this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2025
227 points (96.0% liked)
Technology
76917 readers
3618 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I hate the debate over "what is art". Honestly I think the best answer I could give to the question is "something that was ruined by a bunch of idiots asking 'what is art'".
That said, and not wanting to go into that discussion, calling this guy an "artist" seems like a mockery. He's not an artist, he's just some idiot with double sided tape.
I agree with the first part, disagree with the second.
Jackson Pollock was just some idiot with a paintbrush. John Cage was just some idiot with a piano when he wrote 4'33". "I could have done that." Sure, but they did. Having the concept and then executing it is as much of the art as the finished product.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disumbrationism
https://hoaxes.org/archive/permalink/the_disumbrationist_school_of_art/
collapsed inline media
collapsed inline media
collapsed inline media
collapsed inline media
collapsed inline media
Jordan-Smith did too, though, and his work doesn't qualify. I think that one has to both do and maintain a straight face for the rest of one's life.
Those artists at least had a recognizable and identifiable style. It was easy to mimic yes, but they became icons for the identifiable style. If Altman snuck this in to the museum I'd give him some credit for it I suppose, but the style already exists and isn't novel or identiable to a particular artist. Other people have snuck crap into museums too. There's no novelty or creativity or unique iconic style here. It's just sludge.
And here we are talking about it.
If I take my pants off and walk down the street people will talk about me. Seems like a low bar.
If.
Yeah, it's called performance art. You're not wrong in disliking it as slop, but the barrier for what is art is empirically low.
Last time I did it the cops didn't take that excuse. You'd think doing it near a school would make it obvious it was an artistic performance too.
Artists have often gotten caught in trouble with the law, many justifiably so for having done generally bad things, still artists though
Yes the bar for what is art is so low as to be buried.
That's the god damn point. Anyone can make art. That's the whole damn reason uptight asswads get upset when something new shows up and reminds them of that fact.
What matters is what the viewer think, if they believe it art then thus it is.
I do not believe the paint by number crayon drawing of a 4 year old is of value thus it is not art to me. But to their father and mother? It is of the highest value and the highest form of art.
I hope this guy's mother is proud then at least.
Except this is missing the executing part. Prompting isn't work.
You're missing it. It got sneaked into a museum and hung on the wall. That's an extremely important part of it.
Indeed, the art is the reverse heist.
Jokes on you, putting up bullshit in an art gallery is a classic art move.