Sociopath Community

AliceInWonderland said: 

All signifieds and icons have been liquidated and deconstructed, in that sense I agree that the metaphysical age of art is dead. 

Much like martial arts, I'd just say that it's stopped being for the privileged as it spreads towards the everyman. The only "death" going on is in it's gatekeeping hype. 

What characterizes contemporary art is that the artist essentially looks through these dead signifieds that are seemingly disconnected when comparing them to their constructions in olde narratives and makes them their own. The artist can take the signifieds and put them into within their own sense of inner logic and in doing so forming their own world with its own meaning and reasons. Contemporary art can be difficult for that reason, to understand you need to accept the logic of the inner world the artist has created.

So was art not alive when it wasn't contemporary, when it was just cave scrawlings of their successful hunts, or wall detailings inside of an Egyptian Tomb? 

Art's in the room for it to be appreciated. 

This is in direct opposition to metaphysical artist who uses icons and signifiers in an already constructed world with an established logic. 

You mean a Graphic Designer? 

I'd argue that there are people who borrow from life in less of a directly comparative way, taken from within rather than appropriated purposefully for the consumer. As long as we have people going to their own beat who otherwise rebuke convention, if it doesn't go full blown Post Modern it won't necessarily be reduced into something commercial. 

Tryptamine said: 

QuietBeef said: 

 wtf I showed that to my friend yesterday

 Have you seen other Minute Hour stuff?  If not, you should, I think his work is up your alley.

QuietBeef said: 

Tryptamine said: 

QuietBeef said: 

 wtf I showed that to my friend yesterday

 Have you seen other Minute Hour stuff?  If not, you should, I think his work is up your alley.

I hosted a topic about it as well, it's amazing stuff. 

AliceInWonderland said: 

All signifieds and icons have been liquidated and deconstructed, in that sense I agree that the metaphysical age of art is dead. 

What characterizes contemporary art is that the artist essentially looks through these dead signifieds that are seemingly disconnected when comparing them to their constructions in olde narratives and makes them their own. The artist can take the signifieds and put them into within their own sense of inner logic and in doing so forming their own world with its own meaning and reasons. Contemporary art can be difficult for that reason, to understand you need to accept the logic of the inner world the artist has created. This is in direct opposition to metaphysical artist who uses icons and signifiers in an already constructed world with an established logic. 

 Is the suggestion here that said signifieds, in their present form, have no communal meaning?  I don't think any art can be 100% interpretable or individual.  Iconography has always been morphous, adhering to the changing sociopsychological landscape and its cultural demands.  This is simply the next incarnation, one that's arguably still very informed by religion, but seen in a new light.

If we accept Pop Culture as the modern religion, it's not really too different. 

Turncoat said: 

AliceInWonderland said: 

All signifieds and icons have been liquidated and deconstructed, in that sense I agree that the metaphysical age of art is dead. 

Much like martial arts, I'd just say that it's stopped being for the privileged as it spreads towards the everyman. The only "death" going on is in it's gatekeeping hype. 

In a alot of ways, yes. 

Techniques and styles are being separated from their context and are being mixed together in random ways to serve the individual instead of the continuation of the system. 

What characterizes contemporary art is that the artist essentially looks through these dead signifieds that are seemingly disconnected when comparing them to their constructions in olde narratives and makes them their own. The artist can take the signifieds and put them into within their own sense of inner logic and in doing so forming their own world with its own meaning and reasons. Contemporary art can be difficult for that reason, to understand you need to accept the logic of the inner world the artist has created.

So was art not alive when it wasn't contemporary, when it was just cave scrawlings of their successful hunts, or wall detailings inside of an Egyptian Tomb? 

Art's in the room for it to be appreciated. 

Dead wasn't really the right way as they are only dead in relation to their old context, it's the relation that is in essence dead. 

The Eygptian tomb case is interesting. It could be said that comparatively their 'metaphysical' age began with phonetics in the Old kingdom ~2600 B.C.E. Prior to that in the Dynasties phonetics were not really used in tombs, everything was spoken and it was a far more magical age. 

This is in direct opposition to metaphysical artist who uses icons and signifiers in an already constructed world with an established logic. 

You mean a Graphic Designer? 

I'd argue that there are people who borrow from life in less of a directly comparative way, taken from within rather than appropriated purposefully for the consumer. As long as we have people going to their own beat who otherwise rebuke convention, if it doesn't go full blown Post Modern it won't necessarily be reduced into something commercial. 

 Graphic design does seem to fit this category in so far as the artist is functioning within an external narrative, it wouldn't be necessarily metaphysical though as you often don't see graphic deisgners working with the transcendent. I am hesitant to say it can even be metaphysical in todays age, but I am not sold on the possibility. There's something 'special' about 'metaphysical' art just as there is something special to 'contemporary' art. We can rebuild the Notre Dame but will it really BE the metaphysical Notre Dame? The Notre Dame has had several renovations over the last few hundred years, when did it stop being a metaphyiscal art piece? It seems like context is important. Essentially a play off the 'God is dead' idea from parable of a mad man. We can talk about God but if God is dead that context can rule over the conversation and dictate context. Information changes the memory of a system. 

QuietBeef said: 

AliceInWonderland said: 

All signifieds and icons have been liquidated and deconstructed, in that sense I agree that the metaphysical age of art is dead. 

What characterizes contemporary art is that the artist essentially looks through these dead signifieds that are seemingly disconnected when comparing them to their constructions in olde narratives and makes them their own. The artist can take the signifieds and put them into within their own sense of inner logic and in doing so forming their own world with its own meaning and reasons. Contemporary art can be difficult for that reason, to understand you need to accept the logic of the inner world the artist has created. This is in direct opposition to metaphysical artist who uses icons and signifiers in an already constructed world with an established logic. 

 Is the suggestion here that said signifieds, in their present form, have no communal meaning?  I don't think any art can be 100% interpretable or individual.  Iconography has always been morphous, adhering to the changing sociopsychological landscape and its cultural demands.  This is simply the next incarnation, one that's arguably still very informed by religion, but seen in a new light.

They can have communal meaning but not universal meaning. To actually obtain the meaning of the piece you in fact have to be in the community - in on the joke if you will. 

As for informed by religion, yes I agree but as I stated to TCs post in a long winded way (I am still attempting to find a way to articulate it) information changes a system as it changes its memory. We can take a religious signifier and put it in a religious context and it won't necessarily be metaphysical. 

AliceInWonderland said:

Graphic design does seem to fit this category in so far as the artist is functioning within an external narrative, it wouldn't be necessarily metaphysical though as you often don't see graphic deisgners working with the transcendent.

That depends on how you view transcendence. I'd argue that they are taking the mundane and attempt to display it as something essential, such as what we've seen through the "Got Milk?" campaign, or even the "Eggs are a part of a balanced breakfast" campaign. 

I see Graphic Design as converting art towards communication, effectively taking what it was doing and reducing it to repeatable strategies that use the least amount of detail. Their entire ideology is about how quickly it translates to the brain, which makes things like Emojis a stroke of genius within their field. 

There's something 'special' about 'metaphysical' art just as there is something special to 'contemporary' art.

I'd mostly note it's lack of irony, otherwise based on the timeline they're asking different questions from being at a different point in history. I don't see anything special about it that I wouldn't otherwise appreciate from it's history solely, save for how art appears when surrounded by different local influences (such as what anime and hentai have done to US pencil work). 

when did it stop being a metaphyiscal art piece?

Much like Superman's clause over his vague ambiguous weakness against "Magic", as more of what was once mystified or otherwise unexplained becomes explained it converts from mystic into something more utilitarian. Much like how Hypnosis used to work on Superman, once Hypnosis was revealed to be more of a showman's science than magic he became immune to it.