The petition has long finished. The points in the video remain valid. A public institution, publicly funded, imposes a narrow view on the public and does not - as it is legally obliged to - represent the spectrum of contemporary art. This narrow viewpoint perpetuates the stance taken at the Tate in past and repeats the same mistake as the past. The directors then thought they knew best and their personal choice would be validated by the future. How wrong they were.
The petition has long finished. The points in the video remain valid. A public institution, publicly funded, imposes a narrow view on the public and does not - as it is legally obliged to - represent the spectrum of contemporary art. This narrow viewpoint perpetuates the stance taken at the Tate in past and repeats the same mistake as the past. The directors then thought they knew best and their personal choice would be validated by the future. How wrong they were.
The petition has long finished. The points in the video remain valid. A public institution, publicly funded, imposes a narrow view on the public and does not - as it is legally obliged to - represent the spectrum of contemporary art. This narrow viewpoint perpetuates the stance taken at the Tate in past and repeats the same mistake as the past. The directors then thought they knew best and their personal choice would be validated by the future. How wrong they were.
if art was meant to cater to the ignorance and shortcomings of an audience unwilling to share in the study, history and practice of art itself, it would be no more than a device as useless as sport, or entertainment. that is not what art is, or what it ever was, past or present.
no, the general public is never going to understand the inner workings of subatomic particles or the human genome, but it happens that
The film concerns itself with the Establishment dictating what ART is to the general public and in particular the office of Serota and cronies. If you understand the corrupt manner in which this operates at the top, then you will probably spend less time criticising the art itself or indeed works made in protest.
this research which stemmed from a past much easier to grasp is the deconstruction that leads to knowledge and further understanding of our being. that anyone claiming to 'love' art can't see the beauty in a twombly painting is baffling; either you need to pick up a few books on color theory, poetry or post-structuralism, or you're simply not interested in what art has become.
do you really want to be the heretic refuting global warming, or the narrow-sight preaching creationism?
We as a species do need to push every boundary in making art, but we must be aware of who selects this work for display and gold ribbons and why they do this. MONEY, POWER etc. Same old.
Sorry honey more people have visited the Tate in that last 10 years than ever in history. And just as poets are encouraged to read other poetry there is always a historic element to art and to study the history of it is important. You sound bitter that you have not been born an innovator.
Unfortunately it seems that through discussing/ arguing these mute points that arise when art is comprehensible only to the artist and the art dealer, we miss the point that we are being presented these works as being some sort of movement of now, without seeing the whole picture. We are being deceived by the Tate and the art dealers into paying taxes toward reselling this 'art' at inflated prices. It is precisely beacuase it is incomprehensible to the public that they can achieve this.
"Art has changed and will continue to change..." then I dont quite understand your problem with the Stuckist movement. I mean even if you don't like the paintings of stuckists then that is fine, but, you must realize that what they are saying is that conceptual art has become the status quo to the point of being unquestionable. Stuckist really are trying to move on - of course their way may not be the best way or the way that you would like but this is the risk of 'change.'
why must you insist on confining yourself into your own little world of 'stuckism'?
You cant always be spoon fed with the values and meanings behind art and maybe if you looked a little deeper than what you see on the surface you would learn to appreciate the value of what art has become and not just what art was, or are you incapable of such creative brain power?
don't be so silly. The art condemned here is art that is forced upon us, a value system that has become so overcoded that we simply forget its arbitrariness - you talk about depth as if you know what that means, as if it is truth; this is what is known as a reality delusion. The stuckists are a spirit embodied in a particular movement, one which is most the appropriate today. When painting was the dominant value then Duchamp was necessary.
The fact that you are is showing a bit of reality delusion. You talk as if you know me, which you don't, because if you did you'd realise I'm definitely not the kind of person who would let anything be 'forced upon' me. I choose to like what I like and happen to appreciate all kinds of art, and I certainly don't slag off other people for liking what I dislike.
Art has changed and will continue to change...so I think it's time to get over it :/
This has been flagged as spam show
The petition has long finished. The points in the video remain valid. A public institution, publicly funded, imposes a narrow view on the public and does not - as it is legally obliged to - represent the spectrum of contemporary art. This narrow viewpoint perpetuates the stance taken at the Tate in past and repeats the same mistake as the past. The directors then thought they knew best and their personal choice would be validated by the future. How wrong they were.
Stuckstuckstuck 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The petition has long finished. The points in the video remain valid. A public institution, publicly funded, imposes a narrow view on the public and does not - as it is legally obliged to - represent the spectrum of contemporary art. This narrow viewpoint perpetuates the stance taken at the Tate in past and repeats the same mistake as the past. The directors then thought they knew best and their personal choice would be validated by the future. How wrong they were.
Stuckstuckstuck 1 year ago
The petition has long finished. The points in the video remain valid. A public institution, publicly funded, imposes a narrow view on the public and does not - as it is legally obliged to - represent the spectrum of contemporary art. This narrow viewpoint perpetuates the stance taken at the Tate in past and repeats the same mistake as the past. The directors then thought they knew best and their personal choice would be validated by the future. How wrong they were.
Stuckstuckstuck 1 year ago
if art was meant to cater to the ignorance and shortcomings of an audience unwilling to share in the study, history and practice of art itself, it would be no more than a device as useless as sport, or entertainment. that is not what art is, or what it ever was, past or present.
no, the general public is never going to understand the inner workings of subatomic particles or the human genome, but it happens that
jacobperkinsmusic 2 years ago
The film concerns itself with the Establishment dictating what ART is to the general public and in particular the office of Serota and cronies. If you understand the corrupt manner in which this operates at the top, then you will probably spend less time criticising the art itself or indeed works made in protest.
jaarastafari 2 years ago
this research which stemmed from a past much easier to grasp is the deconstruction that leads to knowledge and further understanding of our being. that anyone claiming to 'love' art can't see the beauty in a twombly painting is baffling; either you need to pick up a few books on color theory, poetry or post-structuralism, or you're simply not interested in what art has become.
do you really want to be the heretic refuting global warming, or the narrow-sight preaching creationism?
jacobperkinsmusic 2 years ago
We as a species do need to push every boundary in making art, but we must be aware of who selects this work for display and gold ribbons and why they do this. MONEY, POWER etc. Same old.
jaarastafari 2 years ago
Sorry honey more people have visited the Tate in that last 10 years than ever in history. And just as poets are encouraged to read other poetry there is always a historic element to art and to study the history of it is important. You sound bitter that you have not been born an innovator.
jowonder 2 years ago
Unfortunately it seems that through discussing/ arguing these mute points that arise when art is comprehensible only to the artist and the art dealer, we miss the point that we are being presented these works as being some sort of movement of now, without seeing the whole picture. We are being deceived by the Tate and the art dealers into paying taxes toward reselling this 'art' at inflated prices. It is precisely beacuase it is incomprehensible to the public that they can achieve this.
jaarastafari 2 years ago
"Art has changed and will continue to change..." then I dont quite understand your problem with the Stuckist movement. I mean even if you don't like the paintings of stuckists then that is fine, but, you must realize that what they are saying is that conceptual art has become the status quo to the point of being unquestionable. Stuckist really are trying to move on - of course their way may not be the best way or the way that you would like but this is the risk of 'change.'
solaranus 2 years ago
why must you insist on confining yourself into your own little world of 'stuckism'?
You cant always be spoon fed with the values and meanings behind art and maybe if you looked a little deeper than what you see on the surface you would learn to appreciate the value of what art has become and not just what art was, or are you incapable of such creative brain power?
lyndsay125 3 years ago
don't be so silly. The art condemned here is art that is forced upon us, a value system that has become so overcoded that we simply forget its arbitrariness - you talk about depth as if you know what that means, as if it is truth; this is what is known as a reality delusion. The stuckists are a spirit embodied in a particular movement, one which is most the appropriate today. When painting was the dominant value then Duchamp was necessary.
solaranus 2 years ago
But the thing is I'm not narrow minded :)
The fact that you are is showing a bit of reality delusion. You talk as if you know me, which you don't, because if you did you'd realise I'm definitely not the kind of person who would let anything be 'forced upon' me. I choose to like what I like and happen to appreciate all kinds of art, and I certainly don't slag off other people for liking what I dislike.
Art has changed and will continue to change...so I think it's time to get over it :/
lyndsay125 2 years ago
here here! someone who got the point of this short film! cheers.
jaarastafari 2 years ago
That's about right.
Stuckstuckstuck 3 years ago