Placing these pieces in the context of their creation, rather than the mere curiosity of their existence (in, for example, a gallery setting), makes this art that much stronger. To hear the clack of the newborn (fiberglass) child as he is rested on his (fiberglass) mother is incredible.
Context does well to create its own art.
(link via monoscope)
[this is good] Wow. Just, wow. That actually gave me faith in art again.
I had been accepted to a GOOD local art school, and had been having second thoughts. I visited the Denver Art Museum (DAM) and, after seeing their "modern art" gallery, was UTTERLY convinced not to pursue art.
So much CRAP passes as "art" nowadays. This is really, really good. Thank you for posting this!!
Posted by: lifemeanssomuch | 09/06/2007 at 12:07 AM
I haven't been to the new DAM (I am originally from Colorado), but everyone finds art that speaks to them. While Mueck is certainly an exceptional artist, I am sure there are more than a handful of folks that point to him as a prime example of what is wrong with 'art'. While modern art isn't always to my tastes either, I love understanding its process. That change of context (from observing the art to observing the art as the end of a process) is often enough to let me fall right in.
Posted by: Steven C. Brown | 09/06/2007 at 12:42 AM
I'd be surprised if too many people thought that, honestly. In my opinion, people who didn't find his stuff to be "art" would either be in the minority or like the hicks from Waco, TX who got upset when a scientist giving a talk stated that the moon reflected light from the sun and stomped off, declaring, "We believe in God!" (True story.)
No, trust me, the stuff they're showing at the DAM is so hideous I spoke to another art student (I was admitted to Rocky Mountain College of Art & Design, and my DAM visit was the final nail in the coffin in my decision NOT to study art -- I'm going to Metro now) who's at The Art Institute, and HE thinks it's hideous. What were the curators smoking and what bribes did they take to put some of that shit up? For example, they have an installation of 18 hubcaps on the wall. Title of the piece? "Protruding Hubcaps." I mean, REALLY???
Sorry, originality for originality's sake does NOT cut it with me. Some of those pieces were in there apparently for the sole reason that someone had never thought of doing them before. I can make bullshit art with the best of them, trust me. That's just unacceptable.
No, what Mueck is doing MORE than qualifies as art for me. :)
Posted by: lifemeanssomuch | 09/06/2007 at 08:56 AM
If my strong reaction offended you, I am sorry. It's just that -- I have never seen so much BAD art in my life, in the DAM of all places! It's like objective standards have gone out the window and the inmates are running the asylum! Some of the pieces, I wondered what bullshit story the artist came up with to get exhibited. I love original art as much as the next person, but it has to be ART. Not a cow's head in formaldehyde. Not a human figure crudely carved out of white styrofoam. Does that REALLY belong in a major city art museum? Ugh. I am disgusted, and again, sorry if that offends you. I have strong feelings about what art should be.
Posted by: lifemeanssomuch | 09/06/2007 at 09:06 AM
No offense taken. Everyone drives their own car.
And don't forget, the DAM does have other collections. Last I was there they had a beautiful Asian Art collection!
Posted by: Steven C. Brown | 09/06/2007 at 01:44 PM
I love the DAM's "classical" collections -- they are a breath of fresh air. And, if you like Asian art, they've got a neat new Japanese art collection in the Hamiltion Building.
I like the iconic art a lot. :)
Posted by: lifemeanssomuch | 09/06/2007 at 09:03 PM