Posts by Paul Litterick
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
One of my local Indians does a Dal Mutter, which I assume to be a delicious blend of herbs and spices inspired by Rammstein:
-
I am fear they are all terribly well-made and will last for years. But as sculpture, they are rubbish: more GI Joe than Giacometti. I expect they are all done with computers and cameras. Making measured models of things as exact reproductions is not much of an artistic act.
No doubt we will find out the secrets of Weta's technique when they produce a making-of-the-making-of film about this ghastly episode in the decline of our culture.
-
Why must a singer write songs to be considered an artist? Must a songwriter also sing her songs to be accepted as an artist? I think not.
Len Lye is an artist because he is accepted by the Art World as such. Artists are identified by the Art World by the fact of their making expressive pieces of work, and the purpose of those works being expression. Making props for movies is not art - it's primary purpose is not artistic expression.
There is also a big question of skill here. The sculptural output of Weta Workshop is not of good quality. Like much conservative art, it is dedicated to prosaic realism, yet its makers are not competent to capture likenesses well. It is also weighed down by leaden symbolism. In this case, we have a sculpture of two halves - which represent earthquakes or teams or islands or any other pairing you can think of. Mawkish sentiment suffuses this and every other Weta work.
In short, it is kitsch, a sort of Capitalist Realism. Real artists moved on from this sort of thing decades ago, and even then its was only the second-rate who indulged in it.
-
The panel that discussed the Rhys Darby ad could easily recycle themselves in cabaret as The Three Douches.
Awful people; that segment should be distributed to schools so that small children can be warned of the sort of people who influence their lives.
-
Another sad loss: Charlie Gillett who, among many other things, was a enthusiast for Fat Freddy's Drop.
-
Big Star, live, in 1993 - their first gig in 19 years:
-
Mozart's Adagio and Rondo for Glass Armonica and Quartet K617 is a good example of change in aesthetic values. Although musical glasses today are regarded as a novelty act, they were played as serious music in the 18th and 19th centuries.
-
if objective values exist, what are they and how would be know them to be objective?
-
Sure, but if you're trying to prove that it's all subjective, then you must accept that Citizen Kane is no better than Robot Monster.
I would like values to be objective, but I think art would be static if they were, like the traditional art forms of the Pacific islands. I think art can only change because values are not objective.
Maybe some values are so well-established that they may as well be laws. After all, artists like Raphael and Michaelangelo have been consistently well-regarded for centuries now. Cinema is a bit more difficult, because it is a relatively new medium and many of its values are new; but others are related to those of other art forms.
Perhaps "The robot monster is not even a robot " is a pretty good value, and one likely to last. If a director makes a film with robot in the title, you are entitled to a robot. That is a simple matter of truth in advertising.
-
if it has the words "iconic" or "legacy" attached to it, it's crap.
Works for me; perhaps "celebration" as well.
I watched the video of Taylor introducing the work to the media, and noticed that the maquette rotates on a stand. I hope the finished work will do the same.