4 ms·
In Duchamp's case the execution of the art would be Duchamp's choice of which object to dignify as art. He did make a choice, so execution would be involved.
by pmoriarty 5y ago
In Duchamp's case the execution of the art would be Duchamp's choice of which object to dignify as art. He did make a choice, so execution would be involved.
In Haaning's case maybe the execution is in the choice of blank canvas and coming up with the concept... would you buy that?
- bambax 5y agoExecution is making something. Decisions and speeches and choice and "coming up with the concept" don't constitute execution. But they show intent, and therefore, IMHO, art. Art is like crime. It's a bigger crime to think of something bad, and then do it. But in lots of cases, planning to do a crime is a crime, even without implementation.
- pmoriarty 5y ago"Execution is making something." So I guess for you that "something" has to be tangible. How would you characterize a musical composition.. could that be art? After all, a musical composition is nothing without being performed -- either on real instruments or in a sheet music reader's imagination. But that performance is not in the composition, so one could argue the composition itself has no execution and therefore by your definition of art a musical composition is modern art. Yet there are plenty of pre-modern compositions, arguably without execution either.
- soco 5y agoThis strawman argument sounds a bit insulting to the composers...