I personally think that the paintings of Malevich and objects Hirst - not quite the same thing. simply because Malevich was an innovator, and Hurst - well, where is the innovation? it "banal objects" represents all the dead bodies of animals, figures with twisted inwards, painting with dots - yes to him a legion of artists did the same thing, with a very long time. Yes, and the skull of this famous ... whole slew of inspirational concepts to come up with this skull, as if it is "reflection on life and death", but in reality ... I think that he (well, not him, and the factory assistants) made a skull (not the heart and intestine) because in that year of the skull were in fashion ... that's all ... in the case of Hirst's better than the infamous "marketing genius" to admire. and art ... Well boring is called art, because it is trivial. quite uninteresting with. I think art should not be so boring.
about Erofeeva I can not say anything because I am about him what little I know. but when I read somewhere that were exhibits at the exhibition "Forbidden Art" ... began to think the same as about Hearst. Christ with Lenin's head - why should it? a terrible banality and stupidity. As if a man who is created, fantasy (or intelligence) is not enough for a more constructive and impressive critique of religion. that people see the job, really thinking about how much influence religion on a person, not disgusted by cheap outrageous. Of course, with Yerofeyev acted terribly, and to prohibit the exhibition is not very good. but I do not understand why the guise of reasoned criticism of repression, which puts the power of religion and free creative expression, the viewer shoved third-shocking.
|