conceptal art

[ironman]

Originally Posted by cooljamesx1

why is reliance on language a failure? also, there seems to be this idea floating around that conceptual art is supposed to make sense or say something...strange.

Hi, I think that work that relies on language is a failure because we make art which is imagery and that should be enough. If you want to be a writer, be one, if you want to be an artist, make art.
As far as making sense or saying something, conceptual art is about IDEAS, you can't have an idea about nothing and if it doesn't make sense, you can't get that idea across to the viewer.
Have a great day,
Jeff

[GlennT]

Perhaps CJx1 is on the verge of developing the next new thing, " non-conceptual art"

[rderr.com]

Originally Posted by GlennT

Perhaps CJx1 is on the verge of developing the next new thing, " non-conceptual art"

Your already behind. It is neo-non-contraception-oh sorry I thought this was about Madame VP-In-The-Making

RD

[cooljamesx1]

Originally Posted by ironman

Hi, I think that work that relies on language is a failure because we make art which is imagery and that should be enough. If you want to be a writer, be one, if you want to be an artist, make art.
As far as making sense or saying something, conceptual art is about IDEAS, you can't have an idea about nothing and if it doesn't make sense, you can't get that idea across to the viewer.
Have a great day,
Jeff

jesus that's like saying well we make pictures and paper and pencil should be enough

you can have ideas about nothing, hell nothing IS an idea.

what if not making sense is the idea?

[evaldart]

Originally Posted by cooljamesx1

jesus that's like saying well we make pictures and paper and pencil should be enough

you can have ideas about nothing, hell nothing IS an idea.

what if not making sense is the idea?

"Nothing" is not only an idea...it is probably a more pertinent one than "something". We only have a few senses, as yet, so "wonder" the real sixth sense, must be given a chance.

And "getting something accross" to someone else can be done by standard means of communication - why waste Art on that. Respect the Art and yourself...save it for the elevated (elevatING) matters.

[grommet]

conceptual art is an ultimate folly and a source of oxygen. Mental breathing space; a place to stretch a little. cause for smiles.
a few fun excerpts from wiki...

1953 : Robert Rauschenberg exhibits Erased De Kooning Drawing, a drawing by Willem De Kooning which Rauschenberg erased.

1957: Yves Klein, Aerostatic Sculpture (Paris). This was composed of 1001 blue balloons released into the sky from Galerie Iris Clert to promote his Le Vid exhibition. Klein also exhibited 'One Minute Fire Painting' which was a blue panel into which 16 firecrackers were set. Later in 1957 Klein declared that his paintings were now invisible and to prove it he exhibited an empty room. This exhibition was called 'The Surfaces and Volumes of Invisible Pictorial Sensibility'.

1960: The artist Stanley Brouwn declares that all the shoe shops in Amsterdam constitute an exhibition of his work. In Vancouver, Iain and Ingrid Baxter exhibited the contents of a four room apartment wrapped in plastic bags.
1961: Robert Rauschenberg sent a telegram to the Galerie Iris Clert which said: 'This is a portrait of Iris Clert if I say so.' as his contribution to an exhibition of portraits.
1961: Piero Manzoni exhibited tins of his own feces. He puts the tins on sale for their own weight in gold. He also sells his own breath (enclosed in balloons) as Bodies of Air, and signs people's bodies, thus declaring them to be living works of art either for all time or for specified periods of time (this depends on how much they are prepared to pay).
1962: Christo's Iron Curtain work. This consists of a barricade of oil barrels in a narrow Paris street which caused a large traffic jam. The artwork was not the barricade itself but the resulting traffic jam

[GlennT]

The posts I have made to this website and the responses elicited from others is my conceptual art, and I DEMAND PAYMENT NOW!

send checks to Fleecem and Floggem, Inc. PO Box 00, Nutindoin, RU, 241special

[grommet]

Glenn, I swallowed some peacock-blue ink and some pepper and am envisioning the number 4628 as I sneeze on a starter check that I printed on a piece of dryer sheet for the Bank of the Collective Unconscious. I will attach this to a paper airplane with instructions for the person who finds it to keep flying it toward Minnesota and add their own check to the plane. You should be rich shortly. You may all send payment for my conceptual payment by return airplane or virtual conveyance of choice.
Oh yeah, the art is the mark the plane leaves as evidence of its landing on hands, cement, cars, bichons, etc. The ink is very slow drying (and tastes like wintergreen)

[evaldart]

Yep, see, conceptual Art is candy, cartoons, tricks, riddles, jokes, never even a conundrum - "The Far Side" - damn fun. But NOBODY will take it with them to oblivion...there you will need the important stuff.

[cooljamesx1]

Originally Posted by evaldart

NOBODY will take it with them to oblivion...there you will need the important stuff.

oh evaldart you're maybe the most religious person i know of

[cooljamesx1]

Originally Posted by GlennT

The posts I have made to this website and the responses elicited from others is my conceptual art, and I DEMAND PAYMENT NOW!

send checks to Fleecem and Floggem, Inc. PO Box 00, Nutindoin, RU, 241special

I think any self respecting conceptual artist knows his art is worthless.

[grommet]

I think maybe that if all you can think of is worthless stuff then maybe you're not trying hard enough. Just a thought, because here again you've put boundaries on it. I believe you're only limited by your own imagination or ability to conjure. Yes, it has the ability to produce foolishness, but what else can you do with this tool? Or is it just to be another paperweight or ashtray? You decide.
James, stop drooling on the man.

[GlennT]

For the sake of my computer screen, I'm glad I wasn't eating when I read the last half dozen posts!

And James must think I'm the only emperor not wearing clothes!

[evaldart]

Originally Posted by cooljamesx1

oh evaldart you're maybe the most religious person i know of

Well thank you CJ, but kind words wont get you into The Church of Evald. Come knocking when you get 25 tons in your boneyard (and beer cans dont count).

(By the way...never end a sentence with a preposition).

[grommet]

evidence to the contrary and more
Sorry Matt, I knows ya was goofin in some sense, but ya jus' opened up a can o' whup-ass.

[evaldart]

Originally Posted by grommet

evidence to the contrary and more
Sorry Matt, I knows ya was goofin in some sense, but ya jus' opened up a can o' whup-ass.

Damn right G, I was speaking as the overlord of the Church of Evald - and we dont go for no prepositions at the end (But double-negatives are just fine).

Are we gonna tear up some grammar, here. Lets do it...its all part of the dis-assembling of the human language. Will get us quicker to those unimaginable hieghts of intellect.

I've had plenty of cans of whup-ass in my day...gave it up though back in my twenties. The hangovers were exceptionally rough.

[grommet]

Naw, not sure why you went there anyway. You stirring the pot?

So Glenn, how long have you had this emperor thing going on?

[cooljamesx1]

Originally Posted by grommet

James, stop drooling on the man.

sorry for the misunderstanding, it was very much the opposite

funny, drooling on and spitting on are very similar in literal practice. its a fine line...

[cooljamesx1]

Originally Posted by evaldart

Well thank you CJ, but kind words wont get you into The Church of Evald. Come knocking when you get 25 tons in your boneyard (and beer cans dont count).

(By the way...never end a sentence with a preposition).

sorry matt i wont be joining your club. i end sentences with whatever type of word i want to, and i don't care why

[cooljamesx1]

Originally Posted by evaldart

I've had plenty of cans of whup-ass in my day...gave it up though back in my twenties. The hangovers were exceptionally rough.

wow do you have a motor cycle too? girls must think you're real tough.

[grommet]

Originally Posted by cooljamesx1

sorry for the misunderstanding, it was very much the opposite

Dude, you better bathe if Evaldart drooled on you, that stuff is toxic! The last person... well suffice to say they don't have to worry about people mistaking them for Fabio any more.

[evaldart]

Originally Posted by cooljamesx1

wow do you have a motor cycle too? girls must think you're real tough.

Strictly an F-350 man, myself (but if I see a motorcycle on the side of the road I'll toss it in back for the boneyard).

[JasonGillespie]

What was the original question?! Oh yeah,

who loves it? I do. how does concept guide what you do? is it necessary or elementary to cling to the art object ?

1. I like it..mostly when it is good.

2. Ideas are behind most art...I am no different.

3.When does the idea not need an object of some sort to elucidate the concept? Perhaps that would be a better way of stating it. Then you can divide the problem into two parts....concept artists like Hirst and the YBA who use objects in one camp and those who follow in the footsteps of Ray Johnson and eschew the use of objects. I think all of them are Neo-Dadaists of the umpteenth generation...only a few of which are terribly original, but....I do find the latter camp to be more problematic and address my remarks mostly towards it.

I see a lot of concept art in NYC that is pretty obtuse...I don't mean in the obtuse artistic way (that is supposedly cool and desirable)...more like the artist seems to have a problem communicating. Not because there is a lack of communication within the medium...no...unfortunately, the message is another noise among many similar noises. Verbage...no matter how interestingly laid out/painted/scratched/glued/ etc...has become a little over used if you ask me....same for video/audio, happenings, and environmental installations. Concept art by nature is reactionary against traditional artistic thoughts and mediums...not news to anyone but as a result the multi-media approach seems to garner the most attention....from many, many, many concept artists. The problem then arises that you have only a few ways to say what you want and a lot of other people using the same means....redundancy....noise. As one of my old undergrad profs used to say...the fewer elements involved in your work, the better (think creatively) you have to be in using them. That pretty much describes the quandary this group of concept artists are in. So, the pitfall of not accepting objects as a part of your conceptual process is having to be better than the average bear at using over used mediums. Score one for the concept artists who don't tie one hand behind their backs and deign to use those icky objects.

Whether they use objects or multi-media...what have you, the concept artist can make a stinker just like the rest of us. No matter how "intellectual" they or their art maybe..it isn't an immunization against having bad ideas or poor executions of same. My own thoughts about concept art is to check whether or not the idea is one that sticks with me after I've "viewed" the work. (This is important since the concept artist is touting his/her work as mostly cerebral.) Many end up having a mental shelf life of the time it takes me to turn to the next piece, but some do show their potency by engaging my grey matter....how very appropriate for an idea.

[grommet]

Jason,
What were some of the better concept pieces that you saw-- or what did they consist of?

[JasonGillespie]

A recent example of concept art I enjoyed was a series of paintings that were exact reproductions of photos of famous artworks that were attacked and in some way damaged by vandals. The painted photos were close cropped details that mostly showed only the section of the work that had been assaulted and increased the image to a large and dominating scale. It was part of a larger show on art conservation. Though the paintings were done with great care and attention to detail (the work of a highly skilled artist), the artwork was of secondary importance to the implied meaning. Awareness of the skill involved in creating the paintings registered on me, but it really only served the greater idea. I am unsure if the artist considered it strictly a conceptual work or not, but it certainly had that feel and still is kicking around my cranium.

Another that comes to mind was an exhibit of color photos that were shot of daily activities/experiences of a group of youngish types that went down somewhere in South America and took part in some sort of study?...the details escape me. Anyway, the photos were augmented by crude, painted clay figures and landscape settings made by an untrained, but observant hand. The narrative of photo was mirrored by the clay figures and captured the feeling of the photos with a degree of authenticity that made the entire event far more memorable for me the viewer. A doll house like treatment of the group's dwelling while down there was the best piece by far and showed figures engaged in what must have been characteristic activities. Again, the idea took pride of place in that situation....if in a less pretentious way than is the norm.


I'm trying to think of a video/audio or text based example I have seen in the recent past, but honestly they are so frequent and similar that they do not jump off the page. Often times there will be video concepts that are mounted for the passerbys in Chelsea to view, but even then the use of the medium is so pedestrian that it fails to entice you to go into the gallery. How many texts on gallery walls do I see through the windows as I pass by that beg to be ignored?....too many.