The person who drew that pipe captioned it “This is not a pipe” in French.
For some reason it’s a popular piece. I don’t really like it because I prefer art to be aesthetically interesting rather than “any creative work that makes a statement.”
I don’t mind if it actually makes me think. I’d like it to be aesthetically interesting anyways.
I do mind if a cheap trick (like “this isn’t a pipe, it’s just a picture of a pipe”) gets touted as a thought-provoking masterpiece. Because then if I say I don’t like it, I get accused of not wanting to think.
“The impact of Duchamp’s Fountain changed the way people view art due to his focus upon “cerebral art” contrary to merely “retinal art”, as this was a means to engage prospective audiences in a thought-provoking way as opposed to satisfying the aesthetic status quo “turning from classicism to modernity”.”
Ahh I see. Seems like andy worhol level creativity. i never really understood why his stuff was considered art, but my brain glides over stuff better than gretzky’s skates so I’m probably no judge.
I actually love the Dadaist movement, although this piece is not really my favorite. Truth be told, I don’t love the art of the Dadaist movement, so much as I love what it represented.
This piece is named “The treachery of images” but most people refer to it by ‘This is not a pipe’ because, well, that’s what’s written on it.
It’s basically an art shitpost. Of course it’s not a pipe. It’s a painting of a pipe.
But the Dadaist movement is basically all art shitposting. Dada is an utterance that roughly means “yeah, whatever” and came about as a form of protest art against the bourgeoisie, and their overly rigid definition of art after WW1. In that time it was common for the rich of various nations to embrace specific forms of art as an expression of nationalism.
Dadaists were like “fuck that, art is whatever the hell the artist says it is.” Because art for just the rich sucks, as does art that’s only in one format, and nationalism, too.
My favorite story is that Marcel Duchamp submitted “Fountain” a urinal that had been turned sideways and signed “R. Mutt” to an art show that ostensibly showed everything submitted to it, but the organizers hid his piece, and it’s rumored that they threw it away after taking a photo of it.
The treatment of the submission and’s mystery surrounding it brought about tremendous attention.
The person who drew that pipe captioned it “This is not a pipe” in French.
For some reason it’s a popular piece. I don’t really like it because I prefer art to be aesthetically interesting rather than “any creative work that makes a statement.”
Ya, I hate when art makes you think.
I don’t mind if it actually makes me think. I’d like it to be aesthetically interesting anyways.
I do mind if a cheap trick (like “this isn’t a pipe, it’s just a picture of a pipe”) gets touted as a thought-provoking masterpiece. Because then if I say I don’t like it, I get accused of not wanting to think.
You can lead a horse to water…
The “cheap trick” is the whole point. You probably really won’t like Magrittes buddy, Duchamp and his Fountain https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fountain_(Duchamp)
“The impact of Duchamp’s Fountain changed the way people view art due to his focus upon “cerebral art” contrary to merely “retinal art”, as this was a means to engage prospective audiences in a thought-provoking way as opposed to satisfying the aesthetic status quo “turning from classicism to modernity”.”
Ahh I see. Seems like andy worhol level creativity. i never really understood why his stuff was considered art, but my brain glides over stuff better than gretzky’s skates so I’m probably no judge.
I actually love the Dadaist movement, although this piece is not really my favorite. Truth be told, I don’t love the art of the Dadaist movement, so much as I love what it represented.
This piece is named “The treachery of images” but most people refer to it by ‘This is not a pipe’ because, well, that’s what’s written on it.
It’s basically an art shitpost. Of course it’s not a pipe. It’s a painting of a pipe.
But the Dadaist movement is basically all art shitposting. Dada is an utterance that roughly means “yeah, whatever” and came about as a form of protest art against the bourgeoisie, and their overly rigid definition of art after WW1. In that time it was common for the rich of various nations to embrace specific forms of art as an expression of nationalism.
Dadaists were like “fuck that, art is whatever the hell the artist says it is.” Because art for just the rich sucks, as does art that’s only in one format, and nationalism, too.
My favorite story is that Marcel Duchamp submitted “Fountain” a urinal that had been turned sideways and signed “R. Mutt” to an art show that ostensibly showed everything submitted to it, but the organizers hid his piece, and it’s rumored that they threw it away after taking a photo of it.
The treatment of the submission and’s mystery surrounding it brought about tremendous attention.
Dada imagery shitposting is nothing compared to Dada theater shitposting. Ever seen Ubu Roi? You’ll probably wish you didn’t.
On the other hand, I can’t be too critical of Alfred Jarry. He used to walk around Paris with a lobster on a leash.
Someone will be saying this looking at internet memes in a museum in 50 years, while everyone else will be acclaiming a portray of loss.