algol

Touché Cappio

heehhehe ...no geenoo, it's just that it stirred things up a bit in the area, it was funny hearing the old folks (and not-so-old) outraged in the streets with their self-righteous talks. The apex was when an idiot climbed the oak tree and ended up getting hurt falling down while trying to get them down. It was all very entertaining.

I love this work also because it was displayed 100 meters from where I live hehehe ....

Defining the criteria of what art is is the subject of an eternal dispute and one of the most challenging tasks. Moreover, its definitely ailing market doesn't help distinguish the crap from the valuable work. The boundaries are ever-changing, just like the society that is the substrate in which the artist/work moves, as well as the techniques that can make an idea realizable. Let’s think about video art, the use of new materials, and technologies that make what was once unimaginable possible. In my opinion, for something to be called Art with a capital A, there must always be a significant technical skill that gives strength to a message, an idea, a sensation that rises from the "personal" to the universal if not (forgive me) a fragment of truth. Therefore, it’s not enough to provoke, it's not enough to defecate in a jar, even if certain market excesses might seem to head in this direction. Cattelan does not belong to this group of pseudo-artists; his ideas are brilliant, strong, disconcerting, and wonderfully executed (as Kosmo pointed out in his intervention 25), and they unveil the daily hypocrisies. That’s no small feat.
Punisher, surely your work is really cool (I can’t see it, but I trust you). You can bet that if it were signed by some big name, no one would hesitate to praise it and assign a value. It’s normal for someone with a significant history and background to have a certain credit, and it’s equally understandable that if they make a mistake, people are more indulgent towards them. This also happens in other fields. However, the discussion about the valuations in the art market is correct and is a sensitive issue. It might be a bit confusing, but I hope I’ve made myself understood.

To each their own respectable sensitivity. The fact that a work does not evoke anything or is not understood does not mean that the work itself is worthless. Nor does it imply that the soul of the one observing it is too narrow to comprehend it. I am fully aware of how the boundary separating what is art from what is not is fragile and thin. It is also true that Cattelan, in some respects, is quite the clever trickster.

Alexander, as far as I'm concerned, Panapp could be right, but I also see a not-so-veiled critique of a society that imposes violent images, which also explains the public location that forces viewers to confront the work. Just as every day, the media and more bombard us with the same violence. In this regard, comment 3 by Iside is enlightening. It is clear that for the artist, the message becomes even stronger by presenting it in such a way, even though I would have preferred a gallery. Also because everyone has their own sensitivity, and I understand that some may feel offended, disturbed, or there are those like you who see it only as an empty provocation. Art can strike different sensitivities in various ways. It seems to me that there are interesting insights in Cattelan's works. To scandalize, to evoke emotions, to touch the soul of the viewer, and to open glimpses of truth about the world are qualities that a work we define as art should possess. Often, art has caused scandal, interpreted, or even transcended the time that housed it. In this case, we are, in my opinion, in the presence of a "provocation" that is not self-serving. However, I don't think there's any need to get worked up about it.

Art has always provoked. It doesn't seem like a novelty to me.

Smart provocation. One can discuss the appropriateness of such a location. Forcing such a work upon everyone's sight (I think of the children) is a form of violence. He is a brilliant provocateur, and I like him.

You also write well. However, this rich boy is trash for me and I find very little noble in this apologia of crap. But you write well.

Anyway, I wouldn't wish a night paralysis or hypnagogic attack on anyone. It's quite unpleasant.