Reader Lisa wrote earlier in the comment Strange to " From the believer addiction ", inter alia, what prompted me to Riposte following:
"You can argue about Beuys' art, but I agree with his statement that everyone is an artist, too."
"@ Lisa
I forgot even Beuys and the concept of art.
I mean, the man has dished out a shudder bullshit.
Not only does it in her imaginary, inflated Do not fired countless Tinker and weak Maten us to steal the last of the day, no, he devalued as the art of what it means socially sustainable as such.
For me, however not a thousandth Gran.
There is hardly anything Boshafteres, Zersetzerischeres to rise as each Krackler, Krattler and scribblers to the artist.
So every little greed, each scabby craving for carrot in the asshole in the Vienna U-Bahn is collected at the Marvel values.
Decadent it almost does not work. Anyway, I find it not easy to an increase.
Does the concept of art in past centuries have been often pulled too tight: THIS is a fatal mischief.
Quasi-putting Bach's violin concertos with the turnip in the asshole in one. Put some Dadaism a New York City € Sufferer with the Quixote in one. Rancid fat corners frescoes of great masters. Abartig. Disgusting. Cultural Totalabsturz.
I assume that you mean it again dear, but since you reap opposition and resistance to such an extent jens the end, as none yet looked.
Such egalitarianism, Verabsurdigung everything enhancing action, can not hope for the slightest form of toleration for me.
Somewhere, right there, even when the prongs is Beinaheallverzeihermagnus from all over.
Way to bring humanity to the lemurs.
(Addendum:. I will probably solve this comment yet out in the direction of a specific article The thing is always important enough.)
Greetings anyway.
(After all, you've got the best times annoyed me again. Respect.) "
I will not even ask closer to what a Schiller, a Kleist, a Nietzsche would have said to the After thesis of Mr. Beuys.
Probably nothing, or only, "Do the asylums about all empty?"
Each set unsubstantiated ramblings addition to Michael Kohlhaas; the donkey tail line next to Goya; the delirious rattle of a terminally demented next Vivaldi; the Rotzpopel a Beuys next even a well-hewn gargoyle: That is not revaluation of all values, but devaluation of all values.
Here again no more. No-won rank, no trouble, no higher sphere, no real existence compression, no knowledge, no model, no special skill, no beauty, no love, no special action.
Man pees Michelangelo in the face, ridiculed to Händel, Dostoijewski calculated using the last Eckensteher same, Gogol makes the Mexican mugger, the umsichschießenden heroin rapper in the South Bronx to the great tenor.
That this Beuys with his notions of art itself otherwise very arty and educated people (by far not only Lisa, I have met many) deromaßen the mind of each measure, which necessarily belongs to art, clouded, darkened, heard in my special category: If I knew of Use no, I did not believe it.
How should in such a premise, because not really arise art?
If the grunts, Farzen, twitching, nor the Unerheblichste, the squeal of a pig is considered art?
In formalin defined rat tails?
Two embalmed as Gipfelkreuz?
Trans fatty acids as transcendent?
A severed ear in advanced decay as Preziose up for auction at Sotheby's?
WHY SOMETHING is claimed?
WHAT do you do with people?
A creature can not help it, it's a beast. It also needs critters. That's right and good.
When a man gives up but just what essentially separates him from the creature, he is unforgivable in the case back to the creature.
And that, if there is one thing for the Behuf is also the Behuf the matter.
How do you manage dull, controllable mass.
That is the intention, as it should go.
What else could you say such a thing?
- Advertisement -
Tags: Never!
