I definitely see your point. Chance would have it that I work in an art museum....for whatever this is worth....
Even if everything is art, we tend to respond to some of it more than the rest. But what I love about Duchamp is that he helped art become self-conscious.
Modern art is philosophical in it's way. Art no longer represents the world but rather itself. The representation of representation. (But this is only some art, as others are keeping the tradition alive. John Currin, for instance.)
He sertainy gave it use.
Who is to say art is not function?
Who is to say art is not the ordinary or mundane?
Who is to say art is meant to mean art?
Who is to say art has to mean anything?
Who is to say art is not interaction?
Who is to say art is not just taking a wizz?
Are we responsible for our responce?
Is our responce responsible for us?
We just dont think that every responce we make is appreciation, appreciable. Worth holding onto and declaring.
We dont think or are afriad to think that our opinion matters more than what is expected form us. We are afraid of being self aware and afriad of being self-conscious.
Let the art speak for us.
We are in total control of all things and all art.
As long as i dont have to say a word.
As long as i dont have to imagine anything.
As long as it means something and it is used for its meaning.
Art no longer needs to speak to us.
We no longer need to hear it.
It can concieve itself.
Tracy Emins bed My Bed - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
is that just so we dont need to speak?
Is that because everything is trying to communicate with us.
Everything is aware of us being it?
Just So we dont need to be so very much?
Modern art although art, no dispute, is still lazy and lacking no matter what philosophy it is whispering, it has actually ceased to be what they are saying and trying to teach you that it is.
It is no longer your bed, just a bed.
The object is no longer an object, it is no longer a bed.
It is no longer what it is trying to prove.
That 'everything is art'.
But the brightest understanding of this is that it is better art becaus eit is not displayed, it is better art because it is part of something, it is real and realsied more by its existence as part of our unconsciousness of its existence.
Art is real when it is lived.
Art is lived when it is real.
Taking it away form its life and giving it another one wher eit is not doing what it is made and created to be, that in effect it is no longer creating it is no longer alive because you have killed it and it can no longer create, just responding instead of the good art which is always asking.
This is a reply not a reaction.
It explains one thing, it insists one thing, it cannot mean anything your heart desires and does not or could not be imagined what to exists as.
There is no voyage, there is little and then no experience, there is nothing to appreciate, because at least if you could sleep in it, it would at least be appreciated, it would at least be lived.
I wonder if the gallery is where art goes to die?
(bit of a rant, need sleep, should have waited.)