Re: What was Brian May thinking?

On Jul 12, 7:09 pm, The Walrus was Danny <dannyisthewal...@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Putting a toilet on display or putting an apple on a stand and
pointing to it with a message, "This is art, you c*nts" is not art in
my books.  It is an insult to the audience.- Hide quoted text -

A really good example of conceptual art is by Michael Craig Martin
here is a description of it:

*****************Michael Craig-Martin. An oak tree, 1973.
In a room at Tate Modern there is a three-quarter full glass of water
on a high shelf. It is a work by Michael Craig-Martin called An oak
tree. Beside it there is the following text:
Q. To begin with, could you describe this work?

A. Yes, of course. What I've done is change a glass of water into a
full-grown oak tree without altering the accidents of the glass of
water.

Q. The accidents?

A. Yes. The colour, feel, weight, size ...

Q. Do you mean that the glass of water is a symbol of an oak tree?

A. No. It's not a symbol. I've changed the physical substance of the
glass of water into that of an oak tree.

Q. It looks like a glass of water.

A. Of course it does. I didn't change its appearance. But it's not a
glass of water, it's an oak tree.

Q. Can you prove what you've claimed to have done?

A. Well, yes and no. I claim to have maintained the physical form of
the glass of water and, as you can see, I have. However, as one
normally looks for evidence of physical change in terms of altered
form, no such proof exists.

Q. Haven't you simply called this glass of water an oak tree?

A. Absolutely not. It is not a glass of water anymore. I have changed
its actual substance. It would no longer be accurate to call it a
glass of water. One could call it anything one wished but that would
not alter the fact that it is an oak tree.

Q. Isn't this just a case of the emperor's new clothes?

A. No. With the emperor's new clothes people claimed to see something
that wasn't there because they felt they should. I would be very
surprised if anyone told me they saw an oak tree.

Q. Was it difficult to effect the change?

A. No effort at all. But it took me years of work before I realised I
could do it.

Q. When precisely did the glass of water become an oak tree?

A. When I put the water in the glass.

Q. Does this happen every time you fill a glass with water?

A. No, of course not. Only when I intend to change it into an oak
tree.

Q. Then intention causes the change?

A. I would say it precipitates the change.

Q. You don't know how you do it?

A. It contradicts what I feel I know about cause and effect.

Q. It seems to me that you are claiming to have worked a miracle.
Isn't that the case?

A. I'm flattered that you think so.

Q. But aren't you the only person who can do something like this?

A. How could I know?

Q. Could you teach others to do it?

A. No, it's not something one can teach.

Q. Do you consider that changing the glass of water into an oak tree
constitutes an art work?

A. Yes.

Q. What precisely is the art work? The glass of water?

A. There is no glass of water anymore.

Q. The process of change?

A. There is no process involved in the change.

Q. The oak tree?

A. Yes. The oak tree.

Q. But the oak tree only exists in the mind.

A. No. The actual oak tree is physically present but in the form of
the glass of water. As the glass of water was a particular glass of
water, the oak tree is also a particular oak tree. To conceive the
category 'oak tree' or to picture a particular oak tree is not to
understand and experience what appears to be a glass of water as an
oak tree. Just as it is imperceivable it also inconceivable.

Q. Did the particular oak tree exist somewhere else before it took the
form of a glass of water?

A. No. This particular oak tree did not exist previously. I should
also point out that it does not and will not ever have any other form
than that of a glass of water.

Q. How long will it continue to be an oak tree?

A. Until I change it. **************************

Me again: This is much much much superior to anything that YO could
ever do!!!!

Danny

This is fabulous. Thanks for posting this.

Perhaps you see this as art. I don't. This gets back to what I've
said before . . . . that in some instances conceptual art is really
the art of the con.

I am not condemning all conceptual art. But much of what I've seen or
read about conceptual art is just like this. The artist takes an
ordinary object, puts it on display and declares "This is art" or
"This is the moon" or "This is a flying machine" or "This is my
mother's behind" and the audience scratches its head.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: What was Brian May thinking?
    ... pointing to it with a message, "This is art, you c*nts" is not art in ... In a room at Tate Modern there is a three-quarter full glass of water ... Q. Do you mean that the glass of water is a symbol of an oak tree? ...
    (rec.music.beatles)
  • Re: The Life Of A Pool Forum Troll
    ... from da deustchland, a water retriever, a real fookin dog. ... Why does the British navy have all glass bottom boats. ... And that black beer with he foam on top, I would rather drink motor ... I am drinking ale today. ...
    (rec.sport.billiard)
  • How to Quit Smoking in Ten Seconds or Less
    ... is a sparkling clean glass of ice water standing next to your plate. ... Now imagine that the photograph on the left side is almost identical to ... is a nasty, murky brown, and you see that there is a cigarette butt ...
    (alt.support.stop-smoking)
  • Re: Maximum age.
    ... Hmm, although since food is a necessary of life, I wouldn't be against ... I know water isn't free everywhere. ... "free to the consumer": I know the infrastructure etc must be paid for ... point where he wants to drink a glass of water. ...
    (rec.arts.sf.composition)
  • Re: Thuja problem
    ... the past 3 weeks and now I water them twice a day (early morning and ... Few of them were planted close to large oak tree but I don't see any ... Hi Jack were these Thuja all in pots and were they a bit pot bound? ...
    (rec.gardens)