Want To Be Original?

[ABERS]

A bit of a turgid read but there's a few tips on producing original art here
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-30343083

"To gain the status of an original artist is therefore not easy. But in a society where art is revered as the highest cultural achievement, the rewards are enormous. Hence there is a motive to fake it. Artists and critics get together in order to take themselves in, the artists posing as the originators of astonishing breakthroughs, the critics posing as the penetrating judges of the true avant garde. "

Get an art critic on your side and you're away!

Why did I keep getting images of 'Call me Dave' and other politicians flashing across my mind when reading it? 

[Reinardina]

No time to read it now. Will get round to it later. Did see the line that modern art wants to shock.

I find that quite shocking in itself. Something that turns your stomach therefore, can be called modern art?
And photographs of the puddles of vomit it induces, would be modern art photography?

And said puddles preserved and tastefully arranged around the stomach turning item, could (or most certainly would) make a prize winning installation?

Better start thinking how to preserve puddles of vomit. Any suggestions?

[ABERS]

Better start thinking how to preserve puddles of vomit. Any suggestions?

A few tins vegetable soup on hand will always ensure you can put a puddle anywhere.

[Reinardina]

Better start thinking how to preserve puddles of vomit. Any suggestions?

A few tins vegetable soup on hand will always ensure you can put a puddle anywhere.

They would look too fresh. I'd want that half chewed, half digested look.

[Oldboy]

Better start thinking how to preserve puddles of vomit. Any suggestions?

A few tins vegetable soup on hand will always ensure you can put a puddle anywhere.

They would look too fresh. I'd want that half chewed, half digested look.

Carrots do it for me! 

[Reinardina]

Better start thinking how to preserve puddles of vomit. Any suggestions?

A few tins vegetable soup on hand will always ensure you can put a puddle anywhere.

They would look too fresh. I'd want that half chewed, half digested look.

Carrots do it for me! 

Do what for you?

[ABERS]

Better start thinking how to preserve puddles of vomit. Any suggestions?

A few tins vegetable soup on hand will always ensure you can put a puddle anywhere.

They would look too fresh. I'd want that half chewed, half digested look.

Carrots do it for me! 

Billy Conolly posed the question in one of his shows, " Why does vomit always have carrots in it, even if you haven't eaten carrots for some time?" 

[Reinardina]

Better start thinking how to preserve puddles of vomit. Any suggestions?

A few tins vegetable soup on hand will always ensure you can put a puddle anywhere.

They would look too fresh. I'd want that half chewed, half digested look.

Carrots do it for me! 

Billy Conolly posed the question in one of his shows, " Why does vomit always have carrots in it, even if you haven't eaten carrots for some time?" 

Ah, I missed the Connolly thing, but he is right, there are always rather large orange blobs present.

[spikeyjen]

How on earth did we get to carrots in vomit?

[Reinardina]

It's all about modern art, and its desire to shock.

[Oldboy]

How on earth did we get to carrots in vomit?

Vomit wouldn't be vomit without carrots! 

[Reinardina]

Finally got round to reading the article. Alan had already condensed it to the bare fake facts.

Another quote: So powerful is the impetus towards the collective fake that it is now rare to be a finalist for the Turner prize without producing some object or event that shows itself to be art only because the critics have said that it is.

So, my invented 'installation' of shock and vomit would only be art, if a critic pronounced it thus.

Who gave the critics so much power? And how do you win over an art critic? Fake it?

Over the years, as a 'side line,' which I have always called 'creative editing,' I have produced some 'acceptable' digital art work; I now realise, it was never noticed because I aimed to please, not shock.

Will have to rethink my approach to Art, and start with photographing graphic events, to base my 'art' on.

My original idea, outlined in my first post, might still work, if I could take a really graphic image of public debauchery, print it 'wall size' and surround it by the 'puddles' that seem to have hijacked this serious thread about Art. (Capital A.)

[spikeyjen]

Who gave the critics so much power? And how do you win over an art critic? Fake it?

I think you might have to sleep with him (or her)

[Reinardina]

Who gave the critics so much power? And how do you win over an art critic? Fake it?

I think you might have to sleep with him (or her)

Wouldn't work at my age. Or maybe it would: shock horror seems to be the required thing.

[ABERS]

Who gave the critics so much power? And how do you win over an art critic? Fake it?

Good question R. To paraphrase an old saying "Those who can, do: those who can't criticize".

How do you become one? Say something outrageous about a well established and highly regarded artist. After all the worst thing an artist can do is become popular in the eyes of the cognoscenti. Back up your criticism with in depth and high falluting language that no one actually understands so that the listener or reader feels a little unsure and loathe to question the critic whereby exposing him/herself to ridicule as someone who is artistically naive.

We have a monthly judging session at the club and occasionally some bumptious prat will ask if the author of the image being judged is present and further ask why the image was taken. What moved the author emotionally to press the shutter at that precise moment. When this question is asked of me I find it delightfully deflating to answer "Well it just seemed a good idea at the time".

Never thought of the sleeping angle.