@coldicehotwater I was asking your thoughts, on the “void” you recognized in the warhol study in comparison to the use of the question mark at the end of the video. I do like what you said about discussion. Would you say the video would be more open to assessment and easier to follow if it had subtitles? Also if you don’t mind me asking, why do you think art is dying as a form of entertainment?
Unless the video and or the sentiment is coming from warhol, I’m not sure I see a connection. If the view point is from the videos creator to warhols, then my thoughts would just be conjecture.
I would have to understand more of the video creators intent to help with guidance. Although I can say, by using, for lack of better terms, “anonymous themed cinematography, it’s distracting. It is a premise, indeed which definitely serves a purpose as a platform to deliver a message but I don’t say it helps particularly well in this instance. Subtitles are useful but if the speech is delivered properly, it isn’t entirely needed.
The world is descending into chaos. Art, although it may be produced in war is often of the first things to. Art is often slow and complex, requiring thoughts and introspection. There is less and less time for that. Even as a side effect of war, that being death and destruction, art is lost. One can easily look at left over ruins or long lost paintings like Van Goghs “painter on his way to work” or courbets “the stone breakers” and see war destroys not only life, but the very fabric of existence. I suppose a better statement than “art is dying as a form of entertainment” is....
“The arts of the world are the canary in the coal mine of life it self. For as art dies, surely humans will follow.”
-M
Interesting! Well it's not coming from Warhol specifically but it is coming from art, the collective or general voice of art history past. Which through participation Warhol is prominently apart of as well as his predecessors . So that's where I make the connection. Warhol being one of the 5 significant "greatest artists" of art history past [that I'm focusing on in this work] in conversation with art history present about art history future. The idea for this study was conceived from his quote "in the future everyone will be famous for fifteen minutes", which shows that Warhol is capable of "seeing the future" or at least interested in defining it lol I do agree that the viewpoint is conjecture but isn't that what the future is? lol
I've been having trouble with deciding on a visual identity of the narrator and the Anonymous Guy Fawkes avatar was an easy go to because it is of course anonymous lol I do agree that it is a bit distracting and a little far off from the subject matter but I don't know if that is good or bad yet. But your point is definitely noted!
I agree with you about art dying as a form of entertainment but I think for different reasons(if I'm understanding what you said correctly) Art can for sure exist in chaos and can be spawned from it. You have works and practices from artists like Chris Burden, Francisco De Goya, Damien Hirst, Paul Mccarthy and even Picasso's Guernica that have lent from and to a chaotic world.
"Art, freedom and creativity will change society faster than politics." -Victor Pinchuk
BUT I think what you said about art being complex and needing time from introspection and extensive thought is spot on. I also agree that there has been less time and space for this, but I think it is a symptom of social media and the art market. There is definitely a lack of consciousness in contemporary art and artists and the people who are funding the arts are not looking for great artists they're looking for investments. The absence of self expression and scarcity of individualism is where it is falling apart in my opinion-