I tend to agree, except that five hundred years from now, probably most of us won't be here, so we don't know for sure what will stand the rigors of age.
Lots of examples of artists or writers who were famous in their day, but who left no footprints on the sands of time.
Charles Dickens was considered a hack in his day. So was Billy Shakespeare -- they used to throw rotten vegetables at his actors.
That picture exists, and may still be around as long as there are computers. Might be that Danielle Steel is the writer folks venerate half a millennium from now, or that some graffiti artist in New York City who isn't born yet tops the list of greats.
Never know until you get there.
Me, I thought the picture conveyed all kinds of things, like ... which position would I like to be in, I was in the stack ... ?
The picture is, apparently, from an April, 2002 exhibition, "Dangerous Liaisons," in Poznan, Poland.
Something called "critical art," apparently quite the rage in Poland in the 90's.
I'm not sure what they are criticizing here ...
I came across the image whilst looking for something else and was struck by it. First, because of the nekkid folks; second, the immediate question -- how'd they do that?
It's obvious they aren't standing up unaided -- the balance is impossible, plus there isn't any weight on their feet, you can tell by looking at their toes.
So I figured they are lying on their backs in a stack, but no; the guy on the bottom would have, well, a flat bottom, and the women's hair and breasts aren't showing gravity's pull in that direction. There's no compression of muscles where there should be.
Then I realized they are probably lying on their left sides on a black background with the photographer perched over them on a ladder or somesuch. The drape of hair and the breasts on the girl in front seem to make this likely, though it is hard to be sure, the image is so small.
Maybe on a stand with a slot for their arms, or something there for them to hold onto to keep them in position.
I don't see any names showing who the models are, but the article is here:
Possibly the unthinking social acceptance of the concept "gravity", which artificially dichotomizes the world into "up" and "down", with the attendant creation of meaningless value-hierarchies embodied in words like "above".
Where'd I put my hip boots? It's a nice picture, though.
Well, some people believe in a strict 5-7-5 count, some say those should just be upper limits, some say you can't really write haiku in any language other than Japanese...
Ahh. Concept art.
ReplyDelete500 years from now, all of the current concept "artists" will be long forgotten.
Renoir, Matisse, Rembrant, Michaelangelo, and DaVinci, however, will still be remembered.
I tend to agree, except that five hundred years from now, probably most of us won't be here, so we don't know for sure what will stand the rigors of age.
ReplyDeleteLots of examples of artists or writers who were famous in their day, but who left no footprints on the sands of time.
Charles Dickens was considered a hack in his day. So was Billy Shakespeare -- they used to throw rotten vegetables at his actors.
That picture exists, and may still be around as long as there are computers. Might be that Danielle Steel is the writer folks venerate half a millennium from now, or that some graffiti artist in New York City who isn't born yet tops the list of greats.
Never know until you get there.
Me, I thought the picture conveyed all kinds of things, like ... which position would I like to be in, I was in the stack ... ?
NO, Steve.
ReplyDeleteThere are SEVERAL words necissary.
*GASP* being the first.
"Who's the lead babe?" are the next four.
The picture is, apparently, from an April, 2002 exhibition, "Dangerous Liaisons," in Poznan, Poland.
ReplyDeleteSomething called "critical art," apparently quite the rage in Poland in the 90's.
I'm not sure what they are criticizing here ...
I came across the image whilst looking for something else and was struck by it. First, because of the nekkid folks; second, the immediate question -- how'd they do that?
It's obvious they aren't standing up unaided -- the balance is impossible, plus there isn't any weight on their feet, you can tell by looking at their toes.
So I figured they are lying on their backs in a stack, but no; the guy on the bottom would have, well, a flat bottom, and the women's hair and breasts aren't showing gravity's pull in that direction. There's no compression of muscles where there should be.
Then I realized they are probably lying on their left sides on a black background with the photographer perched over them on a ladder or somesuch. The drape of hair and the breasts on the girl in front seem to make this likely, though it is hard to be sure, the image is so small.
Maybe on a stand with a slot for their arms, or something there for them to hold onto to keep them in position.
I don't see any names showing who the models are, but the article is here:
http://www.artmargins.com/
content/review/jakubowska.html
"I'm not sure what they are criticizing here ..."
ReplyDeletePossibly the unthinking social acceptance of the concept "gravity", which artificially dichotomizes the world into "up" and "down", with the attendant creation of meaningless value-hierarchies embodied in words like "above".
Where'd I put my hip boots? It's a nice picture, though.
My.
ReplyDeleteOkay, you're a poet. Speak to us of naked gravity, Tiel ...
event horizon
ReplyDeletephotons are raped away by
naked gravity
Ooh. Free verse porn ...
ReplyDeleteNope. Hai-koochie
ReplyDeleteYou know, I thought that might be haiku, but I don't know enough about it to be certain -- I always get the number of syllables mixed up.
ReplyDeleteWell, some people believe in a strict 5-7-5 count, some say those should just be upper limits, some say you can't really write haiku in any language other than Japanese...
ReplyDelete