Curator kills art exhibit.

[Cliche]

http://www.theartnewspaper.com/article.asp?id=7834

One of the central works in the exhibition “Design and the Elastic Mind” at the Museum of Modern Art in New York (until 12 May), Victimless Leather, a small jacket made up of embryonic stem cells taken from mice, has died. The artists, Oron Catts and Ionat Zurr, say the work which was fed nutrients by tube, expanded too quickly and clogged its own incubation system just five weeks after the show opened.

Stem cells, is there anything they can't do?

Also, it would be pretty neat to be in NY to see this.

And another thing... Remorse over killing a jacket?

[Gozer]

Paging PETA!

[CaptainCrunch]

It would have been more edgy and artsy if they would have used hobos instead of mice.

[Iggy's Forehead]

The term 'artist' really gets tossed around loosely these days.

[Temporary_User]

Originally Posted by Iggy's Forehead

The term 'artist' really gets tossed around loosely these days.

I disagree.

[RougeUnderoos]

What a cool idea. Kind of creepy, but neato.

[Locke]

That seems like a lot of work for artists to be engaging in.

[AC]

Originally Posted by Iggy's Forehead

The term 'artist' really gets tossed around loosely these days.

Given that 'artist' can simply be defined as 'a person whose work exhibits exceptional skill', and that art is subjective and abstract, I'm not sure your statement is accurate.

[Metro Gnome]

Originally Posted by AnthonyCook

Given that 'artist' can simply be defined as 'a person whose work exhibits exceptional skill'

This "defintion" could apply to anything. Car mechanics can exhibit "exceptional skill". So do hockey players. Is everything that's created - skillfully - therefore art?

and that art is subjective and abstract, I'm not sure your statement is accurate.

art is "subjective"...do you mean the evaluation of art is subjective? Necessarily? As in "I think a doodle of Mickey mouse is as good as the the Mona Lisa" is an inherently valid opinion? Does this mean all art is good (or bad)?

[Iggy's Forehead]

Originally Posted by Metro Gnome

This "defintion" could apply to anything. Car mechanics can exhibit "exceptional skill". So do hockey players. Is everything that's created - skillfully - therefore art?



art is "subjective"...do you mean the evaluation of art is subjective? Necessarily? As in "I think a doodle of Mickey mouse is as good as the the Mona Lisa" is an inherently valid opinion? Does this mean all art is good (or bad)?

B-I-N-G-O.

[Cliche]

Originally Posted by Metro Gnome

This "defintion" could apply to anything. Car mechanics can exhibit "exceptional skill". So do hockey players. Is everything that's created - skillfully - therefore art?



art is "subjective"...do you mean the evaluation of art is subjective? Necessarily? As in "I think a doodle of Mickey mouse is as good as the the Mona Lisa" is an inherently valid opinion? Does this mean all art is good (or bad)?

Wouldn't a subjective evaluation of art be more of a case by case basis rather than an absolute sum of good or bad? Images presented in art are usually meant to evoke emotion and response from the viewer. Attaching valuation to the artistic piece is determinant by the individual, and that individuals importance or influence in a larger group would dictate the general response.

Thusly, the validity of the opinion would be left to the viewer in general, although that may be moderated by prior viewers.

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by Metro Gnome

This "defintion" could apply to anything. Car mechanics can exhibit "exceptional skill". So do hockey players. Is everything that's created - skillfully - therefore art?



art is "subjective"...do you mean the evaluation of art is subjective? Necessarily? As in "I think a doodle of Mickey mouse is as good as the the Mona Lisa" is an inherently valid opinion? Does this mean all art is good (or bad)?

I'm pretty sure most automobile enthusiasts would equate an exceptional mechanic to an exceptional artist.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

I'm pretty sure most automobile enthusiasts would equate an exceptional mechanic to an exceptional artist.

I think what people might be suggesting here is that this isn't "real" art like a painting or a sculpture.

It's very similar to saying "my 5 year old could have done that" when seeing an abstract painting that sold for a million dollars.

[Cliche]

So what is the artistic value of a mouse stem-cell grown jacket as an art piece?

Here is a link to the online component of the Exhibition in question so that there's a larger framework to judge this work against (NOTE: my safari had problems with it so I had to use firefox to view) http://www.moma.org/exhibitions/2008/elasticmind/

Should just go for the Painstation

[Fozzie_DeBear]

Originally Posted by AnthonyCook

Given that 'artist' can simply be defined as 'a person whose work exhibits exceptional skill', and that art is subjective and abstract, I'm not sure your statement is accurate.

I would add that the art should exhibit an emotional response in the viewer...

[AC]

Originally Posted by Metro Gnome

This "defintion" could apply to anything. Car mechanics can exhibit "exceptional skill". So do hockey players. Is everything that's created - skillfully - therefore art?

Sure. I don't think one can say what is and isn't art definitively. As it brings out personal emotional (as was pointed out) responses to something. Its like saying that because you don't like one genre of music, you don't consider it to be 'music'. What one sees as art will vary from person to person.

Originally Posted by Metro Gnome

art is "subjective"...do you mean the evaluation of art is subjective? Necessarily? As in "I think a doodle of Mickey mouse is as good as the the Mona Lisa" is an inherently valid opinion? Does this mean all art is good (or bad)?

As mentioned, I don't think there can possibly be a broad enough way to describe everything that could be considered 'art'. What is considered to be art will differ for everybody.

Sure, pieces like these are certainly out there. But I would consider an important aspect of artistic expression is based around challenging expectations and trying to do something brand new.

I'd say that artistic expression is so open-ended that its impossible to pin down what is and isn't art.

[SebC]

I wish this exhibit was there when I was. A jacket made of stem cells AND the Nokia Morph? Way too cool.

[Five-hole]

Sure, anything is art if the viewer thinks it is. Art is a dialogue from the artist to the viewer through the artist's piece.

Now if you want to say "well then I'm gonna squirt some ketchup on this plate and call it art", then you're just a ######bag.