Monday, March 29, 2010

5 Quick Links for a Soggy Monday

  • I've finally turned in my contribution to Art21's ongoing debate on "Must art be ethical?" You can participate in the discussion there.
  • Jim Finn, whose film "Interkosmos" (along with Marcus Coate's "Radio Shaman" and “The Plover's Wing”), launches the first week of double features at Decalogue: Films You Can Count on Two Hands at the gallery starting tomorrow, was among the filmmakers interviewed about North Korea in the weekend's New York Times.
  • Everybody's talking about Sarah Thornton's article for The Economist on whether one urine receptacle is more important than another.
  • ARTNews reports that Peter Galassi, MoMA's chief curator of photography, wants all the talking to replaced by looking. Personally, I find that nothing caps off a good afternoon of intense looking like talking about it, but...perhaps just looking at art and then never mentioning it again is under-rated.
  • Too much talking involved apparently sank a proposed public arts project along a river in Wales, according to Artforum.com. "microphones on nearby docks...would store noises from passersby, which would be transformed into pulsing lights on the buoys, activated by the movements of the river. Loudspeakers in the floats would also replay the conversations captured by the mics...." Kinda of creeps me out. It's one thing to know you have no privacy in most public settings anymore, but its another entirely to have that fact played back for you.

Labels:

1 Comments:

OpenID dennishelsel said...

Nice job on the Art 21 article! I like distinction you make regarding the ethics that artists are subject to while acknowledging the neutrality of the art.

War can be said to be unethical, but the documentation of it cannot be subject to any ethical obligation, it simply is. Much the same, art is a record of human life and concerns; ultimately it is left to be considered apart from the artist.

However (to contradict myself), I do think that the intentions of the artist go a long way in undermining an artwork if the means of production are called into question. The work itself may present an interesting set of questions and concerns, but if it was all achieved in an "unethical" manner, the art itself is somewhat compromised.

3/29/2010 07:04:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home