Why Your Five Year Old Could Not Have Done That Modern Art Explained characters ó 7

read & download ´ eBook, PDF or Kindle ePUB Ú Susie Hodge

Why Your Five Year Old Could Not Have Done That Modern Art ExplainedCome on you know you've thought it while viewing a masterpiece of abstract art you mutter A kid could do that Here Susie Hodge author of How to Survive Modern Art explains why the best examples of modern art are actually the result of sophisticat. “The painting seems to be the type of random arrangement that a five year old might come up with However it emerged from the mind of an intellectual” p64; this is only the most annoying of innumerable nearly identical statements in this book that confuse what an artist produces and what an artist claims to be producing “So although this work might initially appear to be a childish scrawl it actually conveys the preoccupations of the time” p71 Hodge writes actually citing the artist’s statement as her source But of course this is not what the work “conveys” If the work “conveyed” meaning we would not need an artist to explain what it was about or Hodge to blindly accept and repeat it This entire book is a hymn to the intentional fallacy Time and again we are assured that an artist acted intentionally pp 138 216 etc consciously pp 59181 etc or especially deliberately pp 65 154 171 172 181 207 etc; we are asked to consider the artist's objective 149 objectives 165 or aim 47 140 169 what an artist was seeking to communicate 202 intended 84 124 aimed at 61 128 140 or planned deliberately 81 as a preconceived statement 119 for meaningful reasons 125 “No child would have created this work with the same intentions as Tinguely” p22 While for her part Rist’s “reasons went much deeper” than children’s reasons would p53How “meaningful” can these “reasons” get Check out these examples of the kind of symbolism modern art offers•“The artist's inclusion of two skulls indicates the prospect of death” p162•“The cut up sleeves of a denim shirt represent the fisherman's clothes” p143Could a five year old have come up with those bits of metonymyAs with the skulls and the denim there is a bizarre literalness at work in this book Could a five year old have painted this Magritte No because “no child could possibly reproduce Magritte’s meticulous and realistic painting style” p14 Could a child have created Emin’s “My Bed” No because although “Children may often leave their beds unmade and their rooms a messa close look at this installation reveals that the bed and strewn items belong to an adult” p130 These explanations seem to miss the point — no one’s ever stated that a five year old could paint like Magritte and no one who’s ever dissed “My Bed” would feel refuted by the fact that children don’t wear pantyhose You might as well say that children couldn’t paint the upper half of Gorky's Year after Year because they’re too short A child could not slash a canvas because children are not allowed to play with knives is a parody of a statement from this book and not an actual statement from this bookMainly though Hodge just falls back on her beloved intentionalism “any five year old could have deposited his own excrement in a canManzoni however was making several points that few children could make” p116What this book does not offer is an explanation for why the artworks reproduced are not trash—I’m not saying they are trash just that the book does not explain or even attempt to explain why they are not As an apology for modern art it addresses only straw man arguments and makes modern art seem safe boring and redundant It also doesn't really explain why a five year old could not have made most of the works reproduced herein In fact it often stumbles backwards into admitting that a five year old could have• “A five year old could make a structure like this but they sic would not be scrutinizing so many elements at the same time” p29•“A child could make a pretend plate of food but would not be able to incorporate the subtle implications or t

review Why Your Five Year Old Could Not Have Done That Modern Art Explained

Why Your Five Year Old Could Not Have Done That Modern Art Explained characters ó 7 ¹ Come on you know you've thought it while viewing a masterpiece of abstract art you mutter A kid could do that Here Susie Hodge author of How to Survive Modern Art explains why the best examples of modern art are aEd thought and serious talent From Marcel Duchamp's notorious Fountain and the scribbles of Cy Twombly to Mark Rothko's multiforms and Carl Andre's uncarved blocks Hodge addresses critical outrage with a revealing insight into the technical skill. People say you can't stumble over new discoveries online the way you can find them in an actual bookstore or library but I stumbled across this book while trying to find a different book in my library's online system and I'm glad I did I learned about some of my favorite artists Claes Oldenburg Felix Gonzalez Torres Louise Bourgeois and some ones I had never heard of Pipilotti Rist's Massachusetts Chandelier is great Also I love that there's an entire chapter on tantrums

Susie Hodge Ú 7 download

Layering of ideas and sheer inspiration behind each work In cleverly organized chapters such as Objects Toys ProvocationsTantrums and PeopleMonsters Hodges thoughtfully and definitively lays bare the perception that modern art is mere child's pl. Or to be accurate with the titleAlright your five year old could indeed have done this but they couldn't have done it while thinking about capitalismFacile un nuanced redundant overtly reliant on the intentional fallacy and likely to confirm a skeptic's belief that children could do it all