4 ms·

Sad to see the other comments are so contemptuous. When you see one of his pieces in person, you will gain an immediate appreciation for what he was trying to d

by aabhay 3y ago

Sad to see the other comments are so contemptuous. When you see one of his pieces in person, you will gain an immediate appreciation for what he was trying to do. Essentially Richard Serra’s iron sculptures were playing with the architecture of the spaces they were placed in. Turning an open plaza into a twisty maze and so forth. As far as art is concerned, one of my favorite people, and I’m glad he did what he did.

llm_trw 3y ago
>Sad to see the other comments are so contemptuous. There are literally no comments in this thread which are negative. I have no idea why those who control the art world feel the need to present themselves as marginalized.
- aabhay 3y ago
  Yes. I pull the strings on the art world and have complete control over everything but this comment thread.
- paganel 3y ago
  Not contemptuous , but this guy’s “art” is the type of thing that has helped alienate the common man and drove him into whichever political hands rejected these neoliberal-inspired creations. Also, props to Serra for doing some “art” stuff for Qatar in the 2010s, the money was probably very good (which brings me to my above point).
  - outop 3y ago
    Pretty sure the existence of art made from large pieces of steel isn't the thing that "helped alienate the common man".
    - paganel 3y ago
      Alienating art has been a staple of many past social revolutions, the “made up of steel” thing (like in this case) is just a secondary issue. But I get this guy’s appeal and I also get why his audience wouldn’t want to see it that way, it is what is, nothing that the two of us can do about it other than trying to talk over an over-increasing socio-economic wall.
      - outop 3y ago
        Can you name some of these social revolutions? I'm genuinely not sure what you are referring to.
timr 3y ago
Yes, Clara-Clara (formerly installed at Jardin des Tuileries in Paris) was the first time I really "got" Serra -- at least, beyond the scale and imposition of the things. That sculpture was almost natural for the space, and people interacted with it by touching it, leaving white handprints from the soil across the surface, and creating a sort of ghostly effect of all the people who had been there. [1] Too many Serra sculptures are just sort of treated as plop art, but if you see his stuff at Storm King or Dia Beacon or the site-specific installations, it makes a lot more sense. [1] https://alltheartiveeverseen.wordpress.com/2013/10/12/serra-clara-clara/ https://alltheartiveeverseen.wordpress.com/2013/10/12/serra-...
dang 3y ago
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=%22contrarian%20dynamic%22&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
bowsamic 3y ago
There isn’t a single contemptuous comment. Did you write this in anticipation of them?
- aabhay 3y ago
  Don’t be so cynical. I was like the third person to comment on this post and both existing comments were negative. One asking about a game telling the difference between art or trash, etc.
  - bowsamic 3y ago
    I don’t think that comment was negative, it starts by saying they are interesting. I’ve seen a lot of art that purposefully juxtaposes itself with trash.
  - aaronbrethorst 3y ago
    An early work of Serra’s involved him literally tossing molten lead at a wall where it would harden into a pile of waste on the floor. Art or trash indeed. https://www.artforum.com/features/due-process-richard-serras-early-splash-cast-works-226187/ https://www.artforum.com/features/due-process-richard-serras...
  - acjohnson55 3y ago
    Well maybe give it a few minutes before judging the temperature of the conversation? At this point, it seems like there's a lot of appreciation.
smokel 3y ago
> When you see one of his pieces in person, you will gain an immediate appreciation for what he was trying to do. No, sorry. It just doesn't work for me. Tastes differ, I guess. I found most of his works to be typical of "put something big in a gallery and it looks amazing". Also, I feel annoyed by people who claim so much space. Not to say that his work is bad or useless -- I just don't like it. Perhaps if I read more about his intentions I might change my mind. But the appreciation sure isn't immediate for me.
- kjellsbells 3y ago
  I hope you dont feel forced to like it in order to this of yourself as an art lover. That would be wrong. No one likes everything in a gallery after all. Re Serra, one of the problems I have with it is that displaying a gigantic work in the confines of a gallery just feels, well, confining. You already know the boundaries of the space because you can see the walls, the ceiling, the giftshop, etc. If the aim is to induce a sense of awe, or perhaps unease, at the mass of the work, or its size, rather like you might feel at an old site like Stonehenge, that effect is lost in the gallery. In fact there is a general problem with how we display art that is not easily soluble. Much of what is in museums and galleries today was created and sold for a single buyer/viewer. Such works reward close inspection over many years by the owner. Maybe one year you see something you never saw before. That effect is totally lost in a gallery.
Daub 3y ago
I agree that too much art commentary is made without actually seeing the goddam artwork. As an art student I was guilty of this. I remember being very contemptuous of Edward Kienholz's work. These installation pieces looked very cheesy in photos, but when I saw one in real life (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beanery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beanery) I was blown away.
- ryandamm 3y ago
  I had the same reaction to Rothko. Doesn’t make sense until you experience it in person; the color and scale creates a totally different experience than what I was able to imagine looking at photos.

by aabhay 3y ago

llm_trw 3y ago

>Sad to see the other comments are so contemptuous. There are literally no comments in this thread which are negative. I have no idea why those who control the art world feel the need to present themselves as marginalized.

aabhay 3y ago
Yes. I pull the strings on the art world and have complete control over everything but this comment thread.
paganel 3y ago
Not contemptuous , but this guy’s “art” is the type of thing that has helped alienate the common man and drove him into whichever political hands rejected these neoliberal-inspired creations. Also, props to Serra for doing some “art” stuff for Qatar in the 2010s, the money was probably very good (which brings me to my above point).
- outop 3y ago
  Pretty sure the existence of art made from large pieces of steel isn't the thing that "helped alienate the common man".
  - paganel 3y ago
    Alienating art has been a staple of many past social revolutions, the “made up of steel” thing (like in this case) is just a secondary issue. But I get this guy’s appeal and I also get why his audience wouldn’t want to see it that way, it is what is, nothing that the two of us can do about it other than trying to talk over an over-increasing socio-economic wall.
    - outop 3y ago
      Can you name some of these social revolutions? I'm genuinely not sure what you are referring to.

timr 3y ago

Yes, Clara-Clara (formerly installed at Jardin des Tuileries in Paris) was the first time I really "got" Serra -- at least, beyond the scale and imposition of the things. That sculpture was almost natural for the space, and people interacted with it by touching it, leaving white handprints from the soil across the surface, and creating a sort of ghostly effect of all the people who had been there. [1] Too many Serra sculptures are just sort of treated as plop art, but if you see his stuff at Storm King or Dia Beacon or the site-specific installations, it makes a lot more sense. [1] https://alltheartiveeverseen.wordpress.com/2013/10/12/serra-clara-clara/ https://alltheartiveeverseen.wordpress.com/2013/10/12/serra-...

dang 3y ago

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=%22contrarian%20dynamic%22&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

bowsamic 3y ago

There isn’t a single contemptuous comment. Did you write this in anticipation of them?

aabhay 3y ago
Don’t be so cynical. I was like the third person to comment on this post and both existing comments were negative. One asking about a game telling the difference between art or trash, etc.
- bowsamic 3y ago
  I don’t think that comment was negative, it starts by saying they are interesting. I’ve seen a lot of art that purposefully juxtaposes itself with trash.
- aaronbrethorst 3y ago
  An early work of Serra’s involved him literally tossing molten lead at a wall where it would harden into a pile of waste on the floor. Art or trash indeed. https://www.artforum.com/features/due-process-richard-serras-early-splash-cast-works-226187/ https://www.artforum.com/features/due-process-richard-serras...
- acjohnson55 3y ago
  Well maybe give it a few minutes before judging the temperature of the conversation? At this point, it seems like there's a lot of appreciation.

smokel 3y ago

> When you see one of his pieces in person, you will gain an immediate appreciation for what he was trying to do. No, sorry. It just doesn't work for me. Tastes differ, I guess. I found most of his works to be typical of "put something big in a gallery and it looks amazing". Also, I feel annoyed by people who claim so much space. Not to say that his work is bad or useless -- I just don't like it. Perhaps if I read more about his intentions I might change my mind. But the appreciation sure isn't immediate for me.

kjellsbells 3y ago
I hope you dont feel forced to like it in order to this of yourself as an art lover. That would be wrong. No one likes everything in a gallery after all. Re Serra, one of the problems I have with it is that displaying a gigantic work in the confines of a gallery just feels, well, confining. You already know the boundaries of the space because you can see the walls, the ceiling, the giftshop, etc. If the aim is to induce a sense of awe, or perhaps unease, at the mass of the work, or its size, rather like you might feel at an old site like Stonehenge, that effect is lost in the gallery. In fact there is a general problem with how we display art that is not easily soluble. Much of what is in museums and galleries today was created and sold for a single buyer/viewer. Such works reward close inspection over many years by the owner. Maybe one year you see something you never saw before. That effect is totally lost in a gallery.

Daub 3y ago

I agree that too much art commentary is made without actually seeing the goddam artwork. As an art student I was guilty of this. I remember being very contemptuous of Edward Kienholz's work. These installation pieces looked very cheesy in photos, but when I saw one in real life (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beanery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beanery) I was blown away.

ryandamm 3y ago
I had the same reaction to Rothko. Doesn’t make sense until you experience it in person; the color and scale creates a totally different experience than what I was able to imagine looking at photos.