It's both. The wiki reference at the end of the story about semiotics would seem to say that Not Art's stencil is the signified (plane of content) and the thing he puts it on, the signifier, (the plane of expression). So one could say that "Not Art" is not art, but the things he put them on are (found object?). At the end of the day I have no problem with him (I'm generally against graffiti) b/c for the most part he was pointing out failures of our society. Same reason I love Keytar Bear. Carry on Not Art!
"I have no problem with him (I'm generally against graffiti) b/c for the most part he was pointing out failures of our society. Same reason I love Keytar Bear. "
Keytar Bear is pointing out the failures of our society?
or attempted art, anyways. But if you're going to play that game, you have to play it through to the end. The irony is that, by explaining it, he destroys its status as art, so in the end it's not art after all.
But I rarely pay heed to what artists say or do. Or what critics or art explainers say. So many are dolts, present company excepted.
I only care about the art itself so all is still good with me. It won’t stop me from smiling every time I see a Not Art.
I think its status as art has been pretty clear to everybody from the beginning. The artist saying, or not saying, anything about it makes little difference. It's not performance not art.
Comments
So it's art
It was better when it was not art.
Schrodinger's art?
It's both. The wiki reference at the end of the story about semiotics would seem to say that Not Art's stencil is the signified (plane of content) and the thing he puts it on, the signifier, (the plane of expression). So one could say that "Not Art" is not art, but the things he put them on are (found object?). At the end of the day I have no problem with him (I'm generally against graffiti) b/c for the most part he was pointing out failures of our society. Same reason I love Keytar Bear. Carry on Not Art!
Keytar Bear?
"I have no problem with him (I'm generally against graffiti) b/c for the most part he was pointing out failures of our society. Same reason I love Keytar Bear. "
Keytar Bear is pointing out the failures of our society?
It was always art.
Except for naive anti art snobs.
Of course it was always art
or attempted art, anyways. But if you're going to play that game, you have to play it through to the end. The irony is that, by explaining it, he destroys its status as art, so in the end it's not art after all.
I get what you’re saying.
But I rarely pay heed to what artists say or do. Or what critics or art explainers say. So many are dolts, present company excepted.
I only care about the art itself so all is still good with me. It won’t stop me from smiling every time I see a Not Art.
I think its status as art has
I think its status as art has been pretty clear to everybody from the beginning. The artist saying, or not saying, anything about it makes little difference. It's not performance not art.
You're not art!
You piece of work, you.
Not all art is good art
Sure it's art on a basic level but that doesn't make it good art or a project worth continuing. He's a lousy artist.
He wants to permanently change other's art into his own and for that I think he's a loser.
and ...
Derelict gas stations.
Is this satire?
Is this satire?
No, It's Satie
Eric
Good one!
Or might it be NOT SATIE?
not just Somerville
Big white paint spill on Beacon Street along the Common has the "Not Art" signature on it.
I was going to make a joke
I was going to make a joke there but I've decided against it. I'll let your imagination have a go at it.
I thought...
...this guy already became an exhibit of the Ancient Joke Museum...