"Pure" Art in the Bathroom [Archive]

Matt Chylak

11/18/10, 03:43 PM

Saw this in a stall just now:

Since it is done for neither profit nor notoriety, bathroom stall drawings are the purest form of art. Discuss.

Of course, I go to a school full of nerds, so there's a good five or six paragraphs debating the topic at hand. Anyone have any thoughts?

Can some art be more "pure" than another kind? What does that entail? Does commercialism "cheapen" art?

loveisdead

11/18/10, 03:45 PM

They're still doing it with the intent of someone seeing the art. By their own logic that "cheapens" the art.

peder458

11/18/10, 03:50 PM

Saw the title and immediately thought of that Seinfeld episode where George brings the art book into the bathroom and it gets "flagged".

Edit: in regards to the actual topic, I don't think creating art to share an emotion/feeling/idea with others cheapens it. Art can be used as a type of communication which requires others to see it. I get what you're saying though.

paper halo

11/18/10, 03:50 PM

Matt Chylak

11/18/10, 03:51 PM

They're still doing it with the intent of someone seeing the art. By their own logic that "cheapens" the art.

Well, if you look up the definition of "notoriety" - the state, quality, or character of being notorious or widely known.

I don't think bathroom stall art will ever be widely known, and since it is anonymous, no one will ever know who did it, so they can't achieve any kind of infamy. I think your reading of their logic is incorrect.

Jake Gyllenhaal

11/18/10, 03:56 PM

When I was in college, I would write in permanent marker in the bathroom stalls "respect school property" for the ironic factor. Is that art?

Oh, and the best thing I've seen written in a stall: "Don't circumcise your children. Their body, their choice."

I'mOnAHorse

11/18/10, 04:25 PM

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b213/MetalRoyX/1283114792903.jpg

cwhit412

11/18/10, 04:27 PM

Yes. Capitalism dumbs down all forms of artistic expression. See: MTV.

I'll revisit this thread later with a better contribution.

Loving the avatar.

x togepi x

11/18/10, 04:29 PM

i don't see how it counts as art.

PandaBear!

11/18/10, 04:32 PM

This building at my uni is being closed down after this year, so some art students put loads of sheets of paper up in all the restrooms and tied marker pens to the stalls so anyone and everyone could graffitti in them - it is awesome, of course people cut the pens loose and went to town all over the walls. Some really crazy things, including the entire S.L.J biblical speech from 'Pulp Fiction' and my personal favorite, the classic "the two things i hate the most: graffiti & irony"

StephenYoung

11/18/10, 04:36 PM

There's a teacher milf ranking in my favourite stall. Mainly my favourite stall because of this list, it pretty much has all the female profs, and you put an ex down besides the ones you'd bang.

dash64

11/18/10, 04:49 PM

No, I believe all art is pure to begin with, unless the person making it does not make/pain/draw/sculpt it from their soul aka with all they have. If no emotion is put into the piece then it has no worth, it is just an object.

EasySkankin

11/18/10, 05:02 PM

Saw this in a stall just now:

Of course, I go to a school full of nerds, so there's a good five or six paragraphs debating the topic at hand. Anyone have any thoughts?

Can some art be more "pure" than another kind? What does that entail? Does commercialism "cheapen" art?
That's pretty cool. All I've ever seen is "GD4LYFE", LK symbols and the random heart.

As for the topic: No, i'm pretty sure it makes it more expensive.

Seriously though I tend to disagree. The most talented graffiti artists tend to have signatures and such. Song titles appear right next to the artist's name. I think a part of being an artist is not necessarily gaining fame or notoriety, but some kind of recognition. Art is inextricably tied to the artist. Great art IMO makes you want more. You replay a song till you want something different but similar, so you revisit the same artist. Same goes for visual art, books, etc.

I find the whole "selling out" thing to be real cliche. It really depends on your tastes I guess but music is just a collection of arranged sounds and that for me is pure enough. Doesn't matter if it sounds generic or it's wtf-avant-garde, I enjoy it all. If you happen to make a lot of cash making music, that's fuckin awesome. But if that's the only reason you make music it's going to show in your tunes.

The Personist

11/18/10, 05:17 PM

Posting to subscribe, but I don't think anything can be "pure" and I don't know why "pure" is better than "impure" in ANY context.

IntoTheSun

11/18/10, 05:21 PM

Posting to subscribe, but I don't think anything can be "pure" and I don't know why "pure" is better than "impure" in ANY context.
CAPRISUN JUICE NOW WITH ALL NATURAL FLAVORS

The Personist

11/18/10, 05:25 PM

CAPRISUN JUICE NOW WITH ALL NATURAL FLAVORS

I gave my girlfriend a mini lecture on queer theory when she remarked she preferred "all natural" orange juice when we were shopping. It went over REALLY WELL. SERIOUSLY.

IntoTheSun

11/18/10, 05:30 PM

I gave my girlfriend a mini lecture on queer theory when she remarked she preferred "all natural" orange juice when we were shopping. It went over REALLY WELL. SERIOUSLY.

She gave you a blowjob afterwards, didn't she.

But seriously, coming from a generally sociological viewpoint of things, I am hesitant to assume that anything "naturally is" a certain way. About the CapriSun though, apparently flavors derived from natural substances can actually be more harmful than using "artificial flavors," but companies do it anyway for marketing purposes (duh) cuz people are ignorant (duh.) I forgot where I read that from. This is important and relevant.

x togepi x

11/18/10, 05:30 PM

Posting to subscribe, but I don't think anything can be "pure" and I don't know why "pure" is better than "impure" in ANY context.

you can draw pure/impure distinctions as long as you're willing to put them under erasure. I don't have any problem saying "real art" is better than corporate art, for example.

Matt Chylak

11/18/10, 05:37 PM

That's pretty cool. All I've ever seen is "GD4LYFE", LK symbols and the random heart.

As for the topic: No, i'm pretty sure it makes it more expensive.

Seriously though I tend to disagree. The most talented graffiti artists tend to have signatures and such. Song titles appear right next to the artist's name. I think a part of being an artist is not necessarily gaining fame or notoriety, but some kind of recognition. Art is inextricably tied to the artist. Great art IMO makes you want more. You replay a song till you want something different but similar, so you revisit the same artist. Same goes for visual art, books, etc.

I find the whole "selling out" thing to be real cliche. It really depends on your tastes I guess but music is just a collection of arranged sounds and that for me is pure enough. Doesn't matter if it sounds generic or it's wtf-avant-garde, I enjoy it all. If you happen to make a lot of cash making music, that's fuckin awesome. But if that's the only reason you make music it's going to show in your tunes.

i don't completely agree with that. i enjoy tons of art that does not make me care about its creator in any fashion...most architectural art is the quickest example i can come up with, but it certainly extends to music and painting and the like.

Matt Chylak

11/18/10, 05:38 PM

She gave you a blowjob afterwards, didn't she.

But seriously, coming from a generally sociological viewpoint of things, I am hesitant to assume that anything "naturally is" a certain way. About the CapriSun though, apparently flavors derived from natural substances can actually be more harmful than using "artificial flavors," but companies do it anyway for marketing purposes (duh) cuz people are ignorant (duh.) I forgot where I read that from. This is important and relevant.

fixed

IntoTheSun

11/18/10, 05:40 PM

fixed

How?

Edit: Oh LOL

Matt Chylak

11/18/10, 05:53 PM

How?

Edit: Oh LOL

i'm going to write a program that automatically turns IntoTheSun into IntoTheCapriSun (say that last part five times fast)

The Personist

11/18/10, 05:56 PM

you can draw pure/impure distinctions as long as you're willing to put them under erasure. I don't have any problem saying "real art" is better than corporate art, for example.

I think that's a different kind of distinction, though. It may just be semantic, but I think if your argument for 'real' art is its 'purity,' that's pretty disingenuous. Not saying that's what you're doing, but that's what I would call bullshit on.

IntoTheSun

11/18/10, 05:59 PM

i'm going to write a program that automatically turns IntoTheSun into IntoTheCapriSun (say that last part five times fast)

Then I don't get quoted and, consequently, will ignore all of your posts directed at me!

The Personist

11/18/10, 06:01 PM

Then I don't get quoted and, consequently, will ignore all of your posts directed at me!

How are you reading Judith Butler in a class as a freshman? and why isn't Ian in those classes?

/random but pertinent questions

Matt Chylak

11/18/10, 06:03 PM

Then I don't get quoted and, consequently, will ignore all of your posts directed at me!

awwwwwwwwww

IntoTheSun

11/18/10, 06:10 PM

How are you reading Judith Butler in a class as a freshman? and why isn't Ian in those classes?

/random but pertinent questions

Because I became interested in soc and gender studies, so Todd recommended me the book. Also, I've been having the worst day today because I was blocked from signing up for my spring classes over something stupid, and now I might not get that Gender and Sexuality Studies course I wanted to take. And if that happens, I will be slitting (sliting?) someone's throat. For real.

whiny bitching

ehehehehe

x togepi x

11/18/10, 06:11 PM

I think that's a different kind of distinction, though. It may just be semantic, but I think if your argument for 'real' art is its 'purity,' that's pretty disingenuous. Not saying that's what you're doing, but that's what I would call bullshit on.

not so much purity in a free floating sense but less dominated by corporations. there's just not a word i can use other than purity, or at least, not one that is currently in my vocabulary.

The Personist

11/18/10, 06:17 PM

Because I became interested in soc and gender studies, so Todd recommended me the book. Also, I've been having the worst day today because I was blocked from signing up for my spring classes over something stupid, and now I might not get that Gender and Sexuality Studies course I wanted to take. And if that happens, I will be slitting (sliting?) someone's throat. For real.

ehehehehe
So you're just reading Judith Butler and Derrida on your own? That's awesome.
not so much purity in a free floating sense but less dominated by corporations. there's just not a word i can use other than purity, or at least, not one that is currently in my vocabulary.

Well if the defense stops with "it's more pure," then I would contest that, but I get a feeling that's not the case. Also, it's not like you're unselfconscious about it.

IntoTheSun

11/18/10, 06:20 PM

So you're just reading Judith Butler and Derrida on your own? That's awesome.

Nah, I'm not even "reading" Derrida, per se, haha. It's just that we've discussed his theories in detail in my philosophy seminar. It's been pretty enlightening stuff.

Ollie McKraut

11/18/10, 06:33 PM

I don't know why "pure" is better than "impure" in ANY context.

Pure ecstacy is better than ecstacy laced with Para-Methoxyamphetamine for instance. Also water is best when not impure, helps to keep cholera under control. Seems obvious, maybe that's not what you mean by "ANY" context

IntoTheSun

11/18/10, 06:50 PM

Pure ecstacy is better than ecstacy laced with Para-Methoxyamphetamine for instance. Also water is best when not impure, helps to keep cholera under control. Seems obvious, maybe that's not what you mean by "ANY" context

Go an breathe some pure oxygen for a couple of minutes and get back to us. And go snort some pure cocaine while you're at it. Context.

The Personist

11/18/10, 07:13 PM

Pure ecstacy is better than ecstacy laced with Para-Methoxyamphetamine for instance. Also water is best when not impure, helps to keep cholera under control. Seems obvious, maybe that's not what you mean by "ANY" context
Is ecstasy actually "pure"? It's a concoction of chemicals, is it not?
Go an breathe some pure oxygen for a couple of minutes and get back to us. And go snort some pure cocaine while you're at it. Context.

Thanks bro.

saysmydoctor

11/18/10, 07:24 PM

I would think art you keep to yourself is the most "pure" art. Then again, sometimes that's done because you think it's bad. There is a little bit of self-preservation in everything we do.

/thoughts

EasySkankin

11/18/10, 07:48 PM

i don't completely agree with that. i enjoy tons of art that does not make me care about its creator in any fashion...most architectural art is the quickest example i can come up with, but it certainly extends to music and painting and the like.
Well I meant it in a more abstract way. You can look at some art or listen to a tune and try to understand, but no one is going to understand like the artist, it's like an extension of himself. But yeah, the only architect i've ever heard of is frank wright, so you got a point there. Sucks to be an architect haha
Is ecstasy actually "pure"? It's a concoction of chemicals, is it not?
It actually is, and pure MDMA is fantastic.

Neo Cassady

11/18/10, 09:06 PM

If art is "cheapened" by being created with the intent of being appreciated (or even viewed), then I'd argue that the "purest" form of art is something like this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/01/arts/design/01underbelly.html

Known to its creators and participating artists as the Underbelly Project, the space, where all the show’s artworks remain, defies every norm of the gallery scene. Collectors can’t buy the art. The public can’t see it. And the only people with a chance of stumbling across it are the urban explorers who prowl the city’s hidden infrastructure or employees of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority.

That’s because the exhibition has been mounted, illegally, in a long-abandoned subway station. The dank, cavernous hall feels a lot farther than it actually is from the bright white rooms of Chelsea’s gallery district. Which is more or less the point: This is an art exhibition that goes to extremes to avoid being part of the art world, and even the world in general.

Although, they let at least one reporter in, so even that has its impurities.

zion the lion

11/18/10, 09:19 PM

If that's the case, my masterpiece of an avatar (that I made) is super super pure.

frenchatticus

11/18/10, 10:06 PM

Toy Story 2 was okay

Theseventhson

11/18/10, 10:47 PM

Will formulate thoughts later.

x togepi x

11/18/10, 11:37 PM

Well if the defense stops with "it's more pure," then I would contest that, but I get a feeling that's not the case. Also, it's not like you're unselfconscious about it.

i think it's "more pure" but it all exists on a continuum. obviously "pureness" doesn't exist. i just think those things are more fluid.

caveBEAR

11/19/10, 07:44 AM

If you're overly concerned about your art being 'pure', then you never gave a fuck about your art to begin with.

mattyrocks

11/19/10, 07:53 AM

i always thought that if you created art you would want SOMEONE to appreciate it.

Nevuk

11/19/10, 08:06 AM

i always thought that if you created art you would want SOMEONE to appreciate it.
Sharing it with others is probably the most common cause of doing art but plenty of people write novels, songs, etc. and never share them with anyone. There's a few books that are around without the author having wanted them published. That one puritan poet is an example, although she's not a very good one because her family knew about it. Anne Bradstreet.

With that said, a lot of people who write this way have self-confidence issues and don't think anyone would want to read their writing so that may be their motivation

Art is more difficult because there is an inherent cost to it not associated with writing. (Which is why visual art is rarely ever going to be truly non-capitalistic).

Love As Arson

11/19/10, 08:53 PM

Hmm:

The notion that art is the mirror of nature is one that only appeals in periods of skepticism. Art does not imitate nature, it imitates a creation, sometimes to propose an alternative world, sometimes simply to amplify, to confirm, to make social the brief hope offered by nature. Art is an organized response to what nature allows us to glimpse occasionally. Art sets out to transform the potential recognition into an unceasing one. It proclaims man in the hope of receiving a surer reply...the transcendental face of art is always a form of prayer.