Monday, February 21, 2011


In the Graduate Seminar class that the majority of the ceramic graduate class is in, there has been a lot of discussion pertaining to conceptual art.  There seems to be an abundance of lackadasical objects floating around in the artworld with pages of concept supporting the objects.  My question is, why do people spend so much time trying to prove the worth of an object they spent all of five minutes obtaining?  It just seems to me, that if you are an excellent writer, then why try to pass yourself off as an object maker?  Why not just become a theorist, or a philosopher?  And more so, why are these "artists" being supported by major contemporary museums?  


  1. Maybe it's the art of our time.... with technology tv internet facebook twitter cellphones texting ipad ipod gps etc etc etc....what else can one expect ?

  2. Do we try to define art out of insecurities. . . so wHat if they call it art, conceptual, object-ual or whatever. isn't there enough room in the world for us all. . so why can't they call their art art, and why can't they write about it, and make it, and so what if one is better than the other .. . . are we implying that if you make objects better than you can comunicate verbally about them, then your a real artist, but if you articulate better than you objectivey create then your not!
    look out, we all know people that create better than they talk. .. be careful with your words!!! or should I!!

  3. I heard an argument in one of my first seminar classes ....that you cannot call everything art. there is not enough 'room for it all.'
    If we say everything is art then it lowers the standards of what we do. This was not my argument....i'm just pharaphrasing. An example that was givin was cake decorators....they have been elevated through tv to a rock star status and their work has been described as art. Do we really want to be compared to a cake decorator? (again, this was not my argument) I am just repeating parts of it to poke the big brown bear!

  4. Are "handmade" objects more special? If you work more or longer on something is it better? What ratio of form to content makes work acceptable? Hopefully these are questions you are thinking about and you'll come to your own educated decision. "Conceptual Art" split away to deal more directly with concepts/ not objects-hence the name. of course you can question their validity but wishing it other is like wishing painters would use only blue. Museums have the right to support whomever they choose-