Critical Debate : Auto-Destructive Art

Banksy, Love is in the Bin, 2018 (Remastered)

638327BA-1E4E-4C2D-A739-9B4A73A36B9C.jpeg

Image::  https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/11/arts/design/winning-bidder-for-shredded-banksy-painting-says-shell-keep-it.html

Critical debate is in response to the Banksy shredded piece

How was the shredder triggered? Was the artwork destroyed? Was the artworks value destroyed?

So what actually happened?

Response to the shredding is quick – people filming on their phones

Sotherbys standard practice to evaluate the print

Aparrently Banks said to not open the print as it would damage the integrity

What about the battery life of the painting

The shredder only continued to shred half the painting – no conservative report on the piece. Is this a risk that was known?

*If the piece is up for sale again will it be worth more on the next sale? It’s feesable to imagine it will be worth more next time it goes on sale

+Is the piece destroyed? The artwork isn’t destroyed, the value isn’t destroyed, looks like anti-institution nut is it? The object is still saleable

Gustav Metzger, Recreation of the first public destructive art is coined by Metzger

Auto-destructive Art is Demostrated by G. Metzger / Does Banksy’s auction fit Metzger criteria fro auto-destructive art? “Timing is good” shredder went off on the hammer

When complete the art is to be removed from the site and scrapped this is unfulfilled by Banksys artwork

”It’s got to come to an end or it’s not really destroyed” Jon Clarkson

it was activated in 20 years but it was not destroyed

What does destroyed mean, as destroying a Banksy may have been harder, as Banksy remains would still be wanted

Break it up at the museum:

Jean Tingley, Homage to New York,1960

Is the spectacle of destruction different if it is expected?

Is built destruction more or less radical than a hidden shredder?

In comparison to Banksy this is very different, as people wasn’t going to see his work. E.G. not going to see it in a gallery

The one he chose was the least orrencive piece he could choose

Was it done at the image is so overused?

Gives the piece an entirely new contest the previous one

The surprise destruction is more of a guesture than…

Jean Tingley, Study for the end of the world No.2, 1962

AD685DA2-155E-4F5B-BB72-4AB41D3E4B70.png

image:: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Jean-Tinguely-Study-for-an-End-of-the-World-No-2-1962-C_fig3_308792790

 

“The waste from a consumer society”

Made from rubbish – once it was blown up it became rubbish

Was anything destroyed? Has it changed state? Have we been given the look of destruction without the actuality

the process means it has

With the question of does things have to have value to be able to be destroyed?

By investigating time does this add value

Kept his distance from the idea of money driven work

The Tingley similar to Banksy? Has it been destroyed? What is the action of both? How does Tingley fit into Metzgers manifesto Metzger if it has become rubbish ‘ In Tingley it started as rubbish – Is Tingley interested rubbish/ Would not fit into the Manifesto

Ben Vautier, Total Art Matches, 1963

As we look at the artwork, does that mean that it has failed? “Used these materials to burn all art”

Cynthia Diagnout, Everyone you loved one day will one day die, 2014

These are labels with dates for destruction, she has set dates so that one is burned whilst she is still is alive, one whilst she was dead

The artwork has been burned

Burning her painting at Art Basel, Miami, 2015

Is a cocky ide to plan someone will be destroyed

Also is there a degree of fame would the works would get destroyed

Ai Weiwei, Dropping a Han Dynasty Vase, 1995

Ai Weiwei, Dropping a Han Dynasty Urn, 1995

Image::  http://www.sothebys.com/en/auctions/ecatalogue/lot.42.html/2016/contemporary-art-evening-auction-l16020

 

Is it destruction as it is done to make a series of photographs

Does this effect this in the same way? No?

Banksy destroyed with his own work, so is it a different ownership status

Did Ai Weiwei have ‘The Right’ to destroy the vase now

Some people wonder about if the authenticity to the vases

Is the effect of the date that it happened effect our opinions? E.G. the Banksy one is current and in the news? Also is it the reason why we have organised in the room now

All the works are influenced by our own ideas of value and our need to keep anything

How long is anything ‘Valid’ for? Is it an important thing? When was the last time we thought about Banksy

Everyone copies Ai Weiwei piece

Ai Weiwei, Han Dynasty Urn with Coca-cola, 1994

657A971B-7A09-4333-AAA7-4868855B147C.jpeg

Image::  http://www.sothebys.com/en/auctions/ecatalogue/lot.56.html/2014/contemporary-art-evening-auction-l14024

 

Manuel Salisburg, Fragments of History, 2012

CCTV of a man in a museum smashed one of Ai Weiwei’s work

Ai Weiwei, Coloured Vases, 2014

Man fined £10000 for the crime, however the work was valued at £1000000

Ai Weiwei, Dropping a Han Dynasty Urn, 1995 + Coloured Vases, 2007-2010

in Royal Academy

Is it auto-destructive because if the way the curated set-up

The guy who broke it was an irritated artist, and wanted more ‘Miami’

Based artist to be notified

One act of destruction can call up another one

A liberating idea comes with destruction

To destroy is refreshing

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.