[Closed] Bloody Lazy 'Artist'

I like art in general, but what a load of bollocks the accompanying piece is.

Lazy yep. Bolting on meaning/depth by naming bad things that have happened in the world is lazy aswell. Born 1990 so only a pup

It's a shame I couldn't find any pics of it, I saw the 'installation' on the local news earlier. It's such a blatant rip off of the ceramic poppies!

It's sparked debate, so in that regard, it's doing what art does. Exposing our divisions.

It's difficult to enter into this work because of how the subaqueous qualities of the biomorphic forms endangers the devious simplicity of the inherent overspecificity.

Really? Surely it's more of a conscious nod to the use of Origami Cranes in any number of installations over the years? This style of "field" installation was around for a long time before the poppies which were a beautiful and poignant but not necessarily hugely original.

Even were she copying from the poppies, that's not inherently lazy - using a symbol which has a place in the public consciousness and subtly twisting it to give it new meaning is something that artists have done for a long time.

All art - be it spoken, installation, music, etc is built on what has gone before - nothing is truly original

Apart from the fact that its red, what else is copied?
You may have to accept that the Tower poppies weren't themselves very original as there've been plenty of site specific art that has done similar previously.

This style of "field" installation was around for a long time before the poppies which were a beautiful and poignant but not necessarily hugely original.

Indeed - the poppies were the right thing in the right place at the right time. But nothing new in any respect and while I'd not want to take anything away from that project - it did succeed entirely on its own merits-probably most artists faced with the same opportunity / place / audience would have ended up devising pretty much the same work.

What can become problematic in art practice is theres a broad language of materials and forms that are in every artists vocabulary. Every now and then a certain artist gets popular acclaim for a certain work and a bit of that vocabulary 'sticks' to them and its kind of lost to everyone else because using (as in this instance) a field work, or red, or a reference of to a current centenary of war*, becomes a reference to that work and it becomes part of that artist's brand. It means any superficial similarities appear derivative and in this instance people are seeing the superficial similarities more than they are seeing the distinct differences.

*which every commissioning body is asking for at the moment. Done one, short listed for another.

George Wylie did an 80 foot paper boat in the 1990's.

Just because someone else uses a shape doesn't mean you can't use it too. It seems very relevant and accessable.

[url= https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/99_Luftballons ]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/99_Luftballons[/url]
Hardly original to use red as a marker of war.

Not a patch on Shed Boat Shed.

[url= http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2005/dec/06/arts.turnerprize2005 ]shedboatshed[/url]

Simon Starling GOOD artist

All art is quite useless...

All art is quite useless...