These topic is roughly split from "tough guy PE topic". Therefore it still may crossover a bit with that, but includes mostly fairly random discussions about nature of art, propaganda, modernity, originality - related to industrial/PE/noise. -Moderator comment
The use of "art" for spreading a message is propaganda, and the idea of left wing / right wing PE is no different IMO to the 'social realist' propaganda found in Nazi realism and Marxist realism, depiction of workers and fighters. Might not PE be in and of itself has no agenda, and the use of explicit sexual, extreme political images merely part of the promotional act of PE itself. I've no idea what Bennett's motivations were except the - at first glance strange - pre-eminent inspiration was Yoko Ono... (i.e. Art) IMO... and it follows that anyone using PE as an illustration for some political agenda, has got the stick, but the wrong end...
Quote from: piss soaked receipt on July 20, 2020, 04:28:45 PM
Quote from: theotherjohn on July 18, 2020, 09:50:11 AM
"Take notes from Smell & Quim" = humiliate, embarrass or degrade themselves? That seems to be the key element in the performances by them I've witnessed. Whether it's Gillham cutting himself and bleeding everywhere, Simon getting a maraca shoved up his arse, Stewart having his hair cut off, the use of repulsive props, people wearing quite frankly dangerous costumes, or being so piss drunk that you can barely stand up.
Just screaming at the top of your lungs over mic feedback could be humiliating, embarrassing or degrading, and there's nothing wrong with that.. Like I said earlier about the use of PE as an analgesic (or detox), I think a lot of people forget that PE (just like most other forms of music) is (or should be) personal first, and for others second.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'personal'. In that the musician is responsible personally for their music, sure, but the motivation might be that of being commissioned to do so, or as a response to some event, the development of a genre etc.
Maybe less talking about how things should be, but let the flow of things develop how things become. And if you don't like it, make something better. And if that doesn't work, there still is enough modern or old stuff around that you will like. If someone is making certain sounds without the aesthetics or themes of the past, is that the end of the world? No. If you don't like it, why spend time bothering with it? Yeesh, don't get your panties twisted. Some people like things different than you, so what?
30 years ago with the development of industrial music, no one said THIS MUST BE SO AND SO, but they just created it. Limiting yourself is good, but not because 'it has been done in the past, so it should be done in the future'. Do your own thing for fucks sake, who cares. What happened to NO GODS, NO MASTERS?
Do I think PE should be confrontational, or vile and nasty? It certainly helps creating a tense atmosphere we all like, but sometimes it can also get a bit obtuse. Do I think PE should be about arranging flower beds and smoking weed? No, but is there anyone that makes PE about such matter? I don't think so.
Doesn't music needs fresh ideas in stead of repeating the past over and over again?
Quote from: collapsedhole on July 20, 2020, 03:31:50 PM
Quote from: APPLE on July 19, 2020, 07:15:25 PM
Quotethe spirit counts for something, and counts a lot when differentiating nuances between the genres that fall under the blanket of 'noise'. and with PE that spirit should be ugly, violent, mean, intolerant, uncomfortable, depraved ...
What would you consider the likes of Shallow Waters, Barrikad, Mourmansk150?
i'd consider shallow waters the most straight up PE of those three of course. i have only heard comp tracks from the other two, but from what i remember theyre on that aforementioned 'PE spectrum'.
political affiliation doesn't really matter - as long as there is anger, frustration, disgust, tension... some exploration of... power... either as the oppressed or the oppressor...
Fair enough, thanks for the response. That's more or less my take on thematics of the genre too.
The idea of 'power dynamics' covers a huge amount of ground - from neuro linguistic programming (Whitehouse) to romantic relationships (Prurient) to religion (AntiChildLeague) to social engineering (Kevlar) to global geopolitics (Genocide Organ), and so on.
One that really gave me pause for thought was Ke/Hil's 'Syndrome/Antidrome' which I interpreted as invoking the power dynamics around urban planning - how cities are designed with human behaviour in mind, how populations have been historically stratified around class and ethnic lines, the creation, control and displacement of communities according to how and where they must live, move and work.
Slogun's website seems to have disappeared but it had an extensive interview section. I recall him stating that serial killers were actually pathetic, powerless people seeking the illusion of power through violent acts. Power over another for a moment, but no power over their own lives before or after the fact. Desperate, sad and weak people rather than heroic and rebellious libertines (as mirrored by the earlier discussion of mass shooters as a topic).
Perhaps what complicates this definition of a focus on power is something like Iron Fist of the Sun where the imagery and titles seem highly personal, obscure, inscrutable and surreal. Perhaps the same themes are there, and I'm unable to decode them. Or perhaps they are out in the open - there were some pretty heavy dynamics within the marriage between Charles and Diana, and power differentials are necessary for a monarchy to exist in the first place.
Quote from: JLIAT on July 20, 2020, 04:01:32 PM
The use of "art" for spreading a message is propaganda, and the idea of left wing / right wing PE is no different IMO to the 'social realist' propaganda found in Nazi realism and Marxist realism, depiction of workers and fighters. Might not PE be in and of itself has no agenda, and the use of explicit sexual, extreme political images merely part of the promotional act of PE itself. I've no idea what Bennett's motivations were except the - at first glance strange - pre-eminent inspiration was Yoko Ono... (i.e. Art) IMO... and it follows that anyone using PE as an illustration for some political agenda, has got the stick, but the wrong end...
how much mental gymnastics do you have to do to end up with a position as incoherent as this?? nazis = marxists, "PE in and of itself has no agenda," Whitehouse isn't obviously an ironic social commentary about british post war morality and thatcherite neo liberalism?? it's fucking SO obvious, it's not subtle at all.
Quote from: l.b. on July 20, 2020, 10:04:03 PM
Quote from: JLIAT on July 20, 2020, 04:01:32 PM
The use of "art" for spreading a message is propaganda, and the idea of left wing / right wing PE is no different IMO to the 'social realist' propaganda found in Nazi realism and Marxist realism, depiction of workers and fighters. Might not PE be in and of itself has no agenda, and the use of explicit sexual, extreme political images merely part of the promotional act of PE itself. I've no idea what Bennett's motivations were except the - at first glance strange - pre-eminent inspiration was Yoko Ono... (i.e. Art) IMO... and it follows that anyone using PE as an illustration for some political agenda, has got the stick, but the wrong end...
how much mental gymnastics do you have to do to end up with a position as incoherent as this?? nazis = marxists,
Not that much, not that I said that, I said both used the same artform, a form of social realism. Type "ussr social realism" and then "nazi social realism" into your browser and look at the pictures and you will see. No mental gymnastics needed. We could discuss the differences between Mao, Stalin and Hitler, but its off topic. What is, is the idea that PE in its inception had nothing to do with politics or sexual deviation... but was taking themes from Industrial and pushing the envelope, a common practice in modernist art. i.e. 'tough guy' and the rift with industrial... from the get go.
Quote from: l.b. on July 20, 2020, 10:04:03 PM
"PE in and of itself has no agenda," Whitehouse isn't obviously an ironic social commentary about british post war morality and thatcherite neo liberalism?? it's fucking SO obvious, it's not subtle at all.
And again I never said that, though some might think it was. I don't, the whole point was sensation and shock, pushing themes from industrial and punk. It was art in the modernist sense because it did this, it reacted to prior art practice, not social injustice or saving the whale. Hence the rift mentioned in the other thread, and Bennett citing Ono. This is a process you will see in modernity in all the arts. So Noise and HN rejected the emo elements of PE. And HNW rejected the sonic variety of HN. Striving for 'purity'... HNW like black paintings, bottle racks and empty galleries marking a terminus (of the modernist trope of less is more).
Welcome to post modernity....
I'm with JLIAT on this one (oddly enough). His position is entirely coherent and seems to be backed up by the words of the progenitors of P.E., most of whom have publicly stated that their use of controversial imagery/themes was purely to provoke a reaction.
Quote from: JLIAT on July 20, 2020, 04:01:32 PM
The use of "art" for spreading a message is propaganda
If art can exist in a vacuum, I'd agree.
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_1CHAKvnEEsU/Stitts0FFaI/AAAAAAAAABU/5QQdYpKUJ3U/s400/Ad+Reinhardt+cartoon.bmp)
Quote from: Bloated Slutbag on July 23, 2020, 04:44:20 PM
Quote from: JLIAT on July 20, 2020, 04:01:32 PM
The use of "art" for spreading a message is propaganda
If art can exist in a vacuum, I'd agree.
Actually I'm not sure of your point here. Its been pointed out that if art was just about spreading a message, then it could be translated, and taught.
(You wouldn't need to listen to the 1812 overture to get it, a text could do the same.) It would have clear criteria, which could be measured. To get back on topic Bennett specifically saw PE as 'tough guy' in its challenge to the audience. He also thought he was being 'original'. He didn't use a language he created something new.
As for vacuum - you mean metaphorically? Some Conceptual artists certainly achieved what they thought was that.
Quote from: piss soaked receipt on July 23, 2020, 06:38:19 PM
Is a response to some event not personal? How many musicians create for the sole purpose of "the development of a genre"?
Anything a person does is 'personal' in a sense, and the motivation can be complex. And maybe differentiate between musician and artist / composer who seeks to make something original.
Quote
music (n.)
mid-13c., musike, from Old French musique (12c.) and directly from Latin musica
"the art of music," also including poetry (also source of Spanish musica, Italian
musica, Old High German mosica, German Musik, Dutch muziek, Danish musik),
from Greek mousike (techne) "(art) of the Muses," from fem. of mousikos
"pertaining to the Muses," from Mousa "Muse" (see muse ). Modern spelling from
1630s. In classical Greece, any art in which the Muses presided, but especially music
and lyric poetry. ...
muse (v.)
"to reflect, to be absorbed in thought," mid-14c., from Old French muser (12c.) "to
ponder, dream, wonder; loiter, waste time," literally "to stand with one's nose in the
air" (or, possibly, "to sniff about" like a dog who has lost the scent), from muse
"muzzle," from Gallo-Roman *musa "snout," of unknown origin..
Very much my modus operandi..
Quote from: JLIAT on July 23, 2020, 06:30:17 PM
Quote from: Bloated Slutbag on July 23, 2020, 04:44:20 PM
Quote from: JLIAT on July 20, 2020, 04:01:32 PM
The use of "art" for spreading a message is propaganda
If art can exist in a vacuum, I'd agree.
Actually I'm not sure of your point here.
I had to sit here a bit and chew over what I had possibly meant. I think this was a boiled down version of lengthier word salad er tossed whilst at some leave from sobriety. Happens a lot, when you are me.
I'm going to say I was wondering if you were proposing art as potentially existing in a pure state not to be sullied by extrinsic concerns- eg message spreading, among others. And while that might be viable in theory I'd be skeptical of how it might actually pan out in the supposed real world as it were. Er, I'll probably need to chew over this a bit more.
Quote from: Bloated Slutbag on July 24, 2020, 09:12:37 AM
I'm going to say I was wondering if you were proposing art as potentially existing in a pure state not to be sullied by extrinsic concerns- eg message spreading, among others. And while that might be viable in theory I'd be skeptical of how it might actually pan out in the supposed real world as it were. Er, I'll probably need to chew over this a bit more.
(lots of provisos in this reply which isn't really on topic – though the tough guy is a trope of this story)
I'm not proposing art as existing in a pure state (not sullied etc) it was proposed, and for some achieved, which resulted in the end of art. Which if one wanted to do art was a disaster.
You can stop there.By Art – I mean modernism, a period roughly from mid 19thC to mid 20thC. I've gone over this stuff before and by some get pelted with eggs. And my 'style' is criticised... maybe I present the bad news in an unsympathetic way, or seem to be arrogantly making such huge claims. But i'm no more than claiming that WW2 is over and the allies won- from the evidence, and claim no personal responsibility With these caveats i'll continue as briefly as possible.
Modernism – Truth is beauty, Beauty is Truth. Less is more.
Architecture, houses are machines for living in.
Painting is paint applied to a flat surface.
Music is sound.
Poetry is just text.
All of this kind of thing has been around since the beginning of the 20thC.
And nothing more – decoration is bad. Hides the truth.
What about Art?
Art is art. And nothing more - 'puff' art disappears.
'If you call it art its art' The reverse of the above- everything is art.
Here is a text which appeared a year before I went to art school...
http://ubu.com/papers/kosuth_philosophy.html
You don't have to read it, it says Art = Art, art is tautology and nothing to do with anything else.
There are books and books on this, all giving reasons – for the same event...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Danto#The_end_of_art
Lucy Lippard - Six years: the dematerialization of the art object from 1966 to 1972;
Obviously it presents a big problem with those wanting to make art, or make music as art, poetry as art... etc. One way out is to deny it happened, another that it did and so we have Art but its no longer the same.
The former is tricky given the evidence*, the latter OK, but what follows is all the suff re Modern Art goes.
No Avant Garde, no progress towards the essence.
No 'experimentation'
No 'Make it New'
And here I can get back on topic, tough guy PE was a move from the (someone quoted) hippy industrial, a progressive move... and PE led to HN and HN to HNW**...
*Cage's 4'33" Duchamp's fountain Conceptual Poetry etc. - oh HNW!
** basically HNW is amplified static.
Quote from: Bloated Slutbag on July 23, 2020, 04:44:20 PM
Quote from: JLIAT on July 20, 2020, 04:01:32 PM
The use of "art" for spreading a message is propaganda
If art can exist in a vacuum, I'd agree.
Perhaps could be splitted to another topic if it continues to go on.
Quote from: JLIAT
Anything a person does is 'personal' in a sense, and the motivation can be complex. And maybe differentiate between musician and artist / composer who seeks to make something original.
One could ask how does not notion of
make something original fall under propaganda? If we use propaganda as so vast umbrella term, that expressing message is equal to propaganda (which is could be), then why would expression and the intent itself be excluded from that umbrella?
Like, back in the day, there was all the classic ideologies that had build in perversion that enable the ideologies. Now, most often you got perversion, that enables or covers the ideology. What remains to be seen, and what is moderately hidden, has changed the roles. Same often works for propaganda. Even if there would not be in-your-face-message, it doesn't mean work would not have any.
If artist seeks most of all to
make something original, it seems pretty close to modernist/avantgarde propaganda? If we would argue it is not, unless they clearly do not express this message, then conclusion would leave plenty of propaganda unnoticed.
Jliats compressed list of slogans about art & truth is prime example of propaganda itself. Advocation as HWN as or "end of art", or "truth is beauty" approach vastly propagandist in core.
If HWN is basically logical end result of entropy, where it is almost substitute of tranquil state of.. paradise? As many might know, I am rather advocate of struggle, conflict and vital life force and will. That often can be also seen expressed in my work. Propaganda, yes of course! Yet always different from propaganda of "pure (non)art".
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on July 24, 2020, 11:25:21 AM
Quote from: Bloated Slutbag on July 23, 2020, 04:44:20 PM
Quote from: JLIAT on July 20, 2020, 04:01:32 PM
The use of "art" for spreading a message is propaganda
If art can exist in a vacuum, I'd agree.
Perhaps could be splitted to another topic if it continues to go on.
Quote from: JLIAT
Anything a person does is 'personal' in a sense, and the motivation can be complex. And maybe differentiate between musician and artist / composer who seeks to make something original.
One could ask how does not notion of make something original fall under propaganda? If we use propaganda as so vast umbrella term, that expressing message is equal to propaganda (which is could be), then why would expression and the intent itself be excluded from that umbrella?
Point taken, that propaganda implies biased or misleading. But my point was if any art is used to just communicate a message it is translatable. Art seems more than a road sign or representation of some thing. Art is it seems is thought different to illustration. I think I said the 1812 overture is not an just an illustration of a battle.
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on July 24, 2020, 11:25:21 AM
Like, back in the day, there was all the classic ideologies that had build in perversion that enable the ideologies. Now, most often you got perversion, that enables or covers the ideology. What remains to be seen, and what is moderately hidden, has changed the roles. Same often works for propaganda. Even if there would not be in-your-face-message, it doesn't mean work would not have any.
If artist seeks most of all to make something original, it seems pretty close to modernist/avantgarde propaganda? If we would argue it is not, unless they clearly do not express this message, then conclusion would leave plenty of propaganda unnoticed.
key to modernism is the idea of 'truth' so it would deny its being propaganda. And in the idea of 'originality' is origin – hence the origin of PE was Whitehouse (et al) – and why Bennett says latter PE is not original but is "plagiarism", I think his use implies not the passing of actual whitehouse work as some others, but that this latter PE is not original. I'm not defending this, I don't see originality as significant these days.
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on July 24, 2020, 11:25:21 AM
Jliats compressed list of slogans about art & truth is prime example of propaganda itself.
With respect they are not my slogans, and not propaganda. "'Make It New' refers to Ezra Pound's (1885–1972) modernist imperative and his 1934 collection of essays of the same name. This slogan compels the writer to create out of the material of art work that is distinctively innovative. "
"'Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.' – that is all / Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know". - from the poet Keats. "Less is more" - Ad Reinhardt, Ludwig Mies van der Rohe both used this term.
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on July 24, 2020, 11:25:21 AM
Advocation as HWN as or "end of art", or "truth is beauty" approach vastly propagandist in core.
If HWN is basically logical end result of entropy, where it is almost substitute of tranquil state of.. paradise? As many might know, I am rather advocate of struggle, conflict and vital life force and will. That often can be also seen expressed in my work. Propaganda, yes of course! Yet always different from propaganda of "pure (non)art".
The case for the end of art is not one of entropy but of a conclusion, and essence is achieved, the core or origin, perfect order, or end of the dialectic. And this is the end of Modernist Art / Music is its essence and originality.
And I think to advocate " struggle, conflict and vital life force" seems to be very like the post-modern idea of Deleueze's use of Joyce's term chaosmos To be clear i'm not advocating modernism or its slogans, i'm saying its seems its generally agreed its over, and what has replaced modernism's uniformity is a multitude of differing perspectives, some serious, others ironic.
Quote from: JLIAT on July 24, 2020, 01:10:05 PM
With respect they are not my slogans, and not propaganda. "'Make It New' refers to Ezra Pound's (1885–1972) modernist imperative and his 1934 collection of essays of the same name. This slogan compels the writer to create out of the material of art work that is distinctively innovative. "
"'Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.' – that is all / Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know". - from the poet Keats. "Less is more" - Ad Reinhardt, Ludwig Mies van der Rohe both used this term.
It is like one could watch Hollywood comedy of past decade, and try to tell himself that it is not propaganda, but "just a movie".
One can conclude that some things are not ONLY propaganda, as it would no longer work for target audience. They may still exists in very much conscious attempt of organized distribution of doctrines of ideology, with intent to cause change.
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on July 24, 2020, 11:25:21 AM
The case for the end of art is not one of entropy but of a conclusion, and essence is achieved, the core or origin, perfect order, or end of the dialectic. And this is the end of Modernist Art / Music is its essence and originality.
And I think to advocate " struggle, conflict and vital life force" seems to be very like the post-modern idea of Deleueze's use of Joyce's term chaosmos To be clear i'm not advocating modernism or its slogans, i'm saying its seems its generally agreed its over, and what has replaced modernism's uniformity is a multitude of differing perspectives, some serious, others ironic.
Yes, modernism as general movement is over. Dead and gone.
What you described as "The case for the end of art is not one of entropy but of a conclusion, and essence is achieved, the core or origin, perfect order, or end of the dialectic" seems exactly what could be cultural entropy. Everything reaches supposed logical end and "essence" where inevitable final level is reached and no change or variation remains.
Essence of creative works barely seems to be about semi-religious "perfect order" or "end of the dialectic", but core/origin is (often unexplained) will to create and will express, will to stand in opposition of current. To praise entropy/static/assumed conclusion is mere ideology. Solid black canvas as conclusion of art is that too. One can only theorize it in context of art dialogue, while will to create may be ideology, but resonate with reality to vastly higher degree.
Certainly now off topic, but i've just written this in response to a conversation... and wondered does it "chime" at all with your thoughts, i think it might...
"On a visit to Paris about 4 years ago we tried to get into the Pompidou centre – free on first Sundays in the month, but the queue was miles, so went to the ethnographic museum @ Musée du quai Branly which knocked me out. All these so called primitive peoples making stuff, not bothered about art etc. This became my motivation and still is. And i guess there is both a fetish about gear, esp. Eurorack which dumping the logic and accepting this makes it OK for me. Fun, but serious fun. This amounts to a reversal of my previous thinking of using logic and reason. I suppose then also not using software? And planning... so i'm now fairly chaotic with real time patching. "
To bounce off the propaganda element of art (which the Russians continue to be brilliant at), I'm sure Malevich would have found some amusement in Suprematism's unintentional influence on social media with the recent BLM protests...
https://www.artsy.net/news/artsy-editorial-art-worlds-engagement-blackouttuesday-fire-critics-activists
https://hyperallergic.com/253361/art-historian-finds-racist-joke-hidden-under-malevichs-black-square/
Before trying to explain myself, I'll just sorta leave this quote from Thomas Ligotti, which is what actually got me on this subject (I'll come back to the quote later, maybe) -
QuoteOnly caricatures can have a good solid reality. Everyone else is an impenetrable mix of qualities that ultimately add up to nothingness.
But first, on with the nothingness-
Quote from: JLIAT on July 23, 2020, 06:30:17 PM
Quote from: Bloated Slutbag on July 23, 2020, 04:44:20 PM
Quote from: JLIAT on July 20, 2020, 04:01:32 PM
The use of "art" for spreading a message is propaganda
If art can exist in a vacuum, I'd agree.
Actually I'm not sure of your point here.
Art as a tool for spreading propaganda. Or propaganda a tool for spreading art. It's art. Propaganda, perhaps, but art. Everything in there, however defined, is art. The word, is there. Which could rhyme with some of what collapsedhole was saying about the essence of pe, and maybe my own earlier comments about everything happening on the Con-Dom stage necessarily taking part in/of the act, the art. Get punched in the fucking face, for art!
And that none of these things exists in isolation. And the words matter. Take JLIAT frequently tagging, in part and in whole, the Vomir manifesto. What would HNW be without these declarations, without someone telling me what it is? And in any event too late to speculate. It has evolved to be what it is, and certainly not in isolation.
The caricature of the tough guy. Good solid reality, there. Good shit. People need to see that.
edit
(Apologies for the blatant pro tough guy propaganda.)
Quote from: Bloated Slutbag on July 24, 2020, 05:29:48 PM
... What would HNW be without these declarations, without someone telling me what it is?
It would be HNW, the limit of the 'musical' development in a musical genre. The declarations, and the telling maybe helping one to see this, but in no way necessary.
Because when Bennett created PE for instance there was no declaration. That came after. There was an intent to do something provocative and shocking, but that's hardly a script. As he said there was "A particular void to be filled" ... "A sense of adventure". (and IMO to simply want to shock is not avant garde Art - his claim)
Personal anecdote.
I remember when Derek Bailey played at the college where i was a student, i'd never head of the guy or Music Improvisation Company, but a friend said he was a notable guitarist. Well he never touched his guitar but after awhile slowly used his chair on the floor to make noises, i got this without any explanation.
Quote from: JLIAT on July 24, 2020, 06:07:36 PM
Quote from: Bloated Slutbag on July 24, 2020, 05:29:48 PM
... What would HNW be without these declarations, without someone telling me what it is?
It would be HNW, the limit of the 'musical' development in a musical genre.
Will concede that it certainly is a limit. There may be more of them kicking around than we might think.
edit
I'd still incidentally argue the words will change how it is received. Or, effectively, what it is. This goes for sounds and the fist in the fucking face. Right of passage no doubt in some (sub)cultures. Else we may well be circling back to the purely physical phenomenon.
Derek Bailey takes his chair and smacks me in the fucking face. No explanation needed. He later apologizes. Apology needed? Accepted? Does that change the way it is received? To the nose, unlikely. To the cranial matter behind it, very possibly.
Quote from: Bloated Slutbag on July 24, 2020, 06:41:19 PM
I'd still incidentally argue the words will change how it is received. Or, effectively, what it is. This goes for sounds and the fist in the fucking face. Right of passage no doubt in some (sub)cultures. Else we may well be circling back to the purely physical phenomenon.
Derek Bailey takes his chair and smacks me in the fucking face. No explanation needed. He later apologizes. Apology needed? Accepted? Does that change the way it is received? To the nose, unlikely. To the cranial matter behind it, very possibly.
How it is received - sure- what it is - not IMO.
This reduces Art to concepts, which obviously has occurred. The art object, or action in this case having no intrinsic value as art. Art becomes, in the case above a matter of opinion. One may accept the apology or not, which in turn alters the nature of the act. The act itself is empty, (of art).
Constable (the painter) on seeing a Turner depicting a sunset hung near one of his landscapes exclaimed in anger- "He has fired a gun!" Others might appreciate the violent depiction of nature differently, as awesome. The genius of the paining remains.
Where Bennett goes wrong, avant garde art because of its originality often caused shock, but causing shock by an act or object doesn't make that object or act avant garde. Tough guy, so what ?there are plenty in pubs, bars etc. They are artists? Maybe some think so. (on topic)
Quote from: JLIAT on July 24, 2020, 06:07:36 PM
Quote from: Bloated Slutbag on July 24, 2020, 05:29:48 PM
... What would HNW be without these declarations, without someone telling me what it is?
It would be HNW, the limit of the 'musical' development in a musical genre.
I am note sure about this. If any lesson can be drawn from art history, it seems that it should be that every declaration of a "limit" in any particular medium has been surpassed and/or modified. Besides, limits only exist if one takes a certain perspective. HNW might be understandable as a limit from the perspective of convention music, perhaps. However, if one adopts HNW as a starting point for their music, then the "limits" have been recontextualized and likely remain as of yet unknown.
Quote from: JLIAT on July 25, 2020, 11:15:19 AM
Quote from: Bloated Slutbag on July 24, 2020, 06:41:19 PM
I'd still incidentally argue the words will change how it is received. Or, effectively, what it is. This goes for sounds and the fist in the fucking face. Right of passage no doubt in some (sub)cultures. Else we may well be circling back to the purely physical phenomenon.
Derek Bailey takes his chair and smacks me in the fucking face. No explanation needed. He later apologizes. Apology needed? Accepted? Does that change the way it is received? To the nose, unlikely. To the cranial matter behind it, very possibly.
How it is received - sure- what it is - not IMO.
This reduces Art to concepts, which obviously has occurred. The art object, or action in this case having no intrinsic value as art. Art becomes, in the case above a matter of opinion. One may accept the apology or not, which in turn alters the nature of the act. The act itself is empty, (of art).
Constable (the painter) on seeing a Turner depicting a sunset hung near one of his landscapes exclaimed in anger- "He has fired a gun!" Others might appreciate the violent depiction of nature differently, as awesome. The genius of the paining remains.
Where Bennett goes wrong, avant garde art because of its originality often caused shock, but causing shock by an act or object doesn't make that object or act avant garde. Tough guy, so what ?there are plenty in pubs, bars etc. They are artists? Maybe some think so. (on topic)
But we're not getting randomly smacked in the fucking face by some random shmuck in a pub with too much blood in the alcohol. We are getting randomly smacked in the fucking face by some random shmuck in a pub with too much blood in the alcohol in the name of art. There's a difference. Put it on a stage, at a university, if you must, if any idea to the contrary offends. If it is to be presented as art then who I am say otherwise. Or put another way, perhaps the declaration of intrinsic value is the intrinsic value, or part of it. As the
helping me to see might also be part of that (but don't give yourself too much credit!)
Where Bennett goes right is in attaching the word
power. The power starts and ends with that word. With words, ideas, concepts. The electronics are, as Bennett seems to imply by demoting harsh noise to a coffee table aesthetic, almost extraneous. To his art. A proposition to which he would be more than welcome.
QuoteBut in the philosophic tabula rasa of art, "if someone calls it art," as Don Judd has said, "it's art."
Can you see the consequences of this being the case?
BTW Bennett discusses the aesthetics and skill of electronics as well as the recordings as being important...
Quote from: theotherjohn on July 25, 2020, 08:24:11 PM
Somehow this has now turned into a Guy Debord PE/Industrial thread...
Yeh, i think if anyone wants to discuss these ideas it would be best to start a new thread in vis art / lit as it might :-) annoy people here.
It seems I allowed my somewhat addled brain to get trapped into roving too far along the words matter side of the reductive tendencies. The words matter, as does the presentation, the venue, whatever. It's all in there. And none of it in isolation, especially now. At this point, any refusal to acknowledge what is (or was) going on all around could only be taken as an aesthetic, read artistic, decision. HNW is just one potential representation of the end of this particular rope, with or without the garbage bag over the head.
There was a discussion on the old troniks board. One chap criticized the idea of allowing what went on before to influence the creative act. Then literally one week later asked for "dark classical" recommendations. Parts of which as far as I can hear have been incorporated quite ingeniously into a now very respectable body of work.
I'm with Burroughs on the idea of plagiarism. It's part and parcel of the creative act. The critique of pathetic tough guy copy-cats is pushing art, the creative act, into a pure realm. Which may theoretically exist, but effectively does not. If it ever did, and perhaps it did, I couldn't see that it would. Now.
Quote from: Balor/SS1535 on July 25, 2020, 06:00:35 PM
I am note sure about this. If any lesson can be drawn from art history, it seems that it should be that every declaration of a "limit" in any particular medium has been surpassed and/or modified. Besides, limits only exist if one takes a certain perspective. HNW might be understandable as a limit from the perspective of convention music, perhaps. However, if one adopts HNW as a starting point for their music, then the "limits" have been recontextualized and likely remain as of yet unknown.
Well under this new thread i can say i think history shows the opposite. In fine art i've already mentioned Danto, Lucy Lippard and Joseph Kosuth. There is much more, any text on post-modernism, in Architecture famously 'Learning from Las Vegas' through to Wiki,
Quote"Modernism is both a philosophical movement and an art movement that arose from broad transformations in Western society during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The movement reflected a desire for the creation of new forms of art, religion, philosophy, and social organization which reflected the newly emerging industrial world, including features such as urbanization, new technologies, and war. Artists attempted to depart from traditional forms of art, which they considered outdated or obsolete. The poet Ezra Pound's 1934 injunction to "Make it new!" was the touchstone of the movement's approach.
Modernist innovations included abstract art, the stream-of-consciousness novel, montage cinema, atonal and twelve-tone music, and divisionist painting. Modernism explicitly rejected the ideology of realism and made use of the works of the past by the employment of reprise, incorporation, rewriting, recapitulation, revision and parody. Modernism also rejected the certainty of Enlightenment thinking, and many modernists also rejected religious belief. A notable characteristic of modernism is self-consciousness concerning artistic and social traditions, which often led to experimentation with form, along with the use of techniques that drew attention to the processes and materials used in creating works of art.
While some scholars see modernism continuing into the 21st century, others see it evolving into late modernism or high modernism.[8] Postmodernism is a departure from modernism and rejects its basic assumptions.
I'm not familiar with the arguments that see modernism continuing into the 21st, i'm aware it now exists as a style. But the force of modernism - its differences given above are no longer possible.
And more recently "Conceptual poetry is an early twenty-first century literary movement, self-described by its practitioners as an act of "uncreative writing.""
Thus any and every text can be poetry. Cage's 4'33" any sound can be music, even accidental ambience. Duchamp - any object can be art, Robert Barry - nothing can be art... Art and Language - Art is Tautology.
The road via purism leads to nothing being art or everything being art. What is then any artists to do if whatever they do is art. The idea that art is then just some opinion regardless of any sound, shape or form given the ideas of modernity, effects the making of anything unnecessary 'decoration' to this idea.
"The "value" now of an original Cubist painting is not unlike, in most respects, an original manuscript by Lord Byron, or The Spirit of St. Louis as it is seen in the Smithsonian Institution. (Indeed, museums fill the very same function as the Smithsonian Institution – why else would the Jeu de Paume wing of the Louvre exhibit Cézanne's and Van Gogh's palettes as proudly as they do their paintings?) Actual works of art are little more than historical curiosities. As far as art is concerned Van Gogh's paintings aren't worth any more than his palette is. They are both "collector's items."" - Kosuth.
Even the modernist idea of progress has gone - given this modernist limit. Ergo many galleries of Modern art, Tate Modern e.g. no longer exhibit works chronologically. Which is odd as there was a development in modernism of what went before. So i see no difference to this uncreative limit to be found in say HNW and Vomir. (TNB also?) It sounds like meaningless noise, OK read the text, what does it say, "its meaningless noise". Not surprisingly then
Romain Perrot has ventured BACK - in his case to using a guitar and "singing". "Shit folk" is it called?
Quote from: Bloated Slutbag on July 26, 2020, 06:43:54 AM
I'm with Burroughs on the idea of plagiarism. It's part and parcel of the creative act. The critique of pathetic tough guy copy-cats is pushing art, the creative act, into a pure realm. Which may theoretically exist, but effectively does not. If it ever did, and perhaps it did, I couldn't see that it would. Now.
plagiarism is interesting topic. I guess somewhat related could be... neoism? Whatever one thinks of mr. Home's ideas, it probably does resonate some ways within noise & industrial culture? Just recently found 1999 published book in second hand store. Odd to see book by Finnish author, published by proper publisher and dealing with situationists, avantgarde in general plus mostly Stewart Home. He was basically the main figure of the book. Perhaps easier to understand knowing how "big" Home books were in Finland of 90's. Now there was about 20 years gap of no new translations coming at all.
I think it is purely up to debade, what is plagiarism. Lets say, Gary Mundy sees Whitehouse show as teenager, and next day he has Ramleh formed. Ramleh doesn't have same tools, but utilizes voice, synth, feedback and outrageous topics. If someone would say that is prime example of being copycat, it would be hard to really argue against in any other way than say first of all they sounded different and they went to sound even more vastly different.
I could move on to more personal examples:
In Finland, and at the era that I know personally, I could easily observe ANY band that existed at early 90's and they all were born in nearly cultural vacuum. This generation, that was mostly guys with punk and metal backgrounds, and had that before internet, you just did not know there even was thing called "noise". People know Swans, Laibach, Einturzende Neubauten and such, but even explosion of Japanese noise had not reached Finland until like... mid 90's. Whatever content or sound people were creating, was not result of copying something. One could name things like U.N.D., Bizarre Uproar, Grunt and there was also more at the time even if bigger growth of Finnish stuff happened in 97-99.
When someone concludes about things like early finnish scene would recycle "noise cliches". Gasmasks, pornography, war, violence, etc.
I think none of it came as influence from noise or power electronics genre when things were starting. Same time or even before music, there was video trading, smut film, gore, sleazy self-financed comic books, collecting discarded porn mags and random torn out pages, etc etc.
It is actually curious thing, that as a "comic artists", I used to do gore & violence at first. Then concluding that it would be "cliche" and all the early 90's comic books I put out were something very different. And they tend to look exactly like comics were at the time. Instead of following your instinct, it was youngster trying to do something "new" but ending up doing what was welcomed in the climate of that moment. Attempting to avoid "cliche", but therefore becoming far more cliche in doing so. Even Grunt, at very first, was intentionally trying to stay away from use of smut & violence, as there was notion of it being "cliche". Absolutely no regrets, since I do have also other interests to deal with... However, it was impossible to keep doing material and avoid dealing things that were the actual influences and things you dealt with, collected, hunted, traded and was surrounded with.
Assumption that things in genre would somehow emerge from guy X, and rest would follow via means of plagiarism is total nonsense. Many may not copy the guy X, but live in same reality, surrounded by enough similar things to come up with something that may look plagiarism - yet is the purely original idea of creator.
First couple of years of all mentioned bands created industrial-noise as if they invented it. I feel this is the feeling that is mostly
missing (haha.. see another topic). Feeling that you created something unique, even if you damn well did not. You thought sampling of Videodrome or Slave Sex vhs is totally unique thing to be done. You will find out about it when you find the other guys who had the exact same ideas. Since era of dominating internet, change is that one basically knows everything before is making anything. It does change nature of work.
Question would be, as outsider who knows about "art theory" and "art history" in style or mr. JLIAT, is he able to see emerging art that happens from other perspective? That suddenly the theory and history of genre is barely related to "art" that is happening.
There is curious moment in Knifedoutofexistence interview, that still as recently as like decade ago, man could have this unusual feeling: In interview he explains being exposed to noise for the first time, and getting this idea, what if noise would have vocals like punk, something shouted over the sheer ripping noise, wouldn't that be great idea. Living for short period of life under impression that he was the guy to think about this first, basically
inventing power electronics while not obviously having such genre tag to it. Interview is also interesting for their dislike towards power electronics, and rather doing.. "sensitive electronics". Check here:
https://harshtruthspodcast.wordpress.com/2020/07/11/episode-19-knifedoutofexistence/
To continue with another podcast link, there is interesting episode of Noisextra:
https://www.noisextra.com/2020/05/20/robert-ashley-the-wolfman/
It discusses the known influence of Robert Ashey in Whitehouse. When you listen the Wolfman, the piercing feedback and total painfully ripping sound, done decades before Whitehouse, one can understand the influence. Even more so when it is being discussed the method of recording vocals, where every bit of silence, any moment of breathing is removed. Resulting surreal fast paced non-stop vocal attack going over electronics (heard in later era of Whitehouse). It would be absolutely silly to claim this to be
copying ideas. It was just influences put to work in different context. I know there drastic difference of Whitehouse creating their own work - being influenced by handful of things kind of "outside the genre". Versus someone starting band in aim of sounding
like Whitehouse as a genre band. And latter being the target of criticism. Not the former. However, I would say that for tons of artists, Whitehouse is one among many influences and for a lot of people it is indirect influence. Genre as a whole is more important than any specific artist or idea. Genre as a whole is so diverse that doing one more artistic work that falls under such umbrella term, is barely mere copy.
Is the work
creative or
original? It is hard to measure, I'd say. If one would take example of DEATHPILE. I recall when it was often laughed as americans not "getting" PE. Just blunt electronic noise mass, with tough guttural vocals roaring about topics that had zero artistic nuance.. hehe. But THIS is what created entirely new type of PE. There is no other band do what Deathpile did then. There was none then, and there is none now. It is not so unheard, that it would spawn genre of its own, of course not. Nevertheless, seems to be fairly unique in sound and approach, where his creations reflected the place, time, technology and spirit of the moment when these creations happened. By definition, that was
original. If it was done now, it would be almost like retro.
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on July 26, 2020, 11:06:29 AM
To continue with another podcast link, there is interesting episode of Noisextra:
https://www.noisextra.com/2020/05/20/robert-ashley-the-wolfman/
It discusses the known influence of Robert Ashey in Whitehouse.
Somewhat off-topic but I found it erroneous that in said episode Sienko didn't even mention Whitehouse sampling a Robert Ashley piece (
Purposeful Lady Slow Afternoon, 1968 (http://ubusound.memoryoftheworld.org/sonic_arts_union/Sonic-Arts-Union_02.mp3)) in the track Ripper Territory, which I would consider the
more obvious reference point (https://www.waggish.org/2003/purposeful-lady-slow-afternoon-robert-ashley/).
Quote from: JLIAT on July 26, 2020, 10:14:17 AM
Quote from: Balor/SS1535 on July 25, 2020, 06:00:35 PM
I am note sure about this. If any lesson can be drawn from art history, it seems that it should be that every declaration of a "limit" in any particular medium has been surpassed and/or modified.
Quote from: JLIAT on July 26, 2020, 10:14:17 AM] Modernism
I am not getting what exactly is point of speculating on modernism in relation to noise/industrial. I feel that there was (and in few cases is) the modernist feel there, but most often noise observing the failures of modernism.
There certainly is still remaining spirit of creation of new forms of art, religion, philosophy, and social organization, but now exists bounded by realistic perspective of reduced into counterculture - which certainly no longer is the same. If new art, new religion, philosophy and social organization creates parallel society or subculture, rather than seek to totally change the existing mainstream. Vast difference. Noise almost exclusively seems to fit into this, rather than modernism or avantgarde. It may be even unfortunately, when the unability to even think alternative way dominates even the fringe underground.
author=JLIAT link=topic=10857.msg88581#msg88581 date=1595747657]
Even the modernist idea of progress has gone - given this modernist limit. Ergo many galleries of Modern art, Tate Modern e.g. no longer exhibit works chronologically. Which is odd as there was a development in modernism of what went before. So i see no difference to this uncreative limit to be found in say HNW and Vomir. (TNB also?) It sounds like meaningless noise, OK read the text, what does it say, "its meaningless noise". Not surprisingly then Romain Perrot has ventured BACK - in his case to using a guitar and "singing". "Shit folk" is it called?
If modernism is gone, if the limit that the idea expressed in its teleologic vibe is crushed, why spend so much time talking about laws of modernist development?
Black canvas was no end of any kind. Silent track was no end of anything in particular. It something merely in modernist ideal, yet you dawn a dripping pussy to black canvas, and suddenly vitality of act crushed the nerdy art critics and reminded that black canvas was no conclusion for anything.
I think Bennett was either mistaken in using the term 'plagiarism' - which is knowingly passing someone else's actual work off as ones own, or- perhaps worse claiming some authority of ownership to what is 'power electronics'. Terms like 'Industrial' and HNW define a genre or movement, are categories. So Cubists didn't plagiarise Picasso, or Berg plagiarise Schoenberg .. etc. Or whoever is credited with being the original Metal band... but it was Picasso who said "Lesser artists borrow; great artists steal".
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on July 26, 2020, 11:52:15 AM
I am not getting what exactly is point of speculating on modernism in relation to noise/industrial. I feel that there was (and in few cases is) the modernist feel there, but most often noise observing the failures of modernism.
It was specifically aimed at Bennett's claim to be Avant Garde. He himself admits in the interview he finds it hard for Whitehouse to shock audiences anymore, and seeks audiences who do not expect the PE antics of Whitehouse. Perhaps impossible these days. I add to that his mistaken idea to shock is to be avant garde, he is using (incorrectly in the latter case) modernist criteria. I think similar 'modernist' justifications are made for the idea of progress in what is generally termed noise, from industrial through PE to HN and finally HNW.
My point is if valid then HNW marks the limit of 'make it new', 'less is more' criteria of modernism... if not then fine, the term is 'post modern' where anything goes. But to then claim to be 'in the front' is either ironic or mistaken. There is no direction.
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on July 26, 2020, 11:52:15 AM
There certainly is still remaining spirit of creation of new forms of art, religion, philosophy, and social organization, but now exists bounded by realistic perspective of reduced into counterculture - which certainly no longer is the same. If new art, new religion, philosophy and social organization creates parallel society or subculture, rather than seek to totally change the existing mainstream. Vast difference. Noise almost exclusively seems to fit into this, rather than modernism or avantgarde. It may be even unfortunately, when the unability to even think alternative way dominates even the fringe underground.
I pretty much agree with that, post modern art can certainly be creative, diverse and different. What is different seems to be no longer a consensus of the direction, an idea of progress is replaced by change and multiplicity. Perhaps even the term 'new' - as different, but not 'better'.
Philosophy is a good example, Wittgenstein sort to cure us of philosophy, forbidding talking of such things as metaphysics, which is however alive and well if no longer competing with science.. science the paradigm that modernism had, that each new creation in art rendered the previous obsolete. Simply that whilst science maybe operates as such, art does not. Kosuth was wrong. A performance now using intonarumori is IMO valid as art - hell even as noise.
Modernism saw little or no value in the past, exemplified in architecture in the UK by post war development where far far more old buildings were demolished in the name of progress than the luftwaffe managed to destroy.
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on July 26, 2020, 11:52:15 AM
Quote from: JLIAT on July 26, 2020, 10:14:17 AM
Even the modernist idea of progress has gone - given this modernist limit. Ergo many galleries of Modern art, Tate Modern e.g. no longer exhibit works chronologically. Which is odd as there was a development in modernism of what went before. So i see no difference to this uncreative limit to be found in say HNW and Vomir. (TNB also?) It sounds like meaningless noise, OK read the text, what does it say, "its meaningless noise". Not surprisingly then Romain Perrot has ventured BACK - in his case to using a guitar and "singing". "Shit folk" is it called?
If modernism is gone, if the limit that the idea expressed in its teleologic vibe is crushed, why spend so much time talking about laws of modernist development?
Black canvas was no end of any kind. Silent track was no end of anything in particular. It something merely in modernist ideal, yet you dawn a dripping pussy to black canvas, and suddenly vitality of act crushed the nerdy art critics and reminded that black canvas was no conclusion for anything.
The Black canvases were part on the end of modernist painting. No one composes Wagnerian operas these days, "Debussy visited Bayreuth but soon distanced himself from the composer, claiming, "Wagner was a sunset that was mistaken for a sunrise.""
I'm not sure of the dripping pussy thing? Jeff Koons...?
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-rY6M7yZ5Mf4/U9ZZ3v3SPjI/AAAAAAAARa4/AQB0sfC5U2A/s1600/Koons_IMG_0328.jpg)
And this is mainstream ART. Now.
Quote from: JLIAT on July 26, 2020, 02:32:03 PM
It was specifically aimed at Bennett's claim to be Avant Garde. (...) I think similar 'modernist' justifications are made for the idea of progress in what is generally termed noise, from industrial through PE to HN and finally HNW.
Ah yes. Then it does make sense. He may have made those statements when it remained possible to do so.
Possible to see things in that light, which has been invalid cause for loong time.
Which leads to:
Quote from: JLIAT on July 26, 2020, 02:32:03 PM
pretty much agree with that, post modern art can certainly be creative, diverse and different. What is different seems to be no longer a consensus of the direction, an idea of progress is replaced by change and multiplicity. Perhaps even the term 'new' - as different, but not 'better'.
Which would be easy to state, that there never was consensus that
from industrial through PE to HN and finally HNW was progression and further more that it was progress for
better. If there are couple artists who claimed so, who entertain few dozen purists, it remains only as entertaining manifesto of intent by mentioned artists, but no depiction of what is happening in general.
You have pretty much rest of people and perhaps listeners who didn't see it as progression or even refinement, but this exact thing one can only describe as modernist trap.
Notion that there is progress, and all progress is good, and new equals to better.
I think in context of noise and industrial, it was rejected long ago. Especially at the age when most things
new simply equal to empty commodity. Whatever surface this commodity has, in its core element and substance, it is just itself:
Newness as commodity itself. Void of any other value.
In context of industrial, there has been relevant players already decades ago shouted slogan: Back to basics! What some thought was seek for new, probably was not. It was misguided perception based on fact that there used to be era when anything new was more interesting than same old oil painting of jesus christ repeated till eternity. Everything new was better than bleak factory work and sunday church as form of culture. Anything, but traditional, anything but
the done, was better. This illusion is crushed long ago. New does not equal better. New does not equal even "progress".
For me, which is subjective experience of course, is that industrial noise represent question: what then? It hits you with a lot of possibilities and many things reject the optimism of progress.
Quote from: JLIAT on July 26, 2020, 10:14:17 AM
I'm not sure of the dripping pussy thing? Jeff Koons...?
And this is mainstream ART. Now.
"Now", isn't it like you know.. 30 years ago? Jeff Koons, cicciolina, this is ancient past. It may give impression of "recent", as it has other kind of vitality than black empty canvas, that has mostly historical significance. So yes, cicciolina pussy pick, I take that anytime over ton of stuff seen in exhibitions as "new ideas".
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on July 26, 2020, 04:30:51 PM
Quote from: JLIAT on July 26, 2020, 02:32:03 PM
It was specifically aimed at Bennett's claim to be Avant Garde. (...) I think similar 'modernist' justifications are made for the idea of progress in what is generally termed noise, from industrial through PE to HN and finally HNW.
Ah yes. Then it does make sense. He may have made those statements when it remained possible to do so.
Possible to see things in that light, which has been invalid cause for loong time.
The one interview where he claims Whitehouse was Avant Garde and more recent PE doesn't 'get it' and is plagiarising Whitehouse is from 2003, and in another presentation of 2016 he seems to maintain his position re music, noise and PE. This relates to the origins of PE in @ 1980 when the idea of an Avant Garde was very questionable and modernity was seen to have been completed.
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on July 26, 2020, 04:30:51 PM
Which leads to:
Quote from: JLIAT on July 26, 2020, 02:32:03 PM
pretty much agree with that, post modern art can certainly be creative, diverse and different. What is different seems to be no longer a consensus of the direction, an idea of progress is replaced by change and multiplicity. Perhaps even the term 'new' - as different, but not 'better'.
Which would be easy to state, that there never was consensus that from industrial through PE to HN and finally HNW was progression and further more that it was progress for better. If there are couple artists who claimed so, who entertain few dozen purists, it remains only as entertaining manifesto of intent by mentioned artists, but no depiction of what is happening in general.
Very questionable if such artists who maintained both purity and extreme radicalism seem to be originators of HN and HNW. (which maybe accounted for serious academic interest)
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on July 26, 2020, 04:30:51 PM
You have pretty much rest of people and perhaps listeners who didn't see it as progression or even refinement, but this exact thing one can only describe as modernist trap.
Notion that there is progress, and all progress is good, and new equals to better.
Then they see this in post-modernist terms - if they do. I see elsewhere though evidence of a rift, between genres. And I cant see how a rift can not involve ideas of 'quality'... "So we are head lining a show and playing with a tonne of punk bands that hate our guts, nothing new there." posted in this forum July 9th. I could be wrong - hope i am - and see the noise scene as tolerant of diversity.
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on July 26, 2020, 04:30:51 PM
I think in context of noise and industrial, it was rejected long ago. Especially at the age when most things new simply equal to empty commodity. Whatever surface this commodity has, in its core element and substance, it is just itself: Newness as commodity itself. Void of any other value.
In context of industrial, there has been relevant players already decades ago shouted slogan: Back to basics! What some thought was seek for new, probably was not. It was misguided perception based on fact that there used to be era when anything new was more interesting than same old oil painting of jesus christ repeated till eternity. Everything new was better than bleak factory work and sunday church as form of culture. Anything, but traditional, anything but the done, was better. This illusion is crushed long ago. New does not equal better. New does not equal even "progress".
Agreed.
Quote from: FreakAnimalFinland on July 26, 2020, 04:30:51 PM
For me, which is subjective experience of course, is that industrial noise represent question: what then? It hits you with a lot of possibilities and many things reject the optimism of progress.
Quote from: JLIAT on July 26, 2020, 10:14:17 AM
I'm not sure of the dripping pussy thing? Jeff Koons...?
And this is mainstream ART. Now.
"Now", isn't it like you know.. 30 years ago? Jeff Koons, cicciolina, this is ancient past. It may give impression of "recent", as it has other kind of vitality than black empty canvas, that has mostly historical significance. So yes, cicciolina pussy pick, I take that anytime over ton of stuff seen in exhibitions as "new ideas".
Well i could have used other less well known examples from more recent work, but the use of sex, perversion violence has been the hallmark of much post-modern work and still is. "cartoonish depictions of gay sex" Paul Yore - Naallini Malani - "The shows title ... refers to the scream of a young girl being violently raped..." "all works 2019... an erect torso with exposed visera..." etc. all exhib Feb 2020. And historical significance, after history ended? "reject the optimism of progress." Agreed!
One could argue that painting pussies is not that much different to painting caves? L'Origine du Monde, indeed. Pretty sure Keenan made a similar connection in the revised edition of England's Hidden Reverse.
Re: Koons, the later history between him and Cicciolina and his subsequent involvement with the ICMEC is far more interesting to me than the Made In Heaven photos.