New York Waterfalls

That is so cool. My daughter sometimes pops up to New York; I'll have to tell her to check this out.
 
Great. So everyone who's stuck on the bridges in rush hour suddenly has to pee.
 
Great. So everyone who's stuck on the bridges in rush hour suddenly has to pee.

Christ, I hate it when I sound like one of those people who gazed on a Rothko painting and cackled, "That's NOT art!"

But, here again, I'm in need of the audio tour. Just to explain to the slow girl why this is art. Not to say I doubt the truth of it, I just need to be helped out in making the connections. It's a critique of man overwriting nature with his urban superstructures? Or perhaps Doc is on the right track: it's an exploration of art's visceral impact on those who encounter it?
 
Christ, I hate it when I sound like one of those people who gazed on a Rothko painting and cackled, "That's NOT art!"

But, here again, I'm in need of the audio tour. Just to explain to the slow girl why this is art. Not to say I doubt the truth of it, I just need to be helped out in making the connections. It's a critique of man overwriting nature with his urban superstructures? Or perhaps Doc is on the right track: it's an exploration of art's visceral impact on those who encounter it?

It's a comment on how our culture has deteriorated to that point that someone can claim anything is art without the remotest justification.
 
It's a comment on how our culture has deteriorated to that point that someone can claim anything is art without the remotest justification.

George Orwell said that in an enlightned society, everyone would be an artist of sorts.
 
George Orwell said that in an enlightned society, everyone would be an artist of sorts.

But how did Orwell define "artist (of sorts)" ?

My aunt made candles and macrame plant hangers. Is that art?

From my plebian perspective, that waterfall looks like a sand castle with a really big budget.
 
George Orwell said that in an enlightned society, everyone would be an artist of sorts.

Because being actually artistic is a large part of intelligence. It requires creativity, skill, patience and can layer together great numbers of themes. Das Glasperlenspiel does a wonderful job of explaining how it can work in music. Spraying fire hoses off a raw scaffold into the harbor is hardly art. All of this is simply my opinion, of course, I really do loathe modern "art" so my perceptions are more than a little be colored.
 
All art began with someone making something that aesthetically pleased him.

And then the critic came along and made the canon.

The rest is history.
 
All art began with someone making something that aesthetically pleased him.

And then the critic came along and made the canon.

The rest is history.

I can only assume the critic fired his canon to get rid of the competition.
 
If he'd managed to do it without the scaffolding, I'd think it was genius.
With the scaffold, it's an oversized garden hose on a stick and definitely not art.
 
Sure it's art. It refreshes the eyes with which you view the world. That makes it art.

It's quite clever, really. Putting it under the bridge gives it a kind of obscene intimacy, like you're seeing the bridge using the toilet. (Or makes you feel like the bridge is drooling.) But I think mostly what he's trying to do is transpose the libidinous and natural feeling of the rain forest onto the hard-edged rigidity of the urban jungle. It's like hanging vines and moss from the Empire State Building.
 
Not art.
Construction.
With water.
My ex built huge garden ponds, and created realistic waterfalls within the design. What he did would never be classed as art, and he'd be horrified to have it. It is a craft.

Still skillful, still interesting to look at, but not art.

As for Rothko mentioned above......just let me get out a tin of paint and a plain wall, and a 6inch brush and I'll give you Rothko. Fucker. :mad:
 
Great. So everyone who's stuck on the bridges in rush hour suddenly has to pee.

Silly Zoot. :heart:

As to the waterfall?

It's kinesthetic art. Of course it's art.

Anything can be art, at least at this moment in time. The definition of art constantly changes though, doesn't it?

You hang a quilt on a wall. It was a functional blanket, now it's art.

You frame unique family photos and group them in a pleasing fashion in the hallway. Art.

I took the smashed foot joint of my daughter's flute (parade floats are very dangerous sometimes) and framed it on velvet for her to keep forever. Art.

Unless you're discussing federal funding of some sort :rolleyes: isn't it always the intent of the artist that determines what is decidedly art?
 
Silly Zoot. :heart:

As to the waterfall?

It's kinesthetic art. Of course it's art.

Anything can be art, at least at this moment in time. The definition of art constantly changes though, doesn't it?

You hang a quilt on a wall. It was a functional blanket, now it's art.

You frame unique family photos and group them in a pleasing fashion in the hallway. Art.

I took the smashed foot joint of my daughter's flute (parade floats are very dangerous sometimes) and framed it on velvet for her to keep forever. Art.

Unless you're discussing federal funding of some sort :rolleyes: isn't it always the intent of the artist that determines what is decidedly art?


I am not sure about the items in your list, but your new AV is ART of the fnest kind!

You know.. that "contmeplate this for a few hours", kind of art!

:rose:

-KC
 
Unless you're discussing federal funding of some sort :rolleyes: isn't it always the intent of the artist that determines what is decidedly art?

In any system where people are actually capable of making judgements, not really. The reaction of the public is what decides if something is art or not. As you pointed out anything can be claimed as art, but if no one else agrees that's totally irrelevant. I can talk to a flying bear named Winston that only I can see but if everyone else says he isn't real my claim doesn't hold up as fact simply because I say so.
 
In any system where people are actually capable of making judgements, not really. The reaction of the public is what decides if something is art or not. As you pointed out anything can be claimed as art, but if no one else agrees that's totally irrelevant. I can talk to a flying bear named Winston that only I can see but if everyone else says he isn't real my claim doesn't hold up as fact simply because I say so.

I disagree.

Did you create the flying bear named Winston as a work of art? Is he art to you?

If I write a piece of complete trash stroke fiction using the same three adjectives for 2000 words it's still a story.

It's crap, sure. But the reader and the critic are incidental, as it is still a story. A work of art.

How about the artist of this?

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b318/sweetsubsarahh/blueexposedpainting.jpg

http://images.google.com/imgres?img...firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&sa=G

On display, has received much acclaim. Looks like something my daughter did in third grade. Is this art?

If people want to purchase it, display it, more power to them. It doesn't speak to me. But I'm incidental.

It is art to the artist.
 
I see where the four "Waterfalls" cost over $15,000,000. You know, you could run a presidential campaign in New York for a week with that kind of money.
 
Back
Top