I am sorry, but your title is very deceiving. You did not present any explanation whatsoever that provides the basic understanding for conceptual art, nevertheless saying that this is all we need to know. If you are reading this comment and interested to really understand conceptual art do some research on Joseph Kosuth and Sol LeWitt's approaches to conceptual art.
I have read Kosuth and LeWitt and I still have no appreciation for what they said. Perhaps conceptual art, at its earliest stage, was guided by ideas that had merit. But, as is often the case, people with little ability jumped on the bandwagon because it afforded them a place in the art world.Then, money came in and created the cult of celebrity whereby, if you are celebrated or notorious, your product automatically becomes valuable regardless of its intrinsic worth.Standards break down and disappear altogether. New standards are created that suit the greedy.Crap is elevated in status even as it is acknowledged as crap! “It’s good because it’s so bad.Get it? “ And soon you are down the rabbit hole.
There is a lot of evidence that the urinal piece was not Duchamp's, but a female artist friend of his'. She exhibited under the name R. Mutt, and one of Duchamp's letters from that period talks about how he received a sculpture that was just a urinal from her. It seems Duchamp did put it in the show but it was not his work. There is also some talk about it being a reaction to a gallery juror calling an earlier work "art or plumbing?"
while I understand the notion that thoughts and ideas that go into a piece or work are important-which is basically the message of conceptual art- I must say the idea that this can only be accomplished through dis-embellishment/tearing apart of art as we have come to know it, is horribly incorrect. The reason why I dislike contemporary/post-modern art is b/c in its effort to reach a higher plane it fails to achieve even the bare minimum. bike wheels & metal bits? an artist should know better.
The Gallic-Charmer, lol.And yes he is charming and intelligent! But I think the major thing about Duchamp is that he demoted the art-object itself to something incidental, and in doing so harnessed all of the attention back to the artist himself (even if he does pretend to not care what the world thinks!)He made an interesting (even if rather obvious) and thought provoking development in the history of Art. But ever since posing the question of 'what is Art', he gave license to much that is pretentious in Art - particularly by inference the notion that if a urinal is (by his definition) 'Art' then so too is anything else .
Art is dead. Art is Life. Life is Art. Like Beauty, Art is in the eye of the beholder...100%. That last statement is all you need to know about Art. The Art World is full of Art-Speak; none of it matters one whit. All that matters is: do YOU like the piece enough to look at it more than passingly, and to maybe even buy it; in other words, does it resonate with you? ~ Scott Haley, Abstract Expressionist [Google: (without quotes) Scott Haley painting.]
If you shit on piece of paper you made conceptual art. So, yes it is definable in one sentence, answering the question I didn't ask myself of. Every single conceptual "art" piece is here to make you question art. (The real one) They do that because of their view of what art is. I don't know exactly what their view is, therefore I can't say that they are wrong but what I can say is that it's not worth my time. See my profile picture ? This is real art, it tells a story, it's not just a lemon nor is it a lemon on a bicycle. The message is simple: HAPPY. Everyone no matter their language can understand that. Why a lemon ? Cause I like lemons, look at my name... I'm the chief of lemons and I'm happy, that's the story, I like making people happy (and being the chief). If I chose a random lemon, took a picture of it in my bathroom and use it as a profile pic that would be conceptual "art".
Lemon Chief Sen anladın onu! Sen ve senin gibi sanatın doğasını anlamayan insanlara rağmen sanatçılar dilediklerini yapma, yaratma ve risk alma özgürlüğüne sahipler. Sanatçıya neyi ve nasıl yapması gerektiğini söyleyemeyeceğin gibi neyin sanat, neyin sanat olmadığını dikte edebilecek otoriteye sahip değilsin. O otoriteye sahip olsaydın o sanat olmazdı! Bunu söylemek bile sanattan anlamadığın anlamına geliyor. Kavramsal sanat senin gibi adamların varlığına karşı ve, ne tuhaftır ki, neyin sanat olup olmadığı söylensin(!) diye çıkmış bir türdür. Şimdi anladın mı! You got it now!
Also, what is mentioned in this video about 'if its so bad, then why does everyone do it?' that is the worst argument in defense of conceptual art that one could possibly come up with because you are assuming that if everyone does it then it is the right/most appropriate thing to do. The answer to that question lies in psychology and social sciences. conceptual/post modern art is a revolution not an evolution, and in a revolution moving against the flow means premature death.
omg I'm soooo close to becoming a stressed nut because I'm so lost when it comes to conceptual art. I get the idea of it but I can't bring myself to create it. For year 12 we have to do a body of art that we work on throughout the year. I've always wanted to be an artist and I thought I could because I am excellent when it comes to painting, drawing, etc. But now I'm so worried because I know I can get full marks based on my skills but the other half of the mark is based on my conceptual idea. I really don't know what I connect to so strongly that I can make an amazing artwork out of it.
+xMyPointlessChannelx Conceptual art is a scam that's destroyed art in the way that Post-Modernism and neo-Marxism in general has destroyed the humanities. You should be proud of the fact that you have legitimate artistic skills like drawing and painting, not embarrassed or frustrated because these skills don't fit into the model of "art" presented by the conceptual art elite (idiots with way too much money, nothing to do, and too little common sense to see that they're paying literally millions of dollars for pieces of shit made by con men and pretenders). Despite the image presented by the idiotic conceptual art world, there is still a market for traditional arts and that market is actually much larger than the market for this kind of trite bullshit. Fortunately, I think the damn is about to break on conceptual art as it's become more and more obvious that what's going on here is a bunch of talent-less wannabe-celebrities doing the most obnoxious things they can think of in a desperate attempt to get attention for themselves. We seem to be finally moving on from this embarrassing period of grotesque failure in art history as more talented and traditionally skilled artists in all areas are getting more attention. Peter Doig, Liu Dan, James Jean... visually, spiritually, emotionally engaging, well crafted art is there to be found in every area and hopefully it will continue to become more popular in the elite world also.
stethoscanomaly oh my goodness thank you so much for your in depth reply. I've currently completed the first year of my course. After my break ends I'll be a second year student studying for my Bachelor of Fine Arts Degree. My time at my Art School has definitely been an eye opener and I hope you're right and that the shift from conceptual art to traditional will be evident in the years to come. I'll also check out the artists you've listed as well. Thanks again
@boogiebuddy01 may i ask what you do? Im going to school to be a film editor... i want to work on documentaries...i find art in crafting aesthetics to make you want to indulge...im 34 and just now finding what i want to do when i grow up...late bloomer 4sure!!
I love Duchamp's work and that of Damien Hirst because there's a clear concept that still works aesthetically. Ai WeiWei, Louise Bourgeois, but alot of them are just bullshitters. If there's only mind and no heart people will forget the artwork even before they walk out.
***** I like things to resonate as well, but sometimes I know it isn't art regardless how much I like it. But those that deem what IS art and what isn't are also those twats who sell it under that ringer in the galleries and auctions. Even dadaism, an anti-art and so brilliantly put by Duchamp, shows the underlying bourgeoisie that turned it into an avant-garde just to keep the money flowing. Don't get me wrong, Duchamp is a brilliant mind, but alot of his works like his readymades, shouldn't be considered art if only to not make him turn in his grave.
Exactly, you can't blame someone for being an artist as we all want to make money for doing nothing but those that enable it, just to profit greatly from it themselves are the ones that are destroying the foundation of art. They are shifting the entire landscape back to the middle ages where artists were forced to make what their patrons demanded, only now it's the market. It makes art dull, dimwitted and overly simplified that it goes right back to the times of Duchamp where beauty and dada were the norm. Only now it is divided as commercial and "art", with art being exclusive to that elite of creative snobbery. The least I can say is that I'm happy to have a good education, where they encourage you to challenge these values and form your own.
***** I was a socialist, I still am but I believe the party representing in my country is just capitalist hiding under the red hood. However, I used to be rich and when my father disappeared we hit rock bottom and I'm quite thankful for having both sides of the coin so early on in life. That luxury being taken away made me realize what was more important to life and also made me more grateful towards life. All artists need scars, it's their brush to paint on life. Talking about outsider art, it's what I grew up with (my mother has a weird taste for art) still what I prefer: it's the most interesting and pure artform because these people often don't know about all the rules and the ones that are important they will feel them intuitively. They keep an eye on their heart while the mind wanders. Joel-Peter Witkin, Miroslav Tichy and Robert Capa are perfect examples of photographers who were outsiders (shock artist, modernist in soviet russia, jew) and put it to their advantage. Today so many people don't have their own opinions anymore simply because they don't live life or they're afraid of not being accepted, then how can you make something and genuinely call it yours if you don't even know what to think about it and most certainly if thousands are going to hate it for a few hundred that will love it? This is why outsiders often become THE insider, they already have a struggle to belong and it makes them stronger than the grey mass of no-minders. Same goes for punk, folk, psychedelic rock, stuff like Moby or David Lynch. These people know they're weird and actually don't give a fuck, it's admirable for those who struggle with it every day.
Taste is the enemy of art because, what some considers to be Art, others may not. The same with Conceptual Art, He asked if the Urinal a piece of art or just meh object.
@Stuckstuckstuck I dont think conceptual art is dead. I think that it is now becoming too abstract. If we keep conceptual art understandable, then it remains interesting.
@keeperofthecheese And I believe that failing to grapple with complexity is a pretty bad life strategy. Understandable, I hope, but complexity is here to stay.
New ideas of what? That's not what art is about. You want ideas? Read a book or watch a movie. And all this trash of the 20th century is not art, it's just trash
duchamp at least prima facie wouldnt have intended his work to be art world crown jewels. In fact the point of the avant garde was always to shock to be revlolutionary. But how does the shock happen, when weve cannonized it? It doesnt!
Art-Speak abounds. Art is not a "social construct"; instead, it's individual expression. It doesn't have to be "public" at all. It doesn't even have to communicate with anyone. Finally, you go to your church, and I'll go to mine. :) This is my last comment on the topic, so have the last word if you must. I'm back to painting...in my innocent way. p.s. Several theoretical physicists will tell you that everything is in the eye of the beholder.
MODERN ART today is MOSTLY .. let me conceptualize mentally ... selling an IDEA ... no matter how is PHYSICALLY BUILD .. more MENTALLY than MATERIAL! TOO MUCH ... "intelectual" CONCEPTUALIZATION ... TOO FEW ... HEART AND FEELING ... HONESTY of the Artist! A PORTRAIT OF TODAYS "ROTTEN" WORLD! iF aRT IS TO REFLECT the World ... then OK!
hello . if view create a psychological nightmare , this portrays a nurtured obsession , that requires like minded participants . however, natural conscious , sees through the mist taken illussion , of how others want you to think . the real meaning of art , is to trance form common sense , bach to normal perception , though most people can`t remember whats behind this basic idea . with regards .
This VIDEO talks about Conceptual Art in a very limited context. MY VIDEOS are Conceptual Art Videos of the Highest Order. Why? NOT JUST because I say so; but because they are. When one watches them one begins to CONCEIVE THINGS one would not likely have conceived before. Not necessarily THINGS which anyone else might CONCEIVE, but THINGS which no one else might! IN EFFECT; CONCEPTUAL ART should make you think, perceive, discover NEW THOUGHTS, IDEAS, and ultimately NEW CONCEPTS! SPAWNING GORKS!
.... just watch out for the bulls**t. How many times can the joke be told when it just isn't funny anymore, the outside is the inside now, its like the only way to go is to do serious work that is difficult to do about real life, try that out for a change!! Any fool can put a thing in a gallery and call it art. Just to add, I would say that all art practice is conceptual to some degree or other, you can't really put brush to canvas without having some idea of what you are going to do.
![Chuckyy - Devil Hours [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/f3wZGj0VnZU/mqdefault.jpg)
I am sorry, but your title is very deceiving. You did not present any explanation whatsoever that provides the basic understanding for conceptual art, nevertheless saying that this is all we need to know. If you are reading this comment and interested to really understand conceptual art do some research on Joseph Kosuth and Sol LeWitt's approaches to conceptual art.
Yeah this was pretty awful
I have read Kosuth and LeWitt and I still have no appreciation for what they said.
Perhaps conceptual art, at its earliest stage, was guided by ideas that had merit.
But, as is often the case, people with little ability jumped on the bandwagon because it afforded them a place in the art world.Then, money came in and created the cult of celebrity whereby, if you are celebrated or notorious, your product automatically becomes valuable regardless of its intrinsic worth.Standards break down and disappear altogether. New standards are created that suit the greedy.Crap is elevated in status even as it is acknowledged as crap! “It’s good because it’s so bad.Get it? “
And soon you are down the rabbit hole.
hmmm...
There is a lot of evidence that the urinal piece was not Duchamp's, but a female artist friend of his'. She exhibited under the name R. Mutt, and one of Duchamp's letters from that period talks about how he received a sculpture that was just a urinal from her. It seems Duchamp did put it in the show but it was not his work. There is also some talk about it being a reaction to a gallery juror calling an earlier work "art or plumbing?"
while I understand the notion that thoughts and ideas that go into a piece or work are important-which is basically the message of conceptual art- I must say the idea that this can only be accomplished through dis-embellishment/tearing apart of art as we have come to know it, is horribly incorrect.
The reason why I dislike contemporary/post-modern art is b/c in its effort to reach a higher plane it fails to achieve even the bare minimum. bike wheels & metal bits? an artist should know better.
The Gallic-Charmer, lol.And yes he is charming and intelligent! But I think the major thing about Duchamp is that he demoted the art-object itself to something incidental, and in doing so harnessed all of the attention back to the artist himself (even if he does pretend to not care what the world thinks!)He made an interesting (even if rather obvious) and thought provoking development in the history of Art. But ever since posing the question of 'what is Art', he gave license to much that is pretentious in Art - particularly by inference the notion that if a urinal is (by his definition) 'Art' then so too is anything else .
Art is dead. Art is Life. Life is Art. Like Beauty, Art is in the eye of the beholder...100%. That last statement is all you need to know about Art. The Art World is full of Art-Speak; none of it matters one whit. All that matters is: do YOU like the piece enough to look at it more than passingly, and to maybe even buy it; in other words, does it resonate with you? ~ Scott Haley, Abstract Expressionist [Google: (without quotes) Scott Haley painting.]
love modern Art videos thanks for sharing ❤
I think Duchamp laughed all the way to the bank.
If you shit on piece of paper you made conceptual art.
So, yes it is definable in one sentence, answering the question I didn't ask myself of.
Every single conceptual "art" piece is here to make you question art. (The real one)
They do that because of their view of what art is. I don't know exactly what their view is, therefore I can't say that they are wrong but what I can say is that it's not worth my time.
See my profile picture ? This is real art, it tells a story, it's not just a lemon nor is it a lemon on a bicycle.
The message is simple: HAPPY.
Everyone no matter their language can understand that.
Why a lemon ? Cause I like lemons, look at my name...
I'm the chief of lemons and I'm happy, that's the story, I like making people happy (and being the chief).
If I chose a random lemon, took a picture of it in my bathroom and use it as a profile pic that would be conceptual "art".
Lemon Chief And also you know and have an authority of what is "the real one" of others's art!?
Alaattin Kirazci Could you repeat that in english, please ?
Lemon Chief Sen anladın onu! Sen ve senin gibi sanatın doğasını anlamayan insanlara rağmen sanatçılar dilediklerini yapma, yaratma ve risk alma özgürlüğüne sahipler. Sanatçıya neyi ve nasıl yapması gerektiğini söyleyemeyeceğin gibi neyin sanat, neyin sanat olmadığını dikte edebilecek otoriteye sahip değilsin. O otoriteye sahip olsaydın o sanat olmazdı! Bunu söylemek bile sanattan anlamadığın anlamına geliyor. Kavramsal sanat senin gibi adamların varlığına karşı ve, ne tuhaftır ki, neyin sanat olup olmadığı söylensin(!) diye çıkmış bir türdür. Şimdi anladın mı! You got it now!
Alaattin Kirazci Yes I do.
Lemon Chief Do it.
Also, what is mentioned in this video about 'if its so bad, then why does everyone do it?'
that is the worst argument in defense of conceptual art that one could possibly come up with because you are assuming that if everyone does it then it is the right/most appropriate thing to do.
The answer to that question lies in psychology and social sciences.
conceptual/post modern art is a revolution not an evolution, and in a revolution moving against the flow means premature death.
i hate it that my art teacher thinks that conceptual art is beautifull
omg I'm soooo close to becoming a stressed nut because I'm so lost when it comes to conceptual art. I get the idea of it but I can't bring myself to create it. For year 12 we have to do a body of art that we work on throughout the year. I've always wanted to be an artist and I thought I could because I am excellent when it comes to painting, drawing, etc. But now I'm so worried because I know I can get full marks based on my skills but the other half of the mark is based on my conceptual idea. I really don't know what I connect to so strongly that I can make an amazing artwork out of it.
Keep researching more artists and you will gel with somebody
debauraslumpy slump Thank you
+xMyPointlessChannelx Conceptual art is a scam that's destroyed art in the way that Post-Modernism and neo-Marxism in general has destroyed the humanities. You should be proud of the fact that you have legitimate artistic skills like drawing and painting, not embarrassed or frustrated because these skills don't fit into the model of "art" presented by the conceptual art elite (idiots with way too much money, nothing to do, and too little common sense to see that they're paying literally millions of dollars for pieces of shit made by con men and pretenders). Despite the image presented by the idiotic conceptual art world, there is still a market for traditional arts and that market is actually much larger than the market for this kind of trite bullshit.
Fortunately, I think the damn is about to break on conceptual art as it's become more and more obvious that what's going on here is a bunch of talent-less wannabe-celebrities doing the most obnoxious things they can think of in a desperate attempt to get attention for themselves. We seem to be finally moving on from this embarrassing period of grotesque failure in art history as more talented and traditionally skilled artists in all areas are getting more attention. Peter Doig, Liu Dan, James Jean... visually, spiritually, emotionally engaging, well crafted art is there to be found in every area and hopefully it will continue to become more popular in the elite world also.
stethoscanomaly oh my goodness thank you so much for your in depth reply. I've currently completed the first year of my course. After my break ends I'll be a second year student studying for my Bachelor of Fine Arts Degree. My time at my Art School has definitely been an eye opener and I hope you're right and that the shift from conceptual art to traditional will be evident in the years to come. I'll also check out the artists you've listed as well. Thanks again
@boogiebuddy01 may i ask what you do? Im going to school to be a film editor... i want to work on documentaries...i find art in crafting aesthetics to make you want to indulge...im 34 and just now finding what i want to do when i grow up...late bloomer 4sure!!
I love Duchamp's work and that of Damien Hirst because there's a clear concept that still works aesthetically. Ai WeiWei, Louise Bourgeois, but alot of them are just bullshitters. If there's only mind and no heart people will forget the artwork even before they walk out.
***** I like things to resonate as well, but sometimes I know it isn't art regardless how much I like it. But those that deem what IS art and what isn't are also those twats who sell it under that ringer in the galleries and auctions. Even dadaism, an anti-art and so brilliantly put by Duchamp, shows the underlying bourgeoisie that turned it into an avant-garde just to keep the money flowing. Don't get me wrong, Duchamp is a brilliant mind, but alot of his works like his readymades, shouldn't be considered art if only to not make him turn in his grave.
Exactly, you can't blame someone for being an artist as we all want to make money for doing nothing but those that enable it, just to profit greatly from it themselves are the ones that are destroying the foundation of art. They are shifting the entire landscape back to the middle ages where artists were forced to make what their patrons demanded, only now it's the market. It makes art dull, dimwitted and overly simplified that it goes right back to the times of Duchamp where beauty and dada were the norm. Only now it is divided as commercial and "art", with art being exclusive to that elite of creative snobbery.
The least I can say is that I'm happy to have a good education, where they encourage you to challenge these values and form your own.
***** I was a socialist, I still am but I believe the party representing in my country is just capitalist hiding under the red hood. However, I used to be rich and when my father disappeared we hit rock bottom and I'm quite thankful for having both sides of the coin so early on in life. That luxury being taken away made me realize what was more important to life and also made me more grateful towards life. All artists need scars, it's their brush to paint on life.
Talking about outsider art, it's what I grew up with (my mother has a weird taste for art) still what I prefer: it's the most interesting and pure artform because these people often don't know about all the rules and the ones that are important they will feel them intuitively. They keep an eye on their heart while the mind wanders. Joel-Peter Witkin, Miroslav Tichy and Robert Capa are perfect examples of photographers who were outsiders (shock artist, modernist in soviet russia, jew) and put it to their advantage. Today so many people don't have their own opinions anymore simply because they don't live life or they're afraid of not being accepted, then how can you make something and genuinely call it yours if you don't even know what to think about it and most certainly if thousands are going to hate it for a few hundred that will love it? This is why outsiders often become THE insider, they already have a struggle to belong and it makes them stronger than the grey mass of no-minders. Same goes for punk, folk, psychedelic rock, stuff like Moby or David Lynch. These people know they're weird and actually don't give a fuck, it's admirable for those who struggle with it every day.
Taste is the enemy of art because, what some considers to be Art, others may not. The same with Conceptual Art, He asked if the Urinal a piece of art or just meh object.
@keeperofthecheese hmm nice point, I might agree
@Stuckstuckstuck
I dont think conceptual art is dead. I think that it is now becoming too abstract. If we keep conceptual art understandable, then it remains interesting.
wheres the rest of it
Andrew makes a lovely tracer
very interesting!
anyone know which music this is?
@keeperofthecheese And I believe that failing to grapple with complexity is a pretty bad life strategy.
Understandable, I hope, but complexity is here to stay.
@EyeWearMySunglasses give me understandable art and I will show you what everyone else does...I want new ideas not regurgitated ones
New ideas of what? That's not what art is about. You want ideas? Read a book or watch a movie. And all this trash of the 20th century is not art, it's just trash
it isnt all about an obviously black and white idea about whether duchamp was important. what importance you give is what you choose to give.
@boogiebuddy01 why???
he pronounces urinal funny
is it a ur-I-nal or is it a work of art?
duchamp at least prima facie wouldnt have intended his work to be art world crown jewels. In fact the point of the avant garde was always to shock to be revlolutionary. But how does the shock happen, when weve cannonized it? It doesnt!
define whats art and whats not is not relevant the question is Why art exist ?
See Snake Oil for the conceptual art that attacks conceptual art.
@keeperofthecheese that makes NO SENSE conceptual art isn't supposed to be understandable its supposed to be ambiguous
Art-Speak abounds. Art is not a "social construct"; instead, it's individual expression. It doesn't have to be "public" at all. It doesn't even have to communicate with anyone. Finally, you go to your church, and I'll go to mine. :) This is my last comment on the topic, so have the last word if you must. I'm back to painting...in my innocent way.
p.s. Several theoretical physicists will tell you that everything is in the eye of the beholder.
WHY is taste the enemy of art?
Now that's funny!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What's contemporary now then eh?
MODERN ART today is MOSTLY .. let me conceptualize mentally ... selling an IDEA ... no matter how is PHYSICALLY BUILD .. more MENTALLY than MATERIAL!
TOO MUCH ... "intelectual" CONCEPTUALIZATION ... TOO FEW ... HEART AND FEELING ... HONESTY of the Artist!
A PORTRAIT OF TODAYS "ROTTEN" WORLD!
iF aRT IS TO REFLECT the World ... then OK!
Oh OK, I thought it was.
hello .
if view create a psychological nightmare , this portrays a nurtured obsession , that requires like minded participants .
however, natural conscious , sees through the mist taken illussion , of how others want you to think .
the real meaning of art , is to trance form common sense , bach to normal perception , though most people can`t remember whats behind this basic idea .
with regards .
+Peter Jones Can't really tell if your grammatical errors were supposed to be artistic.
+Shaquille Hinds (EveryNothing) hello . what really is artistic and why does everybody have to conform to someone elses rules of grammar . enjoy .
This VIDEO talks about Conceptual Art in a very limited context. MY VIDEOS are Conceptual Art Videos of the Highest Order. Why? NOT JUST because I say so; but because they are. When one watches them one begins to CONCEIVE THINGS one would not likely have conceived before. Not necessarily THINGS which anyone else might CONCEIVE, but THINGS which no one else might! IN EFFECT; CONCEPTUAL ART should make you think, perceive, discover NEW THOUGHTS, IDEAS, and ultimately NEW CONCEPTS! SPAWNING GORKS!
Obviously you can't kill something that's dead.
Conceptual art is a misnomer
.... just watch out for the bulls**t. How many times can the joke be told when it just isn't funny anymore, the outside is the inside now, its like the only way to go is to do serious work that is difficult to do about real life, try that out for a change!! Any fool can put a thing in a gallery and call it art. Just to add, I would say that all art practice is conceptual to some degree or other, you can't really put brush to canvas without having some idea of what you are going to do.
YES! Bingo!
All you need to know about conceptual art.
That it is pretty much a big scam?
No. What is dead is CONTRIVED CONCEPTUAL ART! Non-Contrived is not dead. Mine is Living Proof!
Conceptual Art is like religion...You ether a crook or a fool!
conceptual art's totally dead.
Conceptual art is dead.
Yes. He seems to have pea-d on her name! Shame! Come see my videos! Best, JP