“Interparrot” is one of the best neoligisms I’ve read in ages!

by the way mental giant, its ‘interpret’ though inter-parrot is probably more applicable for you.

At the end of the day, when I think about showing in Chicago -as I plan to do this fall, I simply open up my studio. Its far superior in terms of a space to any commercial venue here, I can do all of the footwork to make it happen in a professional, effective manner -something rare to find amongst local gallerie venues -and best of all, the $$$ goes in one persons pocket -namely, mine.

Old models are crumbling as we speak.

As for The Chapmans…..well, to each his own -I have always found the work to be one-line, lightweight -pseudo, badboy schlock-at mega- buck prices.

You do it, we’ll report on it.

R

As a lesser point, I actually like how the Chapman Brothers have reached to reclaim objects condemned as malformed or grotesque by way of a sociocultural fiat in the past: statements made about Holocaust psychology with GI Joe-scale figurines, for instance. In that work, genocide was given a sufficiently commensurate scale in its material to the minds that committed the atrocities depicted. I just don’t think this work manages what it sets out to accomplish and should have been more considerate in its approach to such a painful figure in recent human history. It’s not unjust to mistake their intention as one where so-called lesser beings are worthy of unequal treatment in our present–or past, or future–societal consciousness. This work could have been thought through much better in that regard. That doesn’t mean, however, that their aim is any less admirable for having sought to highlight the best in us all as people.

Ehh–sometimes art falls short of its prospects, like everything else.

This, ” The pictures use creator and history as a material in the creation of a new thing. A thing that “thumbs it nose” at that history, those acts, and and belief structure that attempts to sanctify the the holy or profane” Oh brruuuther! yet more! bad art school induced Foucault like archealogy masquerading as philosophy/revisionist idealogy really is exposed for what it is -as in ‘nothing’ addressing ‘nothing’, in the service of attempting to lend weight and aesthetic traction to what is only, trite trash.

How does this work in any way accomplish anything you claim it does? Lets see: by painting a bad rainbow on a bad Hitler watercolor, this does anything -beyond being fodder for more art school level philosophical mumbo jumbo? I’m guessing that, is where the meaning is -as it is nowhere to be found in the actual work itself. Take away the shite talk, the work is what it is, simply, shite.

The fact is, these guys take some lameass watercolors -and continue in their lameass, weak, poorly thought out or, realized, attempt at manipulation.

Oh and a more solid supporter of the Jewish community you would not find then me and I am solidly in the corner of this work having so little to do with antisemitism that the mere mentioning of it is laughable.

The is art wear a cup.

Paul — “albeit slightly mis-guided” —?!!! — that has to be the most uninformed understatement I have ever heard, whether buried in consensus-theory-sprache or not. I hope you were being facetious, because it read like a parody of curator speech, all so “mfa wonderful” as vanrijngo put it so well.

I hold with Richard that “this work is, in my opinion, lazy and derivative with a clear goal of trying to be glib and shocking.”

I just got off the phone with a friend that was frustrated by that fact that I would not immediately denounce this work as anti-semitic and sadly shocking for shocks sake.

I was upset by their response and horrified that my reaction could be seen as an endorsement of anti-semitism. I felt at that moment, like my Canadian naivety had gotten the better of me and I had mis-stepped again. I can’t imagine that anyone would have seen these gestures as that hateful.

I think the Chapman’s serve to remind us that the sanctified elements of culture enable power and that power is always about oppression. They situate things as unquestionable and fixed. They force us to stop critically assessing our surroundings and allow those concepts, words and images to hold a sway afforded to little else in our culture.

It seems to me that this is what punk rock was about, breaking the unspoken codes that governed peoples lives. That by affronting those unspoken beliefs that could not be named, questioned or re-thought would break their dominance on individuals lives.

Hitler’s fascism prescribed way of being, thinking and acting, and sought a control that would make only his way sanctified and unassailable. The Chapman’s are not resuscitating Hitler’s history and beliefs. The pictures use creator and history as a material in the creation of a new thing. A thing that “thumbs it nose” at that history, those acts, and and belief structure that attempts to sanctify the the holy or profane.

Admittedly this makes me sound like a believer in the power of art but I guess that might be another element of my sad Canadian naivety. At worst it is a hack-ish shock art gesture, but as best it is a cleaver reminder not to enshrine heros or villains and think for ourselves.

Ick. I’ve sickened myself. I might just like it ’cause it seems like kids being naughty. Oh and all prejudices are stupid.

Kum bi ya, my Lord, Kum bi ya.
Kum bi ya, my Lord, Kum bi ya.
Kum bi ya, my Lord, Kum bi ya.
Oh Lord, Kum bi ya.

d.

d.

I think I like the abortion girl or the starving dog one better.

Your comments are atypically presumptive and obnoxious. This work is, in my opinion, lazy and derivative with a clear goal of trying to be glib and shocking. You spend you money how you see so fit, I don’t think these are terribly interesting.

Duncan, since when are you scared of Wesley and I?

R

I secretly or not so secretly love the Chapman brothers. I was afraid Richard and Wesley would yell at me if I responded “I do!” to their open hostility.

d.

PS. F*** it. I think it is f***ing awesome.

PPS. I think you might need like 10 lazy millions to buy the lot.

For Hitler, (and unfortunately for everyone else,) mediocrity didn’t pan out -for these talentless fucks it obviously has; ironic -that they can take this trite trash that sent der Fuhrer first to the poorhouse in the 1920’s in Munich, then into hardscrabble world of post WW1 German politics, -and repackage it for mega bucks sale/consumption in the context of the colossal vapidity and venality of todays art world…….

d.

Lets piss on some holy books while were at it!