"One of his signature 'protocols,' as they were also called, was to paint a canvas the same color as the wall on which it would hang. He did not do this himself; rather, he enlisted a 'charge-taker' — an art collector, museum representative or independent curator — to make the work according to his specifications.... Mr. Rutault’s wryly iconoclastic process represented a break from the past, subverting the basic notion that painters are people who paint. Instead of making paintings, he wrote texts; yet his work was both collaborative and potentially open-ended. His 'protocol' could be painted and repainted, as the charge-taker saw fit. As a result, he said, 'The painting is never finished.'... 'He’s one of the only artists who won’t see what his work looks like in the future, and it will still be his work.'... 'Claude called himself a painter.... Everyone else called him a conceptual artist. It’s true that he did not touch paint or canvasses, but instead he wrote paintings.'"
४ टिप्पण्या:
I find it hard to believe the NYT, of all places, is unaware of the Tom Wolfe takedown of modern art called The Painted Word, so use of the term in their headline would seem to be ironic at least - but which party are they slagging?
We lost a lot when we stopped seeing the world in primary colors. Fingerpaints were more fun than chalk or Crayola.
Rutault always struck me as sincere, but even so, I think this applies.
One of the classics
Wolfe's Back To Blood included an art auction in which the latest craze was the "No Hands" movement, in which the artist did not touch the work, but had others create it according to his instructions. I don't know whether Wolfe invented this nonsense, or rich people are actually spending huge sums on it.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा