for 10 minutes (it seemed like an hour) while a KIA lady pumped them for their thoughts and feelings regarding it.
"I think it's stupid," said one little boy.
Wow, did the KIA lady shut him down fast. "No, the artist worked on this for a really long time," [THREE YEARS! I'm pretty sure most people could have thrown that thing together in three days or less.] "and we need to" blah blah blah. Something about admiring and respecting his work.
I feel bad that I didn't pull that little boy aside and tell him I think it's stupid, too.
4 comments:
I've seen many wonderful things at the KIA.
This piece does not fall in the 'wonderful' category.
I'm sorry that the docent or whoever didn't acknowledge that not every piece appeals to everyone. (Probably it would have been a bit much for her to admit the piece is stupid...)
Any artist that takes 3 years to produce something so ambiguous and aesthetically unpleasing is one crappy artist. I "get" the idea of obtuse art, but if it only has a back story like this, I call BS.
Actually, even with a convoluted back story, I call BS. You shouldn't have to read a novel to understand a piece on at least some level.
If you can't convey your emotion or feeling OR at least invoke a feeling in others (even abhorrence), you have missed the whole point of creating. (Although I get so tired of art that is supposed to push buttons.) I looked at it for a while, and it looks like an ugly waste of clay.
My vote's on stupid too.
Word.
Post a Comment