18 September 2009

Modern art continues to amaze me

The doughnuts and hyacinth still life is offered as a 30x40" print. The dribbling glass of milk is a "unique" Polaroid, which presumably will enhance its rarity value. I am saddened to report that the giant ball of tinfoil is only a print rather than an objet d'art.

I am overwhelmed by the concepts involved and will defer from offering any personal commentary.

Credit (or blame) to Emily Keegan. Via Neatorama.


  1. I don't know if it's still there but there used to be an "objet d'art" at the Philadelphia Museum of Art that was a pile of dirt in a lucite box.I must admit that it was quite skillfully arranged as piles of dirt go. I wonder how much they paid for it. Maybe some wealthy patron donated it. What kind of tax credit does a pile of dirt get you?

  2. Does the phrase "The Emperor's New Art" mean anything here? Only there's not just one emperor, but a great many cultural little Napoleons, happy to point out how we, the unwashed masses, just don't get it. And, I suspect, a fair number of people humming the tune they don't know the words to because they don't want to appear to be bumpkins.

    see also Andy Rooney: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsfX6xqCBks

  3. That is both the beauty and the downfall of Contemporary Art (not to be confused with Modern Art, that is art from roughly 1840-1940); you, as an audience member has to do more than just look at it, you need to educate yourselves to the underlying theory and concept of the piece before you can fully evaluate it. That is the nature of a post-modern word.


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...