Art:21 | Jeff Koons | Season 5 Preview (October 2009)

[tctcrules]

as a londoner, i propose the word 'bobby' only be used by english accents... love me a bit of koons though

[OvalGray]

The kind of wordplay used below to link two randomly chosen subjects (dogs and the apocalypse in this case) is exactly the kind of linguistic system Jeff Koons and other artists use to explain their work; a tactical trick I find as admirable and fascinating as disheartening. Jeff does it better than most artists; therefore he is God.

[OvalGray]

What is God spelled backwards? Dog!

Can we afford to assume that Satan hasn’t come to terms with this mildly comical rearrangement of letters?

It’s high time that men and women of intelligence understand the importance of the God/Dog linguistic phenomenon and not take for granted it’s weightiness in matters of the End Times.

[OvalGray]

It has often, in fact, been pointed out by comedians that if an alien race were to observe our behavior around our pets they would assume that the pets were the owners and we the livestock, the servants, the pets.

This is, of course, exactly how the antichrist will assume control.

What we have to take into consideration is the absolute likelihood of unexpected annihilation. Any elderly man’s Chihuahua could easily possess the soul of Satan; that much is inarguably obvious!

[OvalGray]

The conception of “pet” is an inherently odd one; the idea that any species (in this instance the human species) can own or control another species without equally and oppositely (as the physical laws demand) being controlled by that supposedly controllable species is absolutely inane.

[OvalGray]

In order to fully comprehend the interrelatedness of dogs and the apocalypse, it’s important to understand that the chain of seemingly random events we think of as “everyday life” are in fact an elaborately orchestrated series of pivotal moments adding up (ultimately) to an algebraically necessary end.

[versafan]

Koons _is_ a great contemporary artist. Walk around his works (I have for dozens of pieces) and you see a mastery of material and of technique (wood, steel, varnishes, polishes, etc). But it doesn't end with the teutonic - his works are mostly visually pleasing, some ironic, some humourous, some shocking. I have found the ones I've seen to be well worth the time considering, and very enjoyable in the process.

[CatZula]

@versafan He doesn't make any of his work. The mastery of materials (which I will grant) isn't his...that credit goes to all of the artists who have fabricated his pieces. As far as their worth in the art world, however, they have little value. They're just variations on Warhol's silver balloons. Not even intelligent variations...

[howcynicalofme]

what morality?

[thornbird7556]

@howcynicalofme The morality of using one's communicative position to assist rather than denegrate others. By traditional standards, certain Koons pieces would seem immoral, such as the more pornographic works from the Made In Heaven series, and the majority would seem amoral or without bearing on ethics. But Koons' work is rather morally powerful from a modern point of view. It urges the viewer to accept themself and then, by extension, others. It's less Western than Eastern in moral philosophy

[howcynicalofme]

so what does all this viewers accepting themselves and others and so forth has anything to do with art? do you think people will stop denigrating other people after experiencing or looking at works of art? what are the circumstances or examples of people needing to accept themselves and accept others? why do people have to go all the way to galleries to sanitize themselves? i just have bunch of questions. don't take it personally.

[CatZula]

@howcynicalofme It's all just a bunch of flim flam. You are correct, the rich people who buy Koons' work haven't made the world a better place--they continue to exploit it. As thornbird has described elsewhere the idea is the acceptance is found by accepting that anything can be art...which is a nice proposition, but nothing new... And ultimately, because Koons sells to the elite, he devalues the originals he copies, so he doesn't even achieve said goals...he's an exclusivist.

[sclapione]

@CatZula You talk a load of bull.

[CatZula]

@sclapione OvalGray is the one who came up with the completely incoherent string of connections. Wanna get specific or are you just trying to blow smoke...

[teamcrumb]

The vatican is still the richest city on earth. yes the pope's house and its gardens are actually classed as a fucking city!! Thanks to those filthy catholics stealing most of the ancient civilizations gold and land they continue to molest the world with their despicable moralities, nO FUCKING WONDER we remember the ass kissing artist that painted the old bastards ceilings!!!

[teamcrumb]

@teamcrumb God alive, I loathe the Pope

[teamcrumb]

@teamcrumb and his cronies

[teamcrumb]

we remeber the da vinci cos of that plebish dan Browne book and the fact the tabloids have latched on to the idea that the Mona Lisa is more relevant than any other old painting. because of an enigmatic smile? now that IS banal. No different to Hello magazine having an article about Lindsey Lohan's trout pout!

[teamcrumb]

and whether someone else likes or finds something relevant that I love is not my business. But I know they will. Yes, Jeff Koons piece of the oversized bear over powering and old fashioned image of a policeman will live longer than you, and maybe you're entire family, but don't be sad. 

[teamcrumb]

You don't know what you're talking about. da Vinci was a painter and draughtsman and Michealangelo wanted the Pope to approve of everything he did and hid his sexuality. jeff Koons is a conceptual artist, but he doesn't even need that daft label. he has integrity, he has worked hard and makes memorable beautiful objects on the whole . . . its not banal, he's referencing the world around him.

[teamcrumb]

@teamcrumb I love artists from the past, but they don't become meaningful until you get to Mantegna, Goya, Delacroix, then they all worked a little harder, to convey more than painting the rich or pleasing religious heads of state

[teamcrumb]

@teamcrumb historical worth and the value of a painting because it is rare and old is NOT the same thing as the value of art in the 20th and 21st century. things become valuable when they are good, or significant, or memorable and part of the zeitgeist.

[teamcrumb]

@teamcrumb we've moved beyond painting faces, and cobalt blue on the ceilings of the pope's house, and naked handsome men stretching out an erect digit to touch God's erect digit. and yes of course modern art is often over priced, but I don't care, good fucking luck to them all if they can earn a fat buck, alive or dead

[thehivesboy]

Where can i watch this episode online?

[thornbird7556]

it's so ridiculous that people get upset at any artist that makes money. you never hear people get mad at actors or singers or musicians for it. If you hate art than go sod off and live your own miserable existence. But artists deserve $ just as much (in most cases more) that goddamn pop singers or hollywood phonies.

[fuzzywzhe]

@thornbird7556 I get upset with the endless promotion of crap. People aren't getting upset with artists, they are getting upset with marketers who have stolen the title of artist. Do you really think anything these people have done are on the same level as Da Vinci or Michelangelo? It's just trivial and banal garage endlessly promoted as something it isn't..

.

Here's an artist that makes money - James Cameron. Nobody bitches about him.

[fuzzywzhe]

@teamcrumb Think really carefully.

In 200 years, what of modern art will be remembered then?

Plastic pool toys rendered in aluminum by a company that Jeff Koons hired?

The Stuckists certainly have a point regardless of how avant garde and educated you think you are. All this is, is a money making operation, done by a very good marketer, but he's no artist.

[teamcrumb]

@fuzzywzhe you know nothing, I am not avant garde, I work hard for a living you schmuck. Of course all valued things will be remembered in 200, 2000 years time. he has so many ideas he has people help him make his work. So did fucking most of the old master painters. Your darling Maichealangelo for one. the stuckists are twats, billy childish is a wanna be whinge bag who never forgave racey tracey . . . plebian.

[fuzzywzhe]

@teamcrumb OK, so I know nothing.

But I'm pretty certain that in 300 years, a shark suspended in a glass tank filled with formaldehyde isn't likely to be in any museum, nor will 3 basketballs in an aquarium.

Koons is a former stockbroker. What do you think his motivations are?

ART! of course!

[teamcrumb]

@fuzzywzhe he did well to learn being a stockbroker, and I wans't fucking talking about damien hirst's shark you prig, WE were talking about Jeff Koons. Damien's shark is a joke. Who cares. Nothing to do with this conversation! But yes, yes it will be in a Gallery (different to a museum on a number of levels)

[fuzzywzhe]

@teamcrumb You might be talking about Koons, I am not. I'm talking about this general and temporarily popular movement of crap, like dirty knickers as well.

"Damien's shark is a joke. Who cares. Nothing to do with this conversation! "

If you can't connect the dots, how can I take you seriously?

There's a thousand years of history, and there's dozens of very large cultures in this world. You look at 60 years and see a trend. It's not a trend, it's a dying generation now and some opportunists.

[fragrantvagrant]

@fuzzywzhe if you think Hirst has done any less or more than an italian homosexual who painted religious doctrines on walls you are mistaken, but I also hate him! ha! Koons is his own airship ya fuckin schmuck! His stuff is beautiful. leonardo whip whap drew people, inventions, anatomy . . . people enjoy art that has a meaning more than a fucking object drawn well. 60 years!!!! modern art existed the day Van Gogh picked up a paint brush!!!

[fragrantvagrant]

@fuzzywzhe they clearly have a deeper remit for respecting different value systems than you. you're one of those "i don't get it if it ain't jesus bleeding or a bowl of fucking fruit painted well!' you think Whistler's Mother is just a painting of an old woman. . . No! its an emotional piece. If you don't like koons stuff fuck off and praise your shitty renaissance dead men who did what they did cos thats all there was to know back then: God and hell and what is considered righteous

[fuzzywzhe]

@fragrantvagrant Look, I really don't care to argue this anymore.

If you think plastic inflatable toys, and balloon animals that have been made larger and in aluminum is art, and that this banal trivialities are going to be in a curator's museum in 300 years from now as an example of a renaissance of our era, you can.

I just see a depression in art and the triumph of Edward Bernays.

> i don't get it if it ain't jesus bleeding

I totally "get it". The art, is YOU. YOU are the piece.

[fragrantvagrant]

@fuzzywzhe during the renaisance they put gold gilt on ceilings, painted cherubs golde and painted religious scenes cos that all there was to paint (oh, yeh, they liked to paint ancient mythology as well). 'You' are not the piece. Jeff Koons has produced so much more than those balloon series. I like that you think aluminium is a lesser material for an artist to use . . . does he have to use marble, or gold, or bronze for your literal lovin' tastebuds to get a froth on?

[fragrantvagrant]

@fragrantvagrant and in 300 years religious iconography of catholicism may hopefully be illegal, and they will have to cover up all those monuments to idiotic values. This stinking fox wants nothing more to leave a flaming turd by the Pope's back door :)

[fuzzywzhe]

@teamcrumb "Er, in defence of the fox, I'm an agnostic. I think atheists are like teenagers refusing to do what daddy says, refuting daddy's authority"

In my opinion, I think it's funny that you say you think, and then go along with this silly caricature of "what an atheist is to you".

If the Christian God is so good, and he's omnipotent and he's omniscient, why did he setup the universe in such a way his son had to die on a torture device?

Think about that and remember Matthew 27:46.

[teamcrumb]

@fuzzywzhe I said I'm agnostic. I don't believe in a christian god, but nor do i refute his/its/her existence. I don't know. Anyone who wields quotes from the bible to back up or put down shit is even more inane than someone battling with the values inherent in modern art. I was saying catholicism is a hideous heightened version of christianity. I don't see a reason for all religious doctrines to be made illegal, like the fox its just those catholic fucks that truly offend me.

[fuzzywzhe]

@teamcrumb "I said I'm agnostic. I don't believe in a christian god, but nor do i refute his/its/her existence."

Do you believe in a Santa Claus? Do you refuse his/its/her existence? Gee, how arrogant to draw a conclusion about Santa Clause, or the Easter Bunny. You must be immoral, refuting daddy's authority, and other nonsense.

There was a time when Jupiter was the king of the gods, and any man who doubted his puissance was ipso facto a barbarian and an ignoramus.

Where is He now?

[teamcrumb]

@fuzzywzhe he's up your arse mining for brown eggs. you don't understand what an agnostic is do you. I said I don't believe in/or refute anything. I don't refute daddy's authority, I see his dappy churches on the skyline, but thats man's attempt to see him.

[fuzzywzhe]

@teamcrumb "he's up your arse mining for brown eggs. you don't understand what an agnostic is do you."

Of course I do.

It's somebody that doesn't bother to learn basic logic, like you can't prove a negative.

You never have any evidence that something doesn't exist, ever. That's true of everything that doesn't exist; Leprechauns, the Easter Bunny, Flying Carpets, Centaurs, and God - that have something in common, there's no evidence that they don't exist.

So Leprechauns MIGHT exist to you..

[teamcrumb]

@fuzzywzhe of course they exist.

[fuzzywzhe]

@teamcrumb And pretty much, this is why I resist arguing about religion with people. Absent of logic and reason, you're up against faith and bullshit, and logic and reason can never convince somebody filled with faith and bullshit. You're free to believe what you like and you will.

You can even believe I need "a daddy" because you can't conceive that being moral is acting in your in your own interest - something that is self evident to me and should be to you.

[fuzzywzhe]

@fragrantvagrant Jeff Koons couldn't paint a unicorn with a paint by number guide. That's why he's not an artist. He has absolutely no artist talent whatsoever.

Picasso certainly did, even Warhol had some. Koons is just making a mocker of artists, by using people as dumb as you.

When an ape does it, it's just junk, but when an "artist" does it, it suddenly has significant meaning. The meaning is, people are easily manipulated, and being wealthy doesn't make one smart. That's the art.

[CatZula]

@fuzzywzhe Wow, this is awesome! Very nice! Koons is such a fraud. Hope this reply gets this unmarked as spam!!

[thornbird7556]

@fuzzywzhe I agree on matters of religion's illegitimacy as a tool for personal growth. I think that's really where art enters the picture. I'm sure you've your reasons for disliking Koons. I agree that the prices of art are ridiculous. I don't think you're "attack" on him by listing the sources of his art is effective. It's wellknown his works are readymades. I think that your offer to go buy a cheap Koons is valid though, and appealing, and am sure that Jeffr would feel the same way.

[fuzzywzhe]

@thornbird7556 "I'm sure you've your reasons for disliking Koons. "

I dislike Koons as an artist because he has absolutely no artistic talent whatsoever.

As a marketer, I do respect him.

People who think he's an artist are morons. To be an artist you don't only have to be creative, you have be talented, and Koons isn't either. Every single piece of his work is just a copy of somebody else's work, and he doesn't even have the ability to make the copy himself, he pays somebody else to do it.

[fuzzywzhe]

@teamcrumb "you're such an ass. there are clearly values that you don't value, "

What, marketing acumen?

Well, you got me there.

"there's no reason to keep yapping on about The Emporer's New Clothes,"

How ironic you bring that up when Koons made "art" by photographing him and his porn star wife fucking.

Nevermind, I see the light, he's a true genius. Like I said, I am sick of this stupid conversation.

[teamcrumb]

@fuzzywzhe i didn't ask you to see the light. there is no light. I don't think he's a genius. if you're sick of it, drown it, cos I'm pumped and ready for more. despicable yes. but still. I loathe rows on youtube but am happy to let my self down in the name of building an autobahn over you. You did not spot an irony, you said his stuff was just hype, empty and devoid of love or meaning. The renaissance painted whores as demons, Koons fell in love with his whore and enjoyed fucking her, no doubt

[ANDPRY]

Wow, Jeff! applause, applause- how wonderfully you speak your smarmy platitudes- really just so perfect- now we all- and the uneducated middle class- can really understand art thanks to your deep explanations of the "significance" of each of your pieces.

[taronago]

art factory...AWESOME!

[versafan]

once again great manipulation of materials (reminiscent of the Baroque/stacked pig work). wouldn't u like a job in that studio?!

[basssuper9]

awesome, excellent. hillarius.

i love koons art