Artworks Not Yet Conceived

[Pluto]

Yeah, sounds like there's a lot going on, the communication could be a bit confused, maybe that's the idea. Also by using Piranha it becomes an aggressive work, dare to put your hand in the tank. Piranha B movies. It would be helpful to understand how you see it, if you included a drawing of it.

Living within an image and information saturated society it is perhaps a first port of call, or natural reaction to make the work overloaded too, mirroring what is outside in society and also inside your brain, but I think this unhelpful, is it not better to make a simple work of not so many elements to be the inverse of our overloaded and over-stimulated societies. The simplicity (and possibly emptiness) of the artwork Deep (after seeing it) enables you to see anew (outside your conditioning) the screaming voices and images which constitute consumer society. The crassness and harm, the hatred and aggressiveness, the manipulation and deceit, etc. You see outside your ideology, outside of your water, like the goldfish in the tank cannot.

So, to use a cannot to make a can type artwork.

[Pluto]

Photograph a potato. Portrait lighting, 3:1 light ratio. Frame it. Sell it for 1.5 million euros.

Who'd buy it?

[Walker]

Photograph a potato. Portrait lighting, 3:1 light ratio. Frame it. Sell it for 1.5 million euros.

Who'd buy it?

Correction: who did buy it?

[Pluto]

Okay, who's the artist then?

[Walker]

Richer, with euros as the baseline.

[Pluto]

edited

[Walker]

Businessman buys photograph of a potato for €1m
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-enter ... 31681.html

Simplicity, simplicity, simplicity

*

Skip the fish and the water. Just display the empty tank. If a viewer doesn't get it, their loss.

[Pluto]

Funny. It looks like a planet. The artist who took it is able to charge 200,000 per photographic session, to those who can pay. He will make you look just right. I've been photographed by such and such. The photographer and his potato photo are more about money than art though. Buying the potato photo from this photographer is not like buying a photo of a potato from you, say. That would be insane (at that price). His photo is a commodity, like gold, it can be traded, the work's value can only go up, supposedly. The article plays to those who see 'art' as being extremely suspect and in the service of the moneyed elite and power. This is one way of seeing it but there are other non-monetised artworks which never get into newspapers as they go against the internal political structure of the newspaper and thus the wider society too. A capitalist newspaper sees capital in everything and the art in nothing.

What would the fish-tank on it's own say?

I'm reminded of Rachel Whiteread and her 'Plinth' artwork:

rachel-whiteread-plinth[1].jpg

[marjoram_blues]

Businessman buys photograph of a potato for €1m
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-enter ... 31681.html

Simplicity, simplicity, simplicity

*

Skip the fish and the water. Just display the empty tank. If a viewer doesn't get it, their loss.

This is criminal. It's a photograph of an Irish potato. When you know that and consider the amount paid for it, then the Irish famine. It makes me fuckin' sick.
The gloating of the rich over the poor. The harming of the poor by the rich.
In my imagination, I would go find this bastard, break the photo over his head. And take a snap...a real mug shot. But that would not be enough...

[Pluto]

Yes, read that way, and its impossible not to actually, is both obscene and grotesque. A deeply unethical artwork, of the poor and poverty, as distanced subject of contemplation (and ridicule) by a moneyed elite who have lost all concept of humanity. After the revolution, this work would be the first one for the skip.

[Walker]

Yes, read that way, and its impossible not to actually, is both obscene and grotesque. A deeply unethical artwork, of the poor and poverty, as distanced subject of contemplation (and ridicule) by a moneyed elite who have lost all concept of humanity. After the revolution, this work would be the first one for the skip.

Yeah. Send it to where the Biggest Buddha statues in the world were sent.

[Walker]

edited

Make that a 2:1 light ratio.

3:1 is used for men. The potato looks more like 2:1.

4:1 is veering off into abstraction, where the viewer must input more.

1:1 is for high fashion. Also known as high key lighting.

1:1 is also used for children.

(Did you observe the potato naval?)

[Pluto]

Is it important?

[Walker]

Are you kidding?

Important it is to disregard not what stares in the face you just because conditioning deems content unworthy, even if content may clog with lint of high bacterial variety.

[Pluto]

Hmm. The conditioning covers that which is not even there then. The naval speaks of the body. Maybe we should see what else he's done. He's Irish. He's a celebrity portrait photographer trying to make is client look good. Are you a fan of his work?