View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
BS.Dos.

Joined: 29 Mar 2007
|
Posted: Wed Jun 11, 2008 3:29 am Post subject: Should artists become more environmentally responsible? |
|
|
I've just been looking at this (not literally of course) and it got me thinking as to whether this type of art is environmentally justifiable.
Now, I'm neither critic nor philistine when it comes to passing judgment on societies wider cultural values, but, and having said that, I do very much support and enjoy art for it's own sake and if only as a vehicle for the generation of communication etc, but this particular piece only served to question my reasons for supporting such a view.
This piece could, for example, being making a valid (if somewhat absurd) environmental statement, but if it is, I fail to see it. I expect the materials will obviously be recycled etc or the piece itself was subject to some a strict LCA, but I'm not sure in this instance if the ends really justify the means. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Fishead soup
Joined: 24 Jun 2007 Location: Korea
|
Posted: Wed Jun 11, 2008 3:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Unfortunately Environmentalist artists make that conseptual crap that relies on a lot of Post-Modernist jargon to justify itself. It can't survive outside the gallery system and has very little commercial value, outside of investment.
You can blame the hippies for all this anti- commodification bollocks. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
mrgiles
Joined: 09 Jul 2007 Location: Seoul
|
Posted: Wed Jun 11, 2008 3:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
gosh darn yes those crazy hippies are at it again. they were probably smoking the pot too.
it's really tragic that art sometimes strives to be something other than a form of economic capital. it was never meant to be that way, right? aesthetics aeshmetics we say, right, fishead soup?
sure, artists should be environmentally responsible, but it's still gotta be thought provoking and valuable. in my opinion (and it's just my opinion), this means it shouldn't be some sort of bluntly didactic declamation forced down the audience's throat, but should try to be as subtle and complex as the issues themselves. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Fishead soup
Joined: 24 Jun 2007 Location: Korea
|
Posted: Wed Jun 11, 2008 4:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm sure Spiral Jetty by Robert Smithson did wonders for the Envirnment.
Uproot a lot of dirt and throw it in a lake. It was have disturbed the local ecosystem. Artists such stick to thing that cause less Enviromental problems like using oil paint and Turpentine and flushing it down the toilet.
Last edited by Fishead soup on Wed Jun 11, 2008 6:56 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
khyber
Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Compunction Junction
|
Posted: Wed Jun 11, 2008 5:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: |
Artists such stick to thing that cause less Enviromental problems like using oil paint and Turpentine and flushing it down the toilet. |
I hope your opinions of chemical manufacturers and oil processors is as enlightened. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Fishead soup
Joined: 24 Jun 2007 Location: Korea
|
Posted: Wed Jun 11, 2008 6:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
khyber wrote: |
Quote: |
Artists such stick to thing that cause less Enviromental problems like using oil paint and Turpentine and flushing it down the toilet. |
I hope your opinions of chemical manufacturers and oil processors is as enlightened. |
Then again in the fire of inspiration should an artist need to find a waste dump to dispose of his/her spoiled paint and dirty turpentine. It's better to throw it down the drain and rekindle the fire of creativity.
I'm sure Jackson Pollock, Willham De kooning, would have agreed. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|