Culture Clash

I can’t tell you how many times I get pm’s from you guys lamenting the author’s diaphanous repertoire, how limited we are in post topics, and why oh why don’t we cater more towards the hoidy toidy, the more enlightened educated and superior intellectual pursuits that our regulars have been craving. You think I’m not up to it? Pshaw

Alright which one of you geniuses can tell me what this is:

Clocks ticking, I know for you Ivy Leaguers, this is right into your wheel house, right? OK, here is a hint, it sold for 1500 pounds British sterling, and you thought your 5 year old’s finger painting was creative. But it gets better, here is the method by which genius is produced (warning, it is not necessary to view entire video to capture it’s flavor)

Pretty classy stuff, huh?, this particular art form is called Nexus Vomitus

“Nexus Vomitus” is a collaboration between vomiting artist Millie Brown and opera singers Patricia Hammond and Zita Syme. SHOWstudio documented this one-off performance during which Millie created a rainbow-like spectrum of vomit on canvas to Patricia and Zita’s melodic interlud

The cultural boat has sailed…………..with me still sitting on the dock. I thought this was pretty weird, the silk purse is just an illusion for this sow’s ear.

Kinda makes me want to go right out and fire off another check to the NEA.

Comments are closed.

  1. InsipiD

    They have it turned sideways. Turn it 90 degrees counter-clockwise, and I see Daffy Duck.

    I can’t imagine doing this on purpose. Normally, paint pigments contain dangerous stuff like cadmium and cobalt, so they have to go to some trouble to seek permanent but non-toxic stuff, I guess. Secondly, I hate vomiting. I had food poisoning about a month ago, and after all that I remembered that it had been over a year and close to two years really since I had last thrown up. I even mentioned that to my dad and maybe a friend, too. The thought of doing something and planning to vomit to make it happen is just one of those really wrong things that I can’t imagine doing on purpose. I did laugh and gag really hard at the Jackass Vomelette.

    Thumb up 0

  2. Rann

    I actually don’t mind abstract art. Done sincerely, it can actually be interesting.

    When the “draw” is in the production, not the final product, though, it tends to be bullshit. It’s hipster nonsense, like ordering a CD whose case is a cut-in-half cinder block. (Actual thing, I knew this one jackass that would rave about his collection of “unknown” music and one of them was like that.)

    Abstract art is generally just like any other kind of art… there’s nothing stopping it from being a sincere effort to be visually pleasing and thought-provoking other than the person holding the paint. (Or… chicken bones. Gah.)

    Thumb up 0

  3. JimK

    Here’s the thing. Solely as exploration of color and/or shape, I like abstract stuff. I paint some of it myself sometimes, just to see what happens when you slap this color with that and what have you.

    But then the “artists” all have to take it to some fucking stupid weird place where they puke paint and call it a statement. Yeah, you know what the statement is? You’re an asshole with too much free time and no one ever told you “No” when you were a child. That’s the statement, that you’re a spoiled fucking idiot.

    It’s not even a “These kids today, with their hair and their vomit art” reaction. Most modern art – since decades before I was born – has fallen prey to this game of “shock the art patron” rather than attempting to create beauty.

    Puts me in mind of the episode of Doctor Who where they met Van Gogh. Van Gogh was told that his true genius was in how he turned used his madness and pain to express the beauty he saw around him in such simple things. And that, for me, is the ultimate definition of art…is there beauty in the creation? Vomiting colors looks pretty afterwards, but the act makes the art ugly. I have no interest in that. Art should be an escape, and watching some overprivileged idiot upchuck perfectly good paint? That doesn’t show me beauty.

    Thumb up 0

  4. richtaylor365 *

    A few years before 9/11 my wife and I did a New York City trip. Aside from the usual attractions we hit all the cultural stuff, the met, and the Modern Art Museum . I notice a large crowd gathered around this one exhibit. me being the curious type I mosey on over to see what the hub bub is all about. There, on the wall, is a 6′ x 8′ canvass with 6 toilet seats clued on, each seat was painted a different color, that was it. All these high brows are discussing the intentions of the artist, how free flowing and expressive it was, “People, they are painted toilet seats, his intention was to show what dolts you all are”.

    Thumb up 0

  5. Seattle Outcast

    I was thinking that I could shit better art….

    Too many of these “artists” are merely no-talent hacks that have discovered that there are grants that will support them while they turn out crap that nobody enjoys (first hint – nobody but you likes your art). Then they all get together and discuss how “serious artists” all appreciate it (second hint – you have to insult people into buying it). It isn’t art, it’s spectacle (final hint – your art is nothing more than a cheap gimmick)

    Thumb up 2

  6. AlexInCT

    I have always felt that practially all forms of modern art was about how much some lazy bastard could fleece rich idiots for, and the more of it I see, the more I am convinced that’s precisely what it is all about. As someone mentioned it is also about shcoking people into thinking you are a genius, even when what you do is pedantic at best. These artist types that make it big are just good con men IMO.

    Besides, everyone knows real art can only be admired under black light and if it doesn’t glow it shouldn’t show!

    Thumb up 0

  7. Manwhore

    I pretty much agree here, Jim. I’ll add that art/art appreciation hasn’t quite caught up with the times either. It’s stuck in this idea that it’s performance based (as in the “actor of the part”
    ) and not about innovation. There’s plenty to be done to innovate in art (3d-computer-digital-new material) but watching a semi-hot redhead puke on paper gets rich chinese men horny.

    on the other hand, this post isn’t really fair to her, it should be accompanied with a manifesto, performance art usually does require one to be explained. On it’s face I sorta agree with you that “modern art” died right about the dada period. It went from:

    1:) Representing a 3d form on 2d surface
    2:) Representing light and dark
    3:) Representing light on a form
    4:) How the eye sees lighting effects
    5:) How the mind interprets what the eye sees
    6:) ?????

    Thumb up 0