Someone paid for this bit of art

[DavidDvorkin]

I saw this hanging on the wall of a medical office building today. Someone actually paid for this, and for the babble-babble text that accompanies it.

The reflection of the man holding a cell phone, and the flash reflection, improve the work.

[lunatica]

1. I'm an artist and I think it's quite good

It does a great job of depicting space.

There's no accounting for tastes is there?

[onehandle]

2. I'm an artist and I think most art hanging in offices and restaurants is garbage

Art appreciation is personal expression and the lifeblood of the arts.

I'm glad when people even have an opinion of art.

Both of you are right.

[lunatica]

23. In the Oakland Kaiser Hospital they have all kinds of art and craftworks on the hall walls

It's quite good and all of it is original.

But I know what you're talking about.

[infidel dog]

3. A brilliant depiction of the eternal truth about a fool and his money...

Thank goodness for the artistic progress we've made since that Michelangelo guy.

[DavidDvorkin]

8. :)

[Enrique]

13. im glad we dont have Michelangelo hanging in all our office buildings

that would be depressing.

[marions ghost]

4. and...?

I see a lot of stuff I don't like in art--everywhere!

It's personal taste. Today there are no rules about what you should create, or what you should like.
There's something for everybody in art now.

Don't like, don't look.

[DavidDvorkin]

9. Never have an opinion? Never express an opinion?

[marions ghost]

20. Fine to express your opinion...

but your closed attitude about this is kinda extreme (IMO). It may not be the best piece of art but it sure ain't the worst (IMO)--& there are also worse things to criticize than artspeak (IMO)--people trying to talk about art is always lame. It's only meant to give clues.

Also, with so much in the visual realm to bash, why pick on a benign static image? How about the ugliness and horror of the landscape being bulldozed and made into a quagmire of clogged roads, parking lots, ugly box stores?

Here's another idea to think about--artists KNOW many people will not appreciate their work and they do their work for those who DO.

I am sure there is an artist out there you would like if you actually ever looked at art.

[DavidDvorkin]

21. Did you read the meaningless text attached to the work?

[marions ghost]

22. Take out

sentences 3,4,5 of paragraph 2. Then it's a lot better. Agreed, that part is a bad mess. Still I do kinda get what the thing is saying (not sure I'm convinced--would have to see more work).

But you miss my point--how about not dwelling on something as small and harmless as this and be brave enough to go after big ugliness and seriously offensive things. This is at least trying to be positive.

As for this kind of art, look at more of it and find what speaketh to U.

[Egalitariat]

5. It's valuable because the Dalai Lama thought enough of it to take the picture

That's how artists get big while they're still alive. They get a famous person to start collecting their work, and then everyone else wants it.

[NV Whino]

7. Aside from the fact that I'm an artist and I like this...

Thank god someone is buying art.

Personally, I'm pleased to have some of my own work in local hospitals.

[Bluenorthwest]

10. An actual image of the piece at the link

She's an internationally known artist with a career spanning decades.
http://litaalbuquerque.com/2003/04/trajectory/

[saras]

11. Dunning-Kruger. If you don't know how ignorant you are, you're too ignorant to have an opinion

You might have tastes, but so do bacteria. I suppose there are people who don't read books because they don't care for serif fonts, either.

Do I like it? I don't know, I don't have enough information. I'd have to go there and see it in context, and learn enough about the artist to understand what she was trying to accomplish, and enough about the location to know why it was chosen.

Michaelangelo I understand. His purposes were decoration and Christian propaganda. The fact that he was really good at it - well, he was. So what?

[DavidDvorkin]

17. My, my, my.

[tabasco]

12. There are so many "enlightened" art lovers

who say just everything is art. If my dog takes a shit, they would say it is art. If somebody pisses in a jar and puts a crucifix in it, they say it's art. What these "enlightened" people do is diminish true artistic expression, which requires a bit more effort and feeling than pissing in a jar, IMO.

[Odin2005]

25. +1,000,000,000,000,000,000

[Enrique]

14. thanks for posting, but we can't see it

Not much to say about an art piece we can't see. Anyway as long as you posted it, why not say what you don't like about it?

[DavidDvorkin]

15. Two things

The work itself is abstract images that convey very little, despite the hyperbole used to describe the artist's intent.

Second, the text itself is meaningless babble.

I don't know why you can't see the image.

[Enrique]

19. I'm far from an art expert

but I'm pretty sure a giant reflection taking up half the area of the piece make it impossible for anyone to make any kind of judgement at all, at any level of expertise. Imo anyone who gives an opinion about this based on your photo is really talking about their prejudices about modern art, which are perfectly fine to have, but it's not fair to this artist. But life isn't fair.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

16. "If I don't understand it, it's not art!"

--Dagwood Bumstead

[sibelian]

35. Ab so lutely.

Couldn't agree more.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

37. I'll pass that along to Dagwood.

[GobBluth]

18. I never "get" art, but I have no idea what you find wrong/strange/odd with this. nt

[Odin2005]

24. If that's art then I'm Rembrandt.

[greendog]

26. If, on payday, your boss announced that she couldn't meet payroll...

...and offered you the choice between:

A. A bag of Hostess Snowballs and a can of Keystone Light.
or...
B. A lithograph by Lita Albuquerque.

How long would it take you to decide?

[GoneOffShore]

27. I'd go for the lithograph.

[lapislzi]

33. Mmmmm....SnoBalls.... n/t

[DavidDvorkin]

36. I'd take the lithograph, sell it, and think that the buyer was a fool.

[LeftinOH]

28. I need to get in on this racket; if people will pay good money for

a circle with a rectangle over it, I can be an artist too.

[lapislzi]

29. Do you really have nothing better to do than obsess over an image in a doctor's office?

It's not offensive. The mumbo jumbo of the text is harmless.

So you think it's frivolous/silly/cracked. OK. You're entitled to think that.

Trust me, I'd rather look at an image like that than the propagandistic images of fetuses and glowing pregnant women that I see every time I go to the gynecologist. But I'm not grousing about them. I shrug it off.

Find a hobby.

[Courtesy Flush]

30. The art is in the second photo, not the first.

If a piece of art requires an accompanying dissertation explaining why it's art, then the dissertation is the true creative product. Any object hanging next to it will suffice.

[sibelian]

34. You have just perfectly encapsulated what I think.

Thank you!

[sibelian]

31. I also dabble. I agree - I hate things like this. But then I have a definition of Art.

I think it has to make you feel something. I don't feel anything at all in looking at this.

I know, this is going to preclude a lot of things currently passing for art in the modern art scene - which more and more seems to accept the definition of it's art if it's hung in a gallery which is obviously ridiculous. I also reject much of 20th century modern art.

There will doubtless be many who think I'm not giving this particular piece enough space or I don't *understand* it, but I am completely against the idea that art requiring explanation or understanding is art, I think that's something else. I don't really know if there's a word for what it is, but using the word art to describe it devalues the term. If it has to be explained or understood, then it's failed. If it's trying to tell me something then I should be able to see what it is, I should feel the impact of it straight away.

Also, I think's it worth pointing out that if you take anything at all, a brick, a colostomy bag, a pair of garden shears, and arrange it nicely on a white background and put it in a pretty frame or an unusual context then of course it's going to look posh - that doesn't make it meaningful!

[Tyrs WolfDaemon]

32. Is the reflection of a person taking a picture part of the art?

The inclusion of the photographer could change the meaning of the piece.

Having a person taking a picture from within the moon as it gets hit brings the context of humanity into the art, as it depicts the potential for us to witness such an awe inspiring sight as our moon exploding. This would lead us to think about how such an event might affect our lives on this planet. It also points to how perilous it is in our universe.

However, if the photographer is not part of the piece then the moon being hit could speak to the vastness of space and the many interactions we as a people may and will never know.

At this point I’m putting too much thought into it for a Friday morning as I can see all sorts of questions and lines of thought the art could invoke.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

38. It is now

and here.

[gort]

39. Weird piece. Especially the bright flash

With a man holding what appears to be a camera...

I have a weird taste in art, too.

For instance I would love to have this piece: