The Great Art Debate

If you have a life outside of BWFC, then this is the place to tell us all about your toilet habits, and those bizarre fetishes.......

Moderator: Zulus Thousand of em

Post Reply
User avatar
Hoboh
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 13656
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 8:19 am

Re: The Great Art Debate

Post by Hoboh » Tue Mar 18, 2014 6:25 pm

Bruce Rioja wrote:
TANGODANCER wrote: This painting of a ruined castle is, to me,....a painting of a ruined castle.
Indeed. A took this pic (sorry PB ;) ) during my visit to MoMA. It is NOTHING other than two course o' bricks.

Image

Image :roll:
That floor looks quality

User avatar
Bruce Rioja
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 38742
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 9:19 pm
Location: Drifting into the arena of the unwell.

Re: The Great Art Debate

Post by Bruce Rioja » Tue Mar 18, 2014 7:00 pm

William the White wrote:
TANGODANCER wrote:
William the White wrote:I'm devastated that seven of the eight of the original Equivalent series were destroyed.

Though the recreation of Equivalent V - albeit in different brick - is certainly to be celebrated. You must have felt awed and humble to have been there, Bruce.

I hope you didn't use flash to take the picture.
"Equivalent V throws the surroundings into focus".......Does that mean the Whickes finest floor panels the bricks are laid on? :|
I don't think it means very much. But, obviously, I'm sorry that Bruce didn't include more of the surroundings so that we could see how they are thrown into focus. It looks to me as though they have bee installed with that possibility. That you could view the work of art from any side, or any angle. From the corners, crouching, kneeling or even lying on the floor. And Bruce really should have had the artistic sensitivity to have done this, or we have no chance of seeing the different focii available to the viewer.
I'll nip you down to B&Q, Will. I'll be able to recreate the whole thing in three minutes. Cost to you, Sir? A bargain £25K ;)
May the bridges I burn light your way

User avatar
Bruce Rioja
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 38742
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 9:19 pm
Location: Drifting into the arena of the unwell.

Re: The Great Art Debate

Post by Bruce Rioja » Tue Mar 18, 2014 7:44 pm

Here's some more absolute shite that I pictured.

Three paper bags, Ladies and Gentlemen?

Image

Or maybe some inflatable animals?

Image

Who could possibly resist a sheet of glass on wheels? (I'm sure you can buy these at IKEA)

Image

The most baffling one though - how come they had Jackson Pollock's studio floor on display, but none of his paintings? :conf:

Image
May the bridges I burn light your way

User avatar
Prufrock
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 24832
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:51 pm

Re: The Great Art Debate

Post by Prufrock » Tue Mar 18, 2014 8:20 pm

Bruce Rioja wrote:
TANGODANCER wrote: This painting of a ruined castle is, to me,....a painting of a ruined castle.
Indeed. A took this pic (sorry PB ;) ) during my visit to MoMA. It is NOTHING other than two course o' bricks.

Image

Image :roll:

"Positioned to echo the horizontality of the floor". Firstly, :vomit: . Secondly, as opposed to what? How the feck else do you position a shit load of bricks?

What a crock of shit.
In a world that has decided
That it's going to lose its mind
Be more kind, my friends, try to be more kind.

User avatar
Lost Leopard Spot
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 18436
Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 11:14 am
Location: In the long grass, hunting for a watering hole.

Re: The Great Art Debate

Post by Lost Leopard Spot » Tue Mar 18, 2014 8:47 pm

Two million pounds sterling, in 1974 or thereabouts. That's how much Carl Andre valued the damage caused by Reuben taking one brick out and taking it for a walk. It goes beyond a crock o shite, it's in the realm of Quatari bribery and corruption.
That's not a leopard!
頑張ってください

LeverEnd
Legend
Legend
Posts: 9969
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2012 11:18 pm
Location: Dirty Leeds

Re: The Great Art Debate

Post by LeverEnd » Tue Mar 18, 2014 9:41 pm

Prufrock wrote: "Positioned to echo the horizontality of the floor". Firstly, :vomit: . Secondly, as opposed to what? How the feck else do you position a shit load of bricks?

What a crock of shit.
hahahaha! you beat me to it, that was my favourite!
...

User avatar
Montreal Wanderer
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 12948
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 12:45 am
Location: Montreal, Canada

Re: The Great Art Debate

Post by Montreal Wanderer » Tue Mar 18, 2014 10:42 pm

mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:
Bruce Rioja wrote::roll:
"Horizontality"

:hang:
Leaving aside all the pseudo-intellectual babble, horizontality is a good word.... (though perhaps not in this context).
"If you cannot answer a man's argument, all it not lost; you can still call him vile names. " Elbert Hubbard.

User avatar
TANGODANCER
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 44175
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 9:35 pm
Location: Between the Bible, Regency and the Rubaiyat and forever trying to light penny candles from stars.

Re: The Great Art Debate

Post by TANGODANCER » Tue Mar 18, 2014 11:06 pm

Montreal Wanderer wrote:
mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:
Bruce Rioja wrote::roll:
"Horizontality"

:hang:
Leaving aside all the pseudo-intellectual babble, horizontality is a good word.... (though perhaps not in this context).
I'm struggling to think of a reason for ever needing to use it Monty? If something's horizontal (or even not), why not just say so?
Si Deus pro nobis, quis contra nos?

LeverEnd
Legend
Legend
Posts: 9969
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2012 11:18 pm
Location: Dirty Leeds

Re: The Great Art Debate

Post by LeverEnd » Wed Mar 19, 2014 12:19 am

TANGODANCER wrote:
Montreal Wanderer wrote:
mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:
Bruce Rioja wrote::roll:
"Horizontality"

:hang:
Leaving aside all the pseudo-intellectual babble, horizontality is a good word.... (though perhaps not in this context).
I'm struggling to think of a reason for ever needing to use it Monty? If something's horizontal (or even not), why not just say so?
Quite. I'm off to achieve horizontality right now, night all.
...

mummywhycantieatcrayons
Legend
Legend
Posts: 7192
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 12:31 pm
Location: London

Re: The Great Art Debate

Post by mummywhycantieatcrayons » Wed Mar 19, 2014 12:45 am

TANGODANCER wrote:
Montreal Wanderer wrote:
mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:
Bruce Rioja wrote::roll:
"Horizontality"

:hang:
Leaving aside all the pseudo-intellectual babble, horizontality is a good word.... (though perhaps not in this context).
I'm struggling to think of a reason for ever needing to use it Monty? If something's horizontal (or even not), why not just say so?
It does sound like the basis of a winning chat up line.
Prufrock wrote: Like money hasn't always talked. You might not like it, or disagree, but it's the truth. It's a basic incentive, people always have, and always will want what's best for themselves and their families

User avatar
Montreal Wanderer
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 12948
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 12:45 am
Location: Montreal, Canada

Re: The Great Art Debate

Post by Montreal Wanderer » Wed Mar 19, 2014 3:37 am

TANGODANCER wrote:
Montreal Wanderer wrote:
mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:
Bruce Rioja wrote::roll:
"Horizontality"

:hang:
Leaving aside all the pseudo-intellectual babble, horizontality is a good word.... (though perhaps not in this context).
I'm struggling to think of a reason for ever needing to use it Monty? If something's horizontal (or even not), why not just say so?
Well, it means the condition of being horizontal which is not quite the same thing as horizontal. A person can be stupid, but what is the condition of being stupid? Well, stupidity I guess. Although I will allow that horizontality is not in common usage, while stupidity seems quite common. :wink:
"If you cannot answer a man's argument, all it not lost; you can still call him vile names. " Elbert Hubbard.

User avatar
Bruce Rioja
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 38742
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 9:19 pm
Location: Drifting into the arena of the unwell.

Re: The Great Art Debate

Post by Bruce Rioja » Wed Mar 19, 2014 8:50 am

One must also consider the state of resultant horizontality post-decking for being a pretentious c*nt.
May the bridges I burn light your way

Beefheart
Passionate
Passionate
Posts: 2918
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 6:36 pm

Re: The Great Art Debate

Post by Beefheart » Wed Mar 19, 2014 10:15 am

I'm determined to get the word 'horizontality' into some sort of business meeting now.

User avatar
Lost Leopard Spot
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 18436
Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 11:14 am
Location: In the long grass, hunting for a watering hole.

Re: The Great Art Debate

Post by Lost Leopard Spot » Wed Mar 19, 2014 11:51 am

Beefheart wrote:I'm determined to get the word 'horizontality' into some sort of business meeting now.
How about... "You will note that the graphic line within the sustainibilty report shows a determined horizontality that flies in the face of our stated strategic objectives. We need to double our workforce unit output within the relevant parameters associated with positive sustainable objectivity in order to up the verticality." 8)
That's not a leopard!
頑張ってください

William the White
Legend
Legend
Posts: 8454
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 10:43 pm
Location: Trotter Shop

Re: The Great Art Debate

Post by William the White » Wed Mar 19, 2014 3:33 pm

Further study of the art work, and its complexity is starting to reveal itself to me.

There are two distinct horizontalities held in tension. The flooral horizontality is disturbed, challenged, perhaps, by the bricks laid in the opposite direction.

In this way the artist has created a directionality that is at odds with horizontality, both contending with and enhancing the complexity of the work. I'm unsure whether this is an ironic comment on either, or both, but I suspect so. In which case the work has subversive comicality directly challenging the seeming brutality of its initial appearance.

User avatar
Lost Leopard Spot
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 18436
Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 11:14 am
Location: In the long grass, hunting for a watering hole.

Re: The Great Art Debate

Post by Lost Leopard Spot » Wed Mar 19, 2014 3:50 pm

flooral? :evil:
That's not a leopard!
頑張ってください

User avatar
Bruce Rioja
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 38742
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 9:19 pm
Location: Drifting into the arena of the unwell.

Re: The Great Art Debate

Post by Bruce Rioja » Wed Mar 19, 2014 3:56 pm

William the White wrote:Further study of the art work, and its complexity is starting to reveal itself to me.

There are two distinct horizontalities held in tension. The flooral horizontality is disturbed, challenged, perhaps, by the bricks laid in the opposite direction.

In this way the artist has created a directionality that is at odds with horizontality, both contending with and enhancing the complexity of the work. I'm unsure whether this is an ironic comment on either, or both, but I suspect so. In which case the work has subversive comicality directly challenging the seeming brutality of its initial appearance.

It's two course o' bricks.
May the bridges I burn light your way

William the White
Legend
Legend
Posts: 8454
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 10:43 pm
Location: Trotter Shop

Re: The Great Art Debate

Post by William the White » Wed Mar 19, 2014 3:58 pm

Lost Leopard Spot wrote:flooral? :evil:
clearly the correct adjective when discussing the hozontality of floors...

William the White
Legend
Legend
Posts: 8454
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 10:43 pm
Location: Trotter Shop

Re: The Great Art Debate

Post by William the White » Wed Mar 19, 2014 3:59 pm

Bruce Rioja wrote:
William the White wrote:Further study of the art work, and its complexity is starting to reveal itself to me.

There are two distinct horizontalities held in tension. The flooral horizontality is disturbed, challenged, perhaps, by the bricks laid in the opposite direction.

In this way the artist has created a directionality that is at odds with horizontality, both contending with and enhancing the complexity of the work. I'm unsure whether this is an ironic comment on either, or both, but I suspect so. In which case the work has subversive comicality directly challenging the seeming brutality of its initial appearance.

It's two course o' bricks.
but has so much more to offer than a damp proof course...

User avatar
Bruce Rioja
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 38742
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 9:19 pm
Location: Drifting into the arena of the unwell.

Re: The Great Art Debate

Post by Bruce Rioja » Wed Mar 19, 2014 4:08 pm

William the White wrote:
Bruce Rioja wrote:
William the White wrote:Further study of the art work, and its complexity is starting to reveal itself to me.

There are two distinct horizontalities held in tension. The flooral horizontality is disturbed, challenged, perhaps, by the bricks laid in the opposite direction.

In this way the artist has created a directionality that is at odds with horizontality, both contending with and enhancing the complexity of the work. I'm unsure whether this is an ironic comment on either, or both, but I suspect so. In which case the work has subversive comicality directly challenging the seeming brutality of its initial appearance.

It's two course o' bricks.
but has so much more to offer than a damp proof course...
Not if your house is damp.
May the bridges I burn light your way

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Prufrock and 15 guests