Tuesday, April 19, 2011
Andre Serrano's Piss Christ vandalized
While on display in France Andre Serrano's Piss Christ was vandalized. I personally don't really care much but it does spark debate. The original work took a statue and vandalized it in the first place in the name of "art". If someone destroyed smashed it in the name of art would that be a problem? The people that did it-- didn't have this motive. They were presumably pissed with the piss work. But if they had done it in the name of art would it make a difference? Maybe it was performance art? The bottom line would be that if it were purchased one could do anything they want to it. If the peeps were smarter they would have bought it -- then burned it. I am not a fan of the work anyway. I think art can be made shocking then justified by any variety of means. Does that make it good, or bad, or just sad...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
regardless of whether you like the piece, it is significant in terms or contemporary art, as well as recent art history. if anything comes from the vandalism, i think it strengthens the work, or the concept of the work, as it was made to be a controversial piece of art. that people are that moved by the work to vandalize it, though i am assuming that those who did it do not understand it, definitely proves that the work is successful.
ReplyDeletei use the term 'successful' for works of art that have an effect on the viewer, whether positive or negative, and i do not believe that there is any 'good' or 'bad' art, rather 'successful' art or art that does not give rise to any dialogue with its audience.
ReplyDelete"I think art can be made shocking then justified by any variety of means. Does that make it good, or bad, or just sad..."
ReplyDeleteI agree and I don't think there's an answer for good, bad, or successful. All of these terms are defined subjectively. I also think vandalism is just that - vandalism.
I remember seeing one of those "Next Great Artist" reality shows where the assignment was to make "SHOCKING" art thus making "SHOCKING ART" a genre like a still life. Serrano was the guest judge and I think he was very disappointed. Making fun of religion is far from shocking and relies on the narrow fundamentalist to give it power. So when the Piss Christ is vandalized both sides are happy. What about real controversial art like something pro-Hitler, or pro-pedaphilia or something critical of AIDS art? I think art needs a spiritual humanistic content and not so much politics. But that just me. And Matthew I agree that good/ bad are subjective but we can't do anything without them!
ReplyDelete