse it as art.

Now here is the problem: if it IS to be interpreted as post-modern, how can the artist get away with claiming it has any specific meaning?

If you go structuralist, so TvTropes-style approach, it fails, because you cannot infer the meaning from art, if you go post-structuralist, it fails because it CANNOT have any meaning aside from that ascribed by the viewer.

So basically they are trying to have their cake and eat it.

[MagmaMcFry]

Now here is the problem: if it IS to be interpreted as post-modern, how can the artist get away with claiming it has any specific meaning?

That works because when average people are confronted by a confusing statement, they tend to believe they're not smart enough to understand it rather than consider that the author of the statement is talking bullshit. Ironically that makes them correct. Of course they then go ahead and assume the statement was smart to begin with, which isn't correct anymore.