Yet again, many thanks for this. Getting down to London can be difficult so your reviews help me decide what to go and see when I am able to come down and visit.
@@artgalleryexplorer The other aspect of your films I find useful is the comprehensive look at an exhibition and this often results in me buying the catalogue for a deeper look in lieu of actually seeing the show. Also, I think that you pitch your posts at the right level to be accessible for a wide range of people - and not necessarily ‘art lovers’. I appreciate the work you put into these.
Thanks for this. Even as a member I won't be going, and I'm slightly bummed that it's running until June, but there's plenty of other stuff to see in London (I plan to revisit the wonderful Haegue Yang: Leap Year at the Hayward). I loved your enthusiasm for the show, though, and greatly appreciate you and your channel. Happy holidays
I have not yet covered Haegue Yang on the vlog but must get back there if possible before it closes! It is a long run, I agree. Thank you for watching and taking the time to comment.
Thanks for another really intriguing review. I'll try to get to this, in spite of the cost. It's odd that yesterday, for no obvious reason, the name of Brion Gysin came to mind (something called "Let the Mice in" ?). I remember the ICA "Cybernetic Serendipity" show: a machine which wrote haiku, an igloo made of polystyrene in which you listened to a loop of baroque-style music by Michael Nyman, a concert of music by Herbert Brun, and much else which I no longer recall. I wish I had the catalogue and LP from the show. I can't escape the feeling, though, that there is something superficial about artists' attempts to keep up with technology, which develops at a rate which precludes a profound personal involvement. Does this make sense ? It was very good to see something by David Medalla, though, whose work I do remember with affection.
I am really envious you went to Cybernetic Serendipity at the ICA. A seminal show for this sub strand of art. Wow! It sounds my kind of thing. I do know what you mean about the superficial nature of some artistic links with technology but find some of it beautiful and fascinating. I absolutely feel quite negative about most AI generated art I have seen so far. I felt this in the second half of the show, where the work itself was not great but the narrative was interesting. The first half felt less superficial in that regard. with some great pieces. Thank you for watching and taking the time to comment.
Certainly interesting from a historic perspective, artists awaking to a lot of new techniques and technologies. Unfortunately, as I find it typical for technology-heavy art, I’m missing „substance“ behind the “effect”. Works that take pride in their novelty, in being detached from life, become redundant really fast as soon as the aspect of novelty has vanished. A lot of these works are basically magic tricks that lose their appeal after you’ve seen them once.
Thank you for taking the time to comment. I agree in some places but, in this show, found some of the works more enduring. The show was trying to straddle a quite tricky line between historical narrative and the quality of the art. I actually totally agree with (much) of the AI art I've seen. It has been all about 'effect' and not so much about substance.
@@artgalleryexplorer I've not seen the show in person, only what you show here, so it was also more of a general comment. And yes, parts of these feelings might stem from contemporary trends, so I guess its very reasonable to set a spotlight on this evolution now. Almost intrigued to take it for an excuse for a trip to London.
Really? I thought some of the works had not been done before (when they were produced) - although that did not make them great, necessarily - but certainly pioneering. Thank you for watching and taking the time to comment.
It's amazingly contemporary, experimental and progressive. I love it. where I live people just don't 'get' conceptual or experimental art. they still want landscapes and flowers and banal portraits. sigh.... maybe a reflection of the regression to conservatism.
![BLACK BAG - Official Trailer [HD] - Only in Theaters March 14](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Du0Xp8WX_7I/mqdefault.jpg)
Another excellent vlog + iike you i was most taken by the ambition of the best installations. Merry Xmas!
Thank you for watching and taking the time to comment. The run of installations towards the end of the first half of the show is really enjoyable!
What a great film and comprehensive review. Really interested in this kind of art anyway, but this might just get me there! ✌🏻
Fantastic. Thank you for watching and for your kind comments. If this art interests you then it is a must see!
Thank you Dream Machine is fantastic
I agree. I actually got as much from the smaller one in this show as I did from the huge one in Woolwich, in terms of the effects.
Yet again, many thanks for this. Getting down to London can be difficult so your reviews help me decide what to go and see when I am able to come down and visit.
Thank you, as always, for commenting. Hopefully a lot more in the New Year.
@@artgalleryexplorer The other aspect of your films I find useful is the comprehensive look at an exhibition and this often results in me buying the catalogue for a deeper look in lieu of actually seeing the show. Also, I think that you pitch your posts at the right level to be accessible for a wide range of people - and not necessarily ‘art lovers’. I appreciate the work you put into these.
Thanks for this. Even as a member I won't be going, and I'm slightly bummed that it's running until June, but there's plenty of other stuff to see in London (I plan to revisit the wonderful Haegue Yang: Leap Year at the Hayward). I loved your enthusiasm for the show, though, and greatly appreciate you and your channel. Happy holidays
I have not yet covered Haegue Yang on the vlog but must get back there if possible before it closes! It is a long run, I agree. Thank you for watching and taking the time to comment.
Very interesting indeed. love your brilliantly descriptive sculptured posts. thank you
Thank you so much for watching and taking the time to comment.
Thanks for another really intriguing review. I'll try to get to this, in spite of the cost. It's odd that yesterday, for no obvious reason, the name of Brion Gysin came to mind (something called "Let the Mice in" ?). I remember the ICA "Cybernetic Serendipity" show: a machine which wrote haiku, an igloo made of polystyrene in which you listened to a loop of baroque-style music by Michael Nyman, a concert of music by Herbert Brun, and much else which I no longer recall. I wish I had the catalogue and LP from the show. I can't escape the feeling, though, that there is something superficial about artists' attempts to keep up with technology, which develops at a rate which precludes a profound personal involvement. Does this make sense ? It was very good to see something by David Medalla, though, whose work I do remember with affection.
I am really envious you went to Cybernetic Serendipity at the ICA. A seminal show for this sub strand of art. Wow! It sounds my kind of thing. I do know what you mean about the superficial nature of some artistic links with technology but find some of it beautiful and fascinating. I absolutely feel quite negative about most AI generated art I have seen so far. I felt this in the second half of the show, where the work itself was not great but the narrative was interesting. The first half felt less superficial in that regard. with some great pieces. Thank you for watching and taking the time to comment.
nice...thanx...maybe a little 2 much talk...but u have a lot to say 🎉❤🎉
merry christmas 🌲⭐
And a Happy New Year to you too!
Certainly interesting from a historic perspective, artists awaking to a lot of new techniques and technologies.
Unfortunately, as I find it typical for technology-heavy art, I’m missing „substance“ behind the “effect”. Works that take pride in their novelty, in being detached from life, become redundant really fast as soon as the aspect of novelty has vanished.
A lot of these works are basically magic tricks that lose their appeal after you’ve seen them once.
Thank you for taking the time to comment. I agree in some places but, in this show, found some of the works more enduring. The show was trying to straddle a quite tricky line between historical narrative and the quality of the art. I actually totally agree with (much) of the AI art I've seen. It has been all about 'effect' and not so much about substance.
@@artgalleryexplorer I've not seen the show in person, only what you show here, so it was also more of a general comment.
And yes, parts of these feelings might stem from contemporary trends, so I guess its very reasonable to set a spotlight on this evolution now.
Almost intrigued to take it for an excuse for a trip to London.
All been kind of done before.
Really? I thought some of the works had not been done before (when they were produced) - although that did not make them great, necessarily - but certainly pioneering. Thank you for watching and taking the time to comment.
It's amazingly contemporary, experimental and progressive. I love it. where I live people just don't 'get' conceptual or experimental art. they still want landscapes and flowers and banal portraits. sigh.... maybe a reflection of the regression to conservatism.
The rise of mediocrity.
Ouch! Certainly a move away from traditional art forms. As I said, the show is not for everybody. Thank you for taking the time to comment.
Interesting take! Can you explain this?