• themeatbridge@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    1 month ago

    To be fair, I feel like that’s kind of what the artist was hoping for. Would you be reading about his piece if some Philistine with no concept of what constitutes art hadn’t thrown it away?

  • Clasm@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    1 month ago

    Art exists solely as it is interpreted by the observer.

    In this case, the observer interrupted the art as trash.

    • elfpie@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      I believe this kind of art should embrace the impermanence. The concept is more valuable than the object.

  • wildcardology@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 month ago

    There was another story like this. The exhibit depicts an after party scene with champagne bottles and other party “trash” everywhere. It was placed in a room. The custodians thought there was a party earlier and promptly cleaned the room.

  • JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    That title is a garden path sentence! I was like beer can artwork? Is that grammar correct?

      • solsangraal@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        1 month ago

        i love museums and art centers.

        the great thing about art is everyone is free to define it how they want, and no one is wrong.

        “art” to you, “garbage” to me

    • mineymann@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 month ago

      The labels on the cans were hand painted with acrylic, so there was more effort put in to this installation than if they just grabbed some beers at the local convenience store and dumped them out.

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      There’s always someone arguing about the purity of art. Art doesn’t have a strict set of rules. Anything can be art. Saying otherwise limits it’s ability.

      • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        Saying anything is art doesn’t make it art. If I throw a couple beer cans on the ground, that’s not art just because I say it is, it’s trash. In this particular case the artist hand painted the labels, which I wasn’t aware of when I commented. So, this is art, despite the quirky presentation.

        • Cethin@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 month ago

          If the piece designed to make you think about it then it’s art. That’s the only requirement. It can take as little or as much effort as the artist wants. There is not effort, cost, or material requirement for art. Yeah, just throwing cans on the ground isn’t art, but if you place cans in a way to make someone consider the thoughtlessness or waste of society, that’s art.