[Leica] art & garbage, again

[Guy Bennett <guybnt@idt.net>]

>People like this (and there are lots of them - just tour the galleries and
>art centers) think "I am an artist, therefore ANYTHING I do is art." The
>reason people get like this is because others are too kind. In the
>beginning, no one would say "that's crap," instead they said "oh yes, I can
>see your thoughts," and babble on, ad nauseam, never telling the person
>that his/her stuff is worthless. Instead, he/she gets an inflated ego and
>all the dumb artsy fartsy folks clammer around and make a fuss. And voile!
>Garbage gets labeled art!
>
>Jim again


jim,

i agree with you that garbage does occasionally get labeled art. but what
about the art that gets labeled art? what about the truly *good* stuff that
the dumb artsy fartsy people (as you unnecessarily and condescendingly call
them) and everybody else (i.e. the public, whom you fail to mention but who
are also instrumental in making the success of an artist) go ga ga over?
can they all be wrong all the time? do you alone see clearly?

what bothers me in the above statement, and in similar comments made over
the past few days, is not that you like or dislike eggleston, art
photography, contemporary painting, or what have you; that is immaterial.
it's rather the bold certainty with which these comments are made. by
loudly proclaiming 'this is crap/this is worthless/this is not art' you are
saying that you not only know what art is and is not, you are also implying
that your definition is absolute: like the artist who claims 'anything i do
is art,' you claim 'anything i say is art,' and that position is equally
ridiculous.

we all have our opinions, but by arguing in absolute terms - as you do -
you baiscally saying that you're right, and that those who disagree with
you simply don't get it. is that really what you mean?


guy