Celebrity Hijack - Amy & Brian Sewell discuss Conceptual art
Backis it art?
Channel: Entertainment
Uploaded: January 15, 2008 at 10:11 pm
Author: artynmay2
Length: 00:04:41
Rating: 4.91
Views: 5500
Tags: big brother celebrity hijack 2008 amy jackson conceptual artist discussion andy warhol brian sewell diary room
Video Comments:
tessthenobody (October 9, 2008 at 12:13 am)
wow, I think it was pretty wrong of that guy to slam her that badly. Every form of art has it's value, I think. I do think some Conceptual art is rubbish, but so are some old 'skillfull' paintings and such, because they are only art for arts sake. At least conceptual art gives the viewer a large amount of respect by allowing them to draw their own conclusions from it. Instead of painting something to demonstrate how awesomely skilled you are at painting.
countofbiarritz (September 15, 2008 at 4:39 pm)
Mr Sewell is completely correct.
Her work is an absurdity, she was asked to defend it; she was incapable of doing so as one cannot defend the indefensible.
Whatever you think of him, Sewell is correct. The ability to manipulate string and require opinion is an intellectual vacuum in itself. To manipulate string and to assume a response as a natural reaction betrays a moral vacuum.
Sewell is completely in the right to question her vapid self indulgence.
Her work is an absurdity, she was asked to defend it; she was incapable of doing so as one cannot defend the indefensible.
Whatever you think of him, Sewell is correct. The ability to manipulate string and require opinion is an intellectual vacuum in itself. To manipulate string and to assume a response as a natural reaction betrays a moral vacuum.
Sewell is completely in the right to question her vapid self indulgence.
wingback (August 14, 2008 at 6:17 pm)
... Play-Cam(.COM) ... frisky mmmmm such a tease, Grace
Domytar (August 4, 2008 at 10:17 pm)
hello if anyone is confused about this conversation about art just listen to how brian sewell stands on his own words ( he says "I WAS JUST WONDERING AMY WERE ART COMES IN TO ALL THIS "and at the end he says (THE TRUOBLE WITH YOUR ART AMY IS BLARR BLARR BLARR get it he is a massive prick and sucks them to
0FindGlory (July 27, 2008 at 4:57 am)
Very good listen! Brian and Amy came across very well. She could so easily have let frustration take over and she didn't.
chrish12345 (July 26, 2008 at 4:35 pm)
This whole 'modern art' v 'old masters' argument is flawed from the outset because the 2 sides of it are incompatible for such a purpose. On the one hand you have what people are trying to do now, in the present, and on the other hand you have an academic, historical approach, when time freezes and one is able to look back on what has already been achieved. As soon as you understand this, the whole argument surely disappears?
salim201 (July 5, 2008 at 3:45 pm)
"an elitist construct having little-no effect on the culture at large", there's nothing elitist about art, from the 19th century art has been going against the establishment/social convention. If you wish to make something more accessable to an ignorant and inert public you inevitably devalue it, you can't have it both ways. conceptual art is a way of incorporating clever but untalented people into arts, its a brief abberation, and probably will have no lasting value
httyht (July 6, 2008 at 7:33 am)
hmmm. thanks for your reply. there's nothing elitist about art in itself, but the artworld, of course there is. i sort of agree with your comment about conceptual art being clever but lacking creative talent, but sometimes you get a bit of sugar with the salt! but as for 'an ignorant and inert public you inevitably devalue it' i have a problem with this. surely here you are assigning elitism/class hierachy to art - in contradiction with your opening sentence...
salim201 (July 6, 2008 at 1:05 pm)
i think its a statement of fact that society is innately inert
jamesharvey (July 4, 2008 at 6:25 am)
LEGEND