Showing posts with label Structuralism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Structuralism. Show all posts

Sunday, 23 November 2008

Art for the masses?

A few very scattered thoughts on art. I would love to knit them together better but am trying to concentrate on my real homework (honest). Please feel free to comment below.

Following a psuedo-structuralist discussion we had in the smoking area about the marvel, or not, of Rothko "Is it red? Is it Burgundy? Does it matter?" I thought you might be interested to read this. The journalist writes how art is replacing the religious experience in this supposedly 'increasingly unreligious world'.

Rothko himself, who committed suicide in 1970 from anti-depressants, found painting to be a release from the pressures that life placed upon him and at the same time gained comfort from the feeling of solidarity from his admirers: "The people who weep before my pictures are having the same religious experience I had when I painted them.", he said.

Many people ask the questions: what is art? Who gets to say? What is at stake? Is producing and experiencing art a purely aesthetic experience? Is art shaped by the world around us? and many many more...

On a recent rip to the Tate Modern armed with a new found interest in the links between art and politcs I bumped into one of our fellow class mates who had free entry to the Rothko exhibition. At £12.50 a ticket to what was previously a free exhibition in the same museum one has to question whether the next government will keep to their promise of free entry.

As we face the largest economic crisis since the 1930's sales of art are experiencing the same crashes as elsewhere. Read also at Press TV.

When art is produced purely as an item to be sold, rather than as an expression of the artists creativity, art becomes a slave to capitalist competition and consumerist contortions.

Friday, 31 October 2008

Philosophy disco

Perhaps Sian et al would like to pilot this programme. I for one would be quite up for a being a guinea pig, not liking those pesky words so much. I can just see us errecting (and then perhaps deconstructing) a big Maypole .

Oooh, i feel a bit of a barndance coming on...

Crossposted from Infinite Thought blog. (Links other than the first posted by me-Clare)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I like Jarvis Cocker's plan to incorporate lectures into his gigs.

Oxbridge lecturers will doubtless be watching these gigs carefully, waiting to see if the lecture-disco format takes off.

Well, I may not be an Oxbridge lecturer, but I could probably do with more music in my classes. When teaching Adorno I once played some selections from Swing Tanzen Verboten!, a collection of Nazi swing music from WWII. Fearing the mystical transformative properties of the tunes, one of my students asked me if he could hold me personally responsible if he became a fascist. But of course, dear boy.

Of late I have been trying to think which areas of philosophy I really, definitely don't want to teach, so that when asked I can resolutely say 'no, not my area!'. So far I have determined two: logic/calculus and ethics. I really, really hate teaching ethics. Kant's categorical imperative, fine, but talking about ickle bitty foetuses with undergraduates - horrible. If ethics means anything it's only as a branch of politics. A very tiny branch, too fragile to hold even the smallest of birds. Perhaps, in retrospect, I wasn't the best person to be appointed to the Ethics committee...but who else was going to approve the participant observation burlesque project!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition: Adorno about Popular Music (now with english annotation)