£20.000 in 1p coins ?
So that's a legal tender then.
A giant sculpture of a human arse, £20,000 in one-pence coins, and an off-the-shelf model train are some of the exhibits competing for this year's Turner Prize. The giant polystyrene posterior, by Anthea Hamilton, is based on a 1970s design for an entrance into a New York block of flats. Unveiling 2016 #TurnerPrize! @ …
> So that's a legal tender then.
Technically only if you didn't try to spend them all at once. There is an upper limit to the number of pennies you can use to pay for something; over that limit and the vendor is not obliged to accept them (although they can if they wish).
I can't remember exactly what the limit is (and I can't be bothered to google it), but it's certainly a couple of orders of magnitude lower than twenty grand.
I do believe that's already happened at MONA in Hobart last year.
A collection of ladders, a roller platform, some brooms and a few buckets in a seemingly discussed corner were being 'critically discussed' by a couple of Pearls-and-Twin-Set matrons when three workers came in and started using them to clean the area, presumably in preparation for a new exhibit.
Nearly wet myself.
It'll be severely challenged by my entry - I propose to enter the absurd concept of art by installing an idea for the post-modern world.
Or to put it another way, just by leaving a completely empty display there full of even more hot air than currently exists around the topic. Meanwhile I'll be down the pub with a few pints of real workmanship...
Just what I was thinking - while I usually enjoy the commentards pov, this thread is as reactionary as the Daily Mail comments section.
For reference guys, the era known as "Modern Art" is generally judged to have stopped around 1970. So at least stop railing against something that hasn't been made for over 40 years.
Okey-Dokey. All post-modern art is bollocks. Hmmm. OK. Let's be fair, most post-modern art is bollocks.
I did betake myself to Tate Modern a few years ago, with a friend. We decided that our opinion of this stuff was probably coloured by the unfavourable press it gets, so went for a long look round to see what we could see.
I got to see a large amount of tat, some of it accompanied by excellent punning titles, and very little work that actually took some skill to create. Probably even less that seemed to be saying anything original or interesting. I then heard a man after my own heart opine that, "this is all complete bollocks!" Looked round to see where he was, only to find others doing the same, and looking towards me. I then realised that it was my voice. My unconscious mind had taken control, in a desperate attempt to save my brain from turning to mush. And I was forced to beat a hasty retreat to the cafe, for an excellent cuppa and a very large (and delicious) piece of cake.
...woke up on the morning of the 1999 Turner Prize and thought "Sh1t! I was supposed to have done something for the Turner! What the hell am I going to do...?"
And now the stupid piece of pretentious crap is worth (I hear) more than a million quid? You seriously couldn't make it up. Except these narcissistic talentless no-hopers keep getting away with it.
Modern art is full of pretentiousness. One of the most successful artists of the C20th is villified by the Establishment due to being "self taught". I mean, how dare he have genuine natural talent when everyone else makes millions from selling utter rubbish (sometimes literally) because the Establishment tells them it must be art because we know the artists personally and go to the same cocktail parties as them.
Art to me is something genuine, it's concious thought about what the artist wants to convey. It's Picasso, Matisse, Rembrandt, Rodin. It's paintings, sculpture (real sculpture, not a cast made of some pregnant woman), a cleverly framed photograph. There's more art on my lether jacket than in the Tate (it may not be good art, but it's art, it took me 3 days to paint that jacket).
I got shouted at for climbing on a tank at the Imperial War Museum. I was 6 at the time. If the armour of your tank is incapable of handling the weight of a 6 year old, you're not doing a very good job...
At the Musee Militaire in Brussels the kids play seesaw on some of the cannon at the front. And they let you climb into the cockpits of some of the planes. Now I know why 1950s fighter pilots were small...
Art is whatever useless crap that you can convince somebody to pay for. And sometimes, you don't have to convince them, they volunteer.
I managed to forget about a 100 pound bag of fence-post mix in a wheelbarrow once. I discovered the mistake the next morning when I went to empty the barrow after an early morning downpour. I pitched it out down by the pond & figured I'd find something to do with it once it cured. Somewhat surprisingly, the bag didn't split when it hit the ground. My daughter (age about 10 at the time) stuck an old Schwinn bicycle seat into it, post first. I asked "why", she said so she had a place to sit when fishing. She used it once, but it was too low to be comfy. So it sat. Five years later, a visitor to the Ranch offered me $100 for it. I demurred, saying it was an original, made by my daughter. He asked her, and she said "no!" ... The idiot persisted, and eventually bid himself up to $750, which she "reluctantly" accepted.
I was thinking along similar lines but I was planning on holding up an iPhone, a Samsung Galaxy and maybe and old Nokia and blowing red paint through a straw around them to represent the artists personal communication of modern life to the smart gallery visitor. Naturally dumb gallery visitors won't "get it"
You guys seem to think this Turner prize art is easy. Well its not. Do you have any idea how hard it is and how much work it is to get accepted by the art establishment so they take you seriously in this sort of competition? Its not about the objects, its about the context...
I think you'll find it's about the connection, not the context. Anyone could come up with some of this stuff, the only reason this is accepted as art is because the "artists" all went to Establishment art schools and know each other. If Cezanne, or Monet, was around today they wouldn't get anywhere near the Turner Prize for the simple fact they were all anti-Establishment artists. And yet they are recognised today as the artistic geniuses that they were. I have yet to see anything entered for the Turner Prize that I can connect to on any emotional level except disdain. There are street artists painting pictures of the Eiffel Tower for 20 Euros a time with more talent in their little fingers than any Turner Prize entrant. It wouldn't surprise me if the Turner Prize was created so the Establishment could give a hand-out to their artistic chums who can't shift their latest rubbish.
The problem is that just looking at a pile of coins is meaningless. It has to be seen in the context of the UK Government's decision that £20,437 is the poverty limit for a family of four and as this is one less then it indicates poverty.
None of that is apparent from looking at a pile of coins: you don't know how many are there; you don't know that it's one less than an arbitrary sum dreamt up by the government; you don't know that it is supposed to apply to a family of four.
The problem with this piece of "art" is that it doesn't make you think about poverty, it's the explanation of the piece that makes you think about poverty.
Besides, it should have been a pile of used, unmarked tenners...
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019