Page 1 of 1
Did Duchamp’s Urinal Flush Away Art?
Posted: Wed Jan 16, 2019 6:21 pm
by Philosophy Now
Roy Turner scorns the fact that after Duchamp, critics have questioned the status of ‘traditional’ Western art, making the act of designation the sole determinant of art.
https://philosophynow.org/issues/67/Did_Duchamps_Urinal_Flush_Away_Art
Re: Did Duchamp’s Urinal Flush Away Art?
Posted: Wed Jan 16, 2019 11:26 pm
by Impenitent
the act of designation differentiates everything anyway...
scorning the eye of the beholder doesn't necessarily cloud the vision...
-Imp
Re: Did Duchamp’s Urinal Flush Away Art?
Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2019 3:54 am
by Nick_A
Simone Weil wrote:
A work of art has an author and yet, when it is perfect, it has something which is anonymous about it.
Art is the symbol of the two noblest human efforts: to construct and to refrain from destruction.
Before deciding what to flush a person must first consider what art is and what it is not. Answer this question honestly and it should indicate what is necessary for something to be called art and if it should be flushed.
Imagine you are looking at a 5'/7' technically perfect painting with the title "The Joy of Rape" You see a terror stricken woman being raped by a man with an expression of sadistic satisfaction on his face. Is it art? If it is, should it be hung in museums?