4 ms·

There are artists who are born to craft art. They wake up and want to paint, no matter what, they have a drive to refine their craft. They better the world thro

There are artists who are born to craft art. They wake up and want to paint, no matter what, they have a drive to refine their craft. They better the world through pure visual joy. There are artists who are born to scheme. The art is the vessel, the craft is the thought. The concept is king and and to be successful is to create tight, conceptually sound pieces. To craft relevant and provoking statements out of abstract language. They better the world through debate and response. Many successful artists combine the two but it's not a necessity. I don't think you should dismiss somebody because they provoked you with their work. Your statement, your imagery of blasting him into space, is ultimately the execution of his piece. He built a frame and your comment filled it in. Therefor, my review of Richard Prince and 6stringmerc's collaboration... 3 out of 5. Deductions made due to the cruelty of your "well-deserved end" bit. Maybe next time consider a scenario in which they are trapped and punished but are given an opportunity to redeem themselves through an exercise of traditional craft. Also a smaller deduction due to your trite invocation of Musk and Bezos. Even the most casual HN comment readers have explored their entrepreneurial motif enough.

rsp1984 11y ago
> I don't think you should dismiss somebody because they provoked you with their work. Your statement, your imagery of blasting him into space, is ultimately the execution of his piece. He built a frame and your comment filled it in. Which, according to logic, makes people who successfully provoke others already artists half way. Not a very good definition of art in my opinion...
6stringmerc 11y ago
While I can see the humor in your taking a stance as an arbiter and unquestionable authority on all things artistic and therefore leveling criticism at my personal opinion as conveyed using over-the-top creative writing for effect, I kindly decline the relevance, necessity, or functional benefit of your review, and believe it should be shot into space, where it will meet its well deserved audience.
bweitzman 11y ago
> I don't think you should dismiss somebody because they provoked you with their work. Your statement, your imagery of blasting him into space, is ultimately the execution of his piece. He built a frame and your comment filled it in. But it's not like it's an interesting reaction, it's so obvious. It's like when kids say "Hey look at that over there" and then "Made you look" when you look. You don't have a reason not to look, it's maybe funny the first time because it's so stupid but after it's been done over and over (and appropriation has) then there's nothing left. Or like an older brother who maneuvers his siblings hands and then says "Stop hitting yourself". These produce exactly the same reaction as the provocateur is intending but it's not an interesting reaction at all. Personally, I think the only reason that this guy is famous is because some very wealthy people chose him specifically because he can generate an endless stream of his art so that they can buy and trade them to make more money. The art is an investment for them and has no aesthetic value.
- 6stringmerc 11y ago
  Nicely put; also for relevant context, recently there was publicity around a 'comedian' by the name of Nicole Arbor who put together some incendiary, willfully offensive "Dear ____ People" videos, none of which I'll link. Basically, when called out for being highly offensive, she doubled down on the comedy and art being offensive is part of tradition but side-stepped acknowledging a lot of people found her material, well, just not funny. So it failed the artistic merit test by consensus. Thus, it wasn't really art, just bad rhetoric. Not all things claiming to be art are actually art.

rsp1984 11y ago

> I don't think you should dismiss somebody because they provoked you with their work. Your statement, your imagery of blasting him into space, is ultimately the execution of his piece. He built a frame and your comment filled it in. Which, according to logic, makes people who successfully provoke others already artists half way. Not a very good definition of art in my opinion...

6stringmerc 11y ago

While I can see the humor in your taking a stance as an arbiter and unquestionable authority on all things artistic and therefore leveling criticism at my personal opinion as conveyed using over-the-top creative writing for effect, I kindly decline the relevance, necessity, or functional benefit of your review, and believe it should be shot into space, where it will meet its well deserved audience.

bweitzman 11y ago

> I don't think you should dismiss somebody because they provoked you with their work. Your statement, your imagery of blasting him into space, is ultimately the execution of his piece. He built a frame and your comment filled it in. But it's not like it's an interesting reaction, it's so obvious. It's like when kids say "Hey look at that over there" and then "Made you look" when you look. You don't have a reason not to look, it's maybe funny the first time because it's so stupid but after it's been done over and over (and appropriation has) then there's nothing left. Or like an older brother who maneuvers his siblings hands and then says "Stop hitting yourself". These produce exactly the same reaction as the provocateur is intending but it's not an interesting reaction at all. Personally, I think the only reason that this guy is famous is because some very wealthy people chose him specifically because he can generate an endless stream of his art so that they can buy and trade them to make more money. The art is an investment for them and has no aesthetic value.

6stringmerc 11y ago
Nicely put; also for relevant context, recently there was publicity around a 'comedian' by the name of Nicole Arbor who put together some incendiary, willfully offensive "Dear ____ People" videos, none of which I'll link. Basically, when called out for being highly offensive, she doubled down on the comedy and art being offensive is part of tradition but side-stepped acknowledging a lot of people found her material, well, just not funny. So it failed the artistic merit test by consensus. Thus, it wasn't really art, just bad rhetoric. Not all things claiming to be art are actually art.