display | more...
I had a great idea not too long ago, but you can't tell anyone, okay?

Here's the deal: basically, we would set up a charity fund to aid "young struggling artists in America." We'd take donations and everything would be legit, we just wouldn't tell anyone exactly how the money was going to be used.

Then, when we got about half a million dollars, we'd get in contact with every cancerous act that entertainment harbors: N'Sync, the Backstreet Boys, Britney Spears, Freddy Prinze Jr., Kirsten Dunst, Anne Rice's crotchling (who now fancies himself an author), everyone who is sucking the consumer's money and attention away from real artists. Like myself.

Then we'd give them all a share of the cash, say, $50,000. Enough to live on comfortably for a year. The only stipulation of this money would be that they had to go away for a whole year. No time in the studio, no tours, no riding on mom's coattails at social gatherings in the Garden District, nothing. Just sit on your ass and stay out of the public eye for 365 days.

But don't tell anyone, okay?
No, no, no! How to fix Art:

Send him to a doctor.

Yeah, it was lame, but seriously . . .

The first step is to remove subjectivity. This has been a big problem since postmodernism came onto the scene. You see, modernists were just concerned about the decline of structure w/r/t art. So, just recreate the structure.

"But, Dan," I hear you saying, "What the fuck is structure?"

And I understand your concern. Imagine you're living in about 1920, okay? You've got all these new theories. You're not God-derived any more, you're an ape. You thought you understood physics, because you understand equal and opposite forces. Then Einstein comes around and says, no, some laws of physics change, depending where you are and your motion in relation to the object you're viewing. And then the uncertainty principle comes around, and screws with you more.

Okay, here's the point.

Art now comments on itself, sometimes. (see: recursion) It just used to comment on the real world, but now it comments on the real world through its perceptions of art.

Ex.: Andy Worhol's Brillo stunt. He put a box of Brillo Pads he bought at a store and said it was art. I know what he did; he knows what he did; we ALL know that it's just a damn box of Brillo. You're like, "Andy, go wash my goddamn dishes." That's the point, you're questioning art, and if you think for a second, you see that art is also commenting on itself and, through that, the real world.

How this is all related to a box of steel wool, I will never know.

So, back to the subject, in order to fix art, you need to figure out what the hell art's job was supposed to be. The rather inclusive nature of art being created in an art vacuum is both stupid, snobbish, and useless. Now, I never said art critics were never snobs.

So, What does art do?

Log in or register to write something here or to contact authors.