Comments on: Episode 191: James Elkins/Liz Prince

By: Richard

Richard — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 05:59:56 +0000

Do you care to elaborate?

By: Vato Perez

Vato Perez — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 04:49:01 +0000

eat my pussy

By: Jonathan T.D. Neil on “professionalization” vs. “academicization.” : Bad at Sports

Mon, 15 Jun 2009 22:25:37 +0000

[...] to check the spelling of that last word like, four times. Those of you who enjoyed Duncan’s conversation with James Elkins about the art Ph.D. a few weeks back might want to check out The Drawing Center Executive Editor Jonathan T. D. [...]

By: castor de luxe

castor de luxe — Thu, 28 May 2009 21:28:42 +0000

great discussion. i found it very odd when elkins said that he wants to “prevent” the art phd crazytalk from “spreading” to the US. what powers he has to stop its spread!

By: Who really needs Art PhDs? James Elkins in conversation with Elpida Karaba «

Mon, 11 May 2009 23:46:40 +0000

[...] http://badatsports.com/2009/episode-191-james-elkinsliz-prince/ Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)3rd March 2008 Knowledge Through Practice Seminar – Prof Tom Fisher 0 Comments No Comments so far Leave a comment RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI Leave a comment Click here to cancel reply. Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed:

[...]

By: Mark Staff Brandl Mark Staff Brandl — Fri, 01 May 2009 22:42:16 +0000 Whew— that’s a depressing thought Tim, but a pretty shrewd insight I think — programs constructed to arrive at already vanished destinations. I hadn’t thought of it in that way, but I think you are right. By: Tim Porges Tim Porges — Fri, 01 May 2009 19:47:36 +0000 So what I’m saying is, the kind of control Paul talks about above is doomed to fail. So what’s oddest about it is, it might have worked maybe twenty or thirty years ago, but then it would have been superfluous. Now it’s an attempt to revive a moribund critical culture by institutionalizing it. By: Tim Porges Tim Porges — Fri, 01 May 2009 19:29:02 +0000 A bit more on the previous thought: with student and even curatorial practice (eg Bourriaud) exploring a “relational” aesthetic and epistemology (okay, maybe a pompous abuse of the term, but how ELSE do you talk about the source of content in artwork?), aren’t programs built around increasingly anachronistic information economies doomed in advance? It’s like rats swimming towards a sinking ship. Or not. Discuss. By: Tim Porges Tim Porges — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 04:04:28 +0000 Rather than an opinion at this moment I have a couple of questions: 1.)I vaguely remember PhD programs in studio practice having been tried here before. Does Elkins have any thoughts about the PhD art program at Ohio State, for instance? 2.) The idea of the artist as an isolated generator of new information is oddly antique. I wonder how people square this with current interest in the information commons, Yochai Benkler’s _Wealth of Networks_, the proliferation of social practice programs in art schools and so on. I doin’t so much have a really sharp question about this as a large, tender mass of uncertainty about the presence of easy or clear answers. By: Richard Richard — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 17:50:54 +0000 I need to balance out all of this talk of studio Phds I think I’ll go watch video clips of the Dead Kennedys playing live on Youtube. Ahhhh much better.