[MD] Tracey Emins take on what is Art

[plattholden at gmail.com]

Hey Lu, 

I agree. Like a famous Hollywood producer once said, "If you want to 
send a message, send a telegram."

I find no quality in Emins' work. It strikes me as a product of "the 
untalented sold by the unprincipled to the utterly bewildered," Al Capp's 
opinion of modern art.

And then there's Tom Wolfe's observation: "Frankly, these days, without 
a theory to go with it, I can't see a painting." Emin has gobs of theory. 

Actually, Wolfe's critique of contemporary art can also apply to the 
question, "What is reality?" Do we need a metaphysics to answer?

Not when great art in a fleeting moment lays bare the mystic unity of all. 

Platt 


On 2 Aug 2009 at 12:19, Louise Pryor wrote:

> I don't get it. Why is that art? I see anger, I see a message, but I don't
> see Quality - maybe dynamism, it's certainly not static, but I just don't
> get it. I have anger, and could assault you with my depiction of it on
> canvas, but when I paint, I try to put out joy, life, vibrance. I don't
> claim that my art has a message - it doesn't, except to the people for whom
> it is meant. I can appreciate art that I don't necessarily like - but I
> guess I just wouldn't call all expression "art".
> 
> Lu