>> http://www.wired.com/culture/art/multimedia/2008/08/gallery_legophotog
Mike Stimpson's works are extremely easy. A photographer, he simply sets up the Legos to resemble a famous work then takes a picture of them. Even my friends who have no artistic talent can probably pull this off. Often art critics will say that they appreciate a work that required a lot of hard work and talent. They appreciate something that they themselves could not do making Stimpon's work questionably "art".
I found an article about him from Wired magazine, and well, here are some of the comments:
"All this guy did was buy some toys and then get a magazine desperate for content to publicize it. He didn't "create" anything. At least replace the word "creation" with "approximation" in the story. Wired is getting pretty weak!"
"These really aren't at all good are they.
Still, it's pages like this that prove that even the uninspired and talentless can have their few minutes of fame."
I would instead like to point out that it is not the artistic talent but the idea behind these pieces that truly makes this art. The art itself may be simple but the idea was fun, imaginative, and creative. I would even go as far to say it is original; sure he is copying famous pieces but who would have thought to recreate these pieces with Legos? It is a new way of looking at the famous artworks and even at photography.
Most importantly it is fun and something that people would enjoy looking at. Even those who do not believe this can qualify as art can admit that this is fun. I personally enjoyed browsing through his gallery and seeing famous pieces portrayed with blocky Legos. So I ask, isn't that what art is all about anyway? Looking at a piece and wanting to see more?
I feel this relates to Digital Art because it reminds me of Dadaism where a urinal was placed in a museum and labeled as "art". There wasn't any "talent" behind it in making the piece for it was a readymade, much like these legos, and it raised quite an uproar. I feel as if Dadaism and Stimpson's work teach me to look at the common world differently, to look at art differently. Digital work is going to have to be viewed as a completely different medium than painting and drawing and to make truly creative digital works digital artists have to look beyond conventional art. There is still so much opportunity for creativity with the digital medium.
In closing, I am curious and going to ask anyone who happens to be reading this, do you think this is art?
whenever I talk to someone who is a traditionalist about art, and tells me that s/he could do the same thing as Pollock or Duchamp, I point out "but you *didn't* do that! that's the point!" contemporary art is very much about the importance of concept, and sometimes artistic skill plays into the visualization of the piece but Damien Hirst certainly doesn't bank on being a master painter!
ReplyDelete