"What's the tech angle? You're reading this on the internet."
Ouch. You people are getting nasty. I didn't fight through two world wars... etc.
Skull bedazzler and shark preserving artist Damien Hirst spent some of his recently acquired riches from a record-breaking art sale to purchase a collage of US socialite Paris Hilton composed of images from porn magazines. The Hilton portrait, for which Hirst paid an undisclosed sum, is the latest in a series by fellow …
Ouch. You people are getting nasty. I didn't fight through two world wars... etc.
I read that title as "Damien Hirst buys Paris Porn College". Oh dear.
Paris, because ...
>> I read that title as "Damien Hirst buys Paris Porn College". Oh dear.
Fuck. For just a second I thought I really missed out when I chose to following attend an engineering college. I think maybe I just wanted to believe that there was a porn college in Paris...
I'm not I'm reading the print edition and I'm very disappointed!
He's no good at thumbs
What's the IT angle?
The Hilton Porntrait?
I have to know, were the porn pictures used to make the collage originally Paris' own pics?
do you think I could sell a congealed collection of old jissues for? I'm no art critic, but I know what is one idea mercilessly rehashed and lacking in any artistic merit.
If you don't know waht a jissue is, use your imagination. Think bedroom floor. Think sticky hands.
Andy Warhol once said "Art is what you can get away with." These kind of people prove the truth of that on a regular basis.
wow a chance to comment on my pet hate, "modern art". the guy saying "wow this is great" is saatchi. he buys it. it instantly goes up in value. everybody talks about said "artist". he later sells and makes money. Spotty paintings, hamsters sawn in half and preserved in Lidl whisky. WTF?
chapman bros with childlike mannequins with penises all over the place. WTF? Maybe glam rock asian fiddlers might have some fun with the notion but seriously, WTF?
Mark Rothko with a series of brown rectangles in red rectangles (or vice versa).. is this worth it's own room in a prime london building area?
shit, stick all of it in with david blaine hanging upside down.
either there's a point to something, or its purely aesthetic otherwise its a bunch of entrenched entwined circle jerkers unwilling to say "wow this is crap/ripped off/made by 160 staff and not touched by the 'artiste's' hands' because - well - it's their reputation on the line. nobody wants to step out of line.
I'm in southampton and they've been running "art vaults" over the summer, "art" installations in the old medieval vaults (just finished). Whilst some have taken on board the notion and the history of space they are in, others, well... sucked. One, used as a bomb shelter during the war (and drowned a number of people when a mains burst) was used for an installation that worked with this theme, taking 1940s images and placing them, lit in the dark. Cross over the road and see - a bunch of eggshells glued together, meaning nothing. Cross again and see what looks like onions, placed on a bed of salt. WTF? No matter what cock you write on the promotion board - its pointless.
pretty much the best thing there was what a bunch of teenagers came up with - what looked like a spitfire crashed inside a vault. It was relevant (spitfires made here in southampton) and was a good use of the space.
we are talking of a world here where Ikea is the biggest supplier of "art" in the UK. quality is dead.
Are you sure?
Nice cock thumb love..
that the flaming bag of dog turds i left on his front porch will be preserved as another work of art.
Paris, 'cuz she's a work of art in progress.
I hate modern art, It sux more than the artists themselves.
Ikea have some nice black and white photo pictures that look great in our hallway.
Very flattering portrait of a not very attractive woman IMHO, the pron is just a bonus and a reminder of why this 'talented heiress' has been in the public eye at all.
...is that WE know you can get computer programs that build collages like this. The question is, do THEY?
I thought that it all got a little silly when I saw Michael Craig-Martin's 'Oak Tree' (actually just a glass of water on a shelf, together with text showing how blatantly he's taking the piss - see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Craig-Martin for an image and http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~ig206/oak_tree.html for the text.
Compared to that, this is quite good...
Why did they take the unicorn horn off the unicorn and put it on a normal horse? Seems ever so slightly redundant.
...another litany of, "Pptllllbbbt! It's not art! Yearrhhgh!" comments.
People said the exact same thing about Van Gogh, Monet, and Picasso. Whether any individual artist measures up is an open question, but slathering everything in a genre with... well, with the same brush... just makes you look like an idiot.
What's even more ironic is that the entire point of the Paris porn collage was the irony - and that's precisely what got the article posted here. So the work does everything art is supposed to do - make a point, make people think, make people talk, and make someone like it enough to buy it - and the Neanderthals here can't manage anything better than, "It's not art! My kid could do that!"
Reading the title I thought it was a PH portrait (or porntrait as someone above wisely suggested) made with stills from her own "work"... But if it's mag clippings, then it can't be the case. Right?
Anyway, I wonder what's written on her side there, just bellow her left armpit.
I also usually dislike "modern art", but this one at least does seem like it requires quite some level of skill to make. If it was computer generated (where a program chooses fragments to match a part of the pic, etc.), I wouldn't consider it artistic skill, of course... Only the programmer's skill would apply.
An easy target for the thick-headded amongst us... However, art is merely a reflection of life and human condition. The fact it draws this reaction from sheeple makes it worth every penny. Bleat on!
I think she does I've seen one night... next time get a proper camera crew....
Thumbs up... nuff said
My brother's an artist and he claims that's his "professional opinion".
Good to see I'm not the only one. I saw this article title multiple times since this morning (it's now well into tomorrow morning), while planning to read the article later... and I'm only now realizing (with some disappointment) that there is no porn college after all.
...we did something very similar for our Standard Grade [GSCE, O-level, etc - the courses you go through at 15-16 for the foreigners] Art class - and while we didn't use jizz mags, no Paris as a study, the results were similar.
How is this worth more? Ah, an 'artist' did it.
Modern Art - the ultimate in constructive skiving that people will pay for, it seems - possibly second only to working in IT Project Management ;-)
If artists are prepared to suffer for what they do, why don't they learn to paint?
PS - My pet ferret is called Banksy. Fact.
I too hate most so-called modern art, but I do think this particular picture is more a traditional piece executed in a clever way. Technically it's extremely good and hardly qualifies to be lumped in with the "stunt" modern art cited by all the moaners here.
The penis thumb is pure genius. :-)
It's hardly fair that Paris alone should get the proceeds of the poster sales. What about the, erm, jazz artistes without whose work the image could not have been composed?
I'd be very worried about anyone who says that their kid could have done this picture - doesn't it imply a rather large pr0n collection?
So his commission to capture Bush was canceled, so he chose to use bush anyway in his collage...
So why did the Bush admin cancel his contract? Wasn't there enough sallow grey toilet paper available to be used as a medium?
oh.... carry on...
@ all the Artsperts above:
Is it that you don't find the image to your liking? Or that the person who made it has a fatter bank account than you?
Be honest, would it bother you as much if some penniless bloke had made this image, and put it on his own wall? Perhaps a watercolour of a nice bowl of fruit would make you happier, ideally backed up with legislation to ensure that no-one perverts the notion of 'proper art' again.
One more thing.. in keeping with 'commentard' pedantry, Modern art refers to an area that ended nearly 30 years ago; (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_art). This work could better be described as Post-Modern or Comtemporary Art.
-Strange roadkill-type icon, for surrealist angle...
I have to agree with most of the so called moaners here, modern/minimalist art goes right over my head, i suspect because i know very little about art, but mostly i just want it to be pleasing to look at in some way.
I also feel that if i'm going to take the time & effort to see someone else's work, they could at least have the courtesy to put a bit of time & effort into it and produce something that i, as a non-artist, could not.
i recently went to the tate modern, and frankly most of it looked like it could have been produced at a special needs primary school, for blinds kids. -i mean, a whole wall devoted to an 8 sided piece of paper!? -seriously, it was apparently from the "artist's" octagonal period.
Not much these days - socialist scum excepted
"This work could better be described as Post-Modern or Comtemporary Art."
Call it what you like it's still crap.
It's not the work that is the problem with art nowadays it's cocks like you three.
Art is entirely subjective and therefore "pretentious wank" is a perfectly valid judgement. Unfortunately, as the purpose of art nowadays seems to be a competition to see who can come up with the most obtuse explaination for any particular piece, your psyches simply cannot deal with the idea that someone can dismiss your thoughts so easily. It must be really annoying spending all that time coming up with a deep, meaningful justification for something like this just to have us point out how irrelevant it is.
"What's even more ironic is that the entire point of the Paris porn collage was the irony - and that's precisely what got the article posted here."
What got it posted here were the words "porn" and "Paris" being in close proximity.
and this is not bad. But, I do think they need to put in more effort, let the skill in art shine through.
Sure the idea is worth something, but is it that great?
Surely it would been better to make a collage from the used condoms, or spent tissues generated by the porn industry then to go straight for the glossy elements.
I want to see some degree of suffering in the art, not just a Porno Blue Peter project.
...but I rather like this. FIrst picture of Paris I've even seen that made her look attractive, too. I do think Rachel Whiteread's quite clever, mind.
Couldn't have put it better.
Theres not a lot wrong with a lot of 'modern art' (or whatever the pretentious luvvies want to call it this week). The thing that gets my back up is the utter cocks above who will unquestioningly defend absolutely anything so long as someone has told them its 'art'.
9 times out of ten, its utter crap. Go lock yourself in the Tate Modern, theres some very good thought provoking stuff, and a hatful of complete and utter drivel that you 3 are giving credence to.
Do you think I could make some money out of a hatful of complete and utter drivel with an 'Art' sticker on it?
"Art is entirely subjective and therefore "pretentious wank" is a perfectly valid judgement. "
Totally and utterly agree.
"The thing that gets my back up is the utter cocks above who will unquestioningly defend absolutely anything so long as someone has told them its 'art'."
The only thing I'm 'unquestioningly' defending is the right of anyone to make whatever they want, whether you or I 'like' it or not.