1999 | 2000 | 2001 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023
TAGGED: ►Questions +++ Link Added +++ Individuality +++ Boris Lurie Interview +++ Vortex Painting
MIKE NEVILLE: Vortex painting | Whikham/GB on Aug 07 | Hello, I own a painting, "VORTEX", 1963 oil on paper, 24"x 24" by Aldo Tambellini. It was a gift. I would like to include it with my home owners insurance. I would appreciate it if you could give me some idea of it's value. Thank you very much, Mike Neville
ALAN MURDOCK: Boris interview | New York on Jul 26 | I received a comment on one of my posts this last week indicating that an interview I conducted with Boris Lurie is now included on a website dedicated to the NO!art movement. The website, http://www.no-art.info, can be read in English or German.
The NO!artists countered the Pop Art movement during the 1960's by creating a hot, politically active art in contrast to the cool, politically aloof Pop movement. The movement was ignored through the 70's and 80's, but interest has been growing in their work and several retrospective shows have been mounted recently in the US and Germany.
Boris Lurie, a survivor of World War II German concentration camps and NO!art founder has been making artwork that is agressively anti-war and highly expressive for over 40 years in his New York studio. He and the other NO!artists were influenced heavily by Abstract Expressionism, but where these artists removed social content from their work, Lurie and others added intensely emotional and political commentary to their art while maintaining an emphasis on gesture and expression. Lurie is known for his use of knives, cement, women's clothing and pinup images in his sculptural assemblages, collages and paintings.
Rich in photographs and texts, the website is an important resource for anyone interested in arts from the 1950's and 60's as NO! has influences from expressionistic abstract works, as Lurie explains in our interview, but the movement also relates to the larger aesthetic/political changes in the arts during the postwar period.
I may have to attempt a German translation of the interview to submit for consideration under the German heading as well.
ALAN MURDOCK: Individuality | New York on Mar 12 | I've been working on some ideas about individuality and the value of the individual as it changes through history, especially in relation to how individuality plays out in art. It seems to me that modernism in the early 20th century was much more willing to accept and promote people expressing their individuality (note the publication of the Founding Manifesto of Futurism in a Parisian paper in 1909) while now we promote professionalism and ability to work as a team.
I'm looking at artists like Acconci who moved from fine art and now runs an architectural firm and Ken Friedman who moved from Fluxus to design.
It seems to me that because art has become completely professional, something [NO!art founder Boris] Lurie pointed to in his interview I recently red, and is based solely on the money, that team design is the place artists can, in contrast to isolated individualist art, promote their ideas to the world in a way the art world rarely allows today.
ALEKSEY DAYEN: Link added | New York on Feb 9 | hi, dietmar, i'm a friend of boris. i added link to your site on my web-page http://www.aldayen.com
Sincerely, Aleksey Dayen>
CHRIS: Questions | Boston on Feb 3 | Dear sirs, before I go on I simply must give you a background of myself and my certain disposition. I am e-mailing you for the soul reason of a report I'm doing. I am a senior in high school (a Christian school) and plan on going to art school (despite the administrations attempts to get me to go to a nice Christian school and give up my free will). My last moments at my school have been a complete cynical hell because the people who run the school are fascists (to be into are is one of the evils of the world it must mean your into drugs and everything els then). However throughout my life at that school I have some up with the eccentric theory that God is a creator and thus by creating art we are within ourselves godliness. I have had a traumatizing childhood, yet a perfect family life. So everything has left me conflicted.
Now here for the question part. I am from America and just recently got into all the controversy on the Piss Jesus piece. I liked it. However it left me with the question of if art is offensive should governmental funding be taken away from it? Could you possibly answer a couple of questions I have for my report/paper I'm doing. As said before I am for art in anyform, I believe that its the reasons behind the art that make the art, the spirit, the soul, the ideas, and the emotions of the artists that make the art.*do not judge the art till you meet the artist*>
1.) If art is offensive should there be warning to viewers in the muesum/gallery?>
2.) Should the government and branches off of the government be able to control what art gets shown?>
3.) Should funding for art from a governmental source be pulled if the art is offensive?>
4.) Should the museum decide what the people see or should the people decide what's offensive or not?>
5.) Are there any websites/books that will help me on my research?>
Your help is appreciated,
*chris* Boston, Mass.