New Plasticpills Feature Video (Early Access)
Added 2024-02-28 04:21:39 +0000 UTCI think you'll see, I have been working on this one for a while. Not yet sure when it will go public but watch it here ad-free! Thanks for supporting my work, more to come!
Comments
Masterful contribution! I would be really interested in Pills opinion an Luhmann's perspective on art who thought of art as the medium that takes on the form as the difference of medium and form, that is, an artwork makes its medium visible which is somewhat close to Heidegger's earth/world distinction. For Luhmann a medium consists of loosely coupled elements while forms are rigidly coupled. We never perceive the medium (like we do not perceive the Heidegger's hammer). We can not hear the air (medium) only the tone (form). Furthermore, Luhmann defined medium relative, that is, a form can make up a "new" medium (e.g. tone becomes the medium of a melody) and to understand an artwork, i.e. to perceive the difference of medium and form one has to have some knowledge. For Luhmann, the difference is constructed by the observer. Furthermore, second-oder observation is important, especially for something like John Cage's work of 4'33. The observer of the artwork knows that the artists knows that his/her artwork will be observed and the observer also observes others that observe the artwork, i.e. art critics. Furthermore, the observer knows that the artist knows that the artwork is observed. Why is Warhol's works art? Luhmann would say: because of second-order observation or the observation of the system of art. Similar to Heidegger, Luhmann thought that we make sense of artworks and construct their internal logic and open a new world that is different to "reality" (not sure what world is opening up looking at a Warhol work).
Dalia
2024-03-07 23:46:38 +0000 UTCWhere does an interpreter fit into art? This is my crude way of seeing. it. Interpreters have always played a pivotal role in describing history, religion and art. Simply fulfilling with different functions in a society, solidifying a mass. Letting people know that the people in charge know their shit. Even the unfinished mysteries of the world become the part of a whole. Clearly, that has transitioned to an era of mobile signifiers for mass consumption. The consumer mass lacks any practical experience around its surroundings, thus leaving the stratosphere delving into the hyperreal. Now everything can mean anything depending on the association. A lays packet opened by George Clooney becomes the divine, because the association says so. Art interpreters and critics need a place of security. And that place is a void. Around it orbits the empty signifiers, some psychoanalytic jargons here and there. Even some philosophical terms. The better the orbits, the better the pricing and pay. You are asking the wrong question. Are they seeing the same thing I am seeing? That simply does not matter. Only the orbits matter. Even Warhol was playing a fool's game. He wanted to become famous but claim that his paintings were empty of meaning. Because his pieces took a life of its own. PS: The critic saying, "I dont know who is the expert who can explain" was damn funny.
TheUltimateBird
2024-03-04 21:17:33 +0000 UTCAnother masterpiece Pils. V.J. Solanas was a Baudrillardian terrorist before Baudrillard. She did believe in meaning, however, and she shot warhol cause he didn’t …. and was gonna be the end of art. True as u point out he was the final nail in the coffin. Also, she shot him, not only as ppl say bc he was a man, but coz of his laziness. He didnt believe in ‘work’ or labor, and she really did. Especially in the value of her own work and labor. He was the VOID of art and the void of the proletariat. He stole every idea outright in a kind of radical passivity, laziness, nothingness that had no political aim at all. He always loved business and capital and always said so. He wanted to be a successful commercial artist (window dresser for Barney’s) and a Hollywood celebrity, but lacked the talent and looks. On this level he is interesting as a person. True he wrote it & said it out loud all the time as you point out, but no one believed him. except Solanas. Solanas though, as someone experiencing psychosis, for her ‘meaning’ is something v different from the average neurotic. ( ask Schreiber) . Most specifically she shot him on that day coz she was desperately broke and needed money for her play which was in his possession but he said he had lost it, and she got paranoid and thought he was stealing her work, and wouldn’t credit her or pay her for it. He was a cheap guy for someone who only believed in the pure circulation and accumulation of money. He didn’t even really press charges. He didn’t even take it that personally, bc he didn’t believe in his being a ‘person.’ haha. I think the whole Solanas-Warhol connection is such an interesting moment in the historical arc of revolution to consumer capitalism. Like Warhol, money itself is an empty screen where u project any value u believe in. But it is fact that Warhol always said he was a void, a pure cipher. Empty,nothing, a surface for projection: a Capitalist Buddhist monk. I liked the photo moment of Schopenhauer. But no one belived that, they needed to believe something else. Just goes to show how hard it is to produce nothing. How hard it is to think of the ‘Subject’ as a cipher, a nothing. How hard it is for people to accept that there’s nothing rather than something, no secret, no meaning behind anything best attested to in consumer capitalism. But Warhol was fine with that, he wasn’t critiquing it. He was the master of being nothing. But that’s also the rub, capitalism has to keep the faith in its meaning, in belief, or the wheel of $ would come to a stop. The logical conclusion of the exposure Warhol gives to the void would , if grasped, be the end of market economy.
Zachary Manenti
2024-03-03 16:33:10 +0000 UTCThey added Freddy Got Fingered to The Criterion Collection
Joey McAuley
2024-03-02 16:42:25 +0000 UTCNo it was cause he was a man and a "great artist" presumably
Ashley H
2024-03-02 00:39:52 +0000 UTCI want the mock documentary where pills gets his friends to play experts commenting on his life work 💀
Jack
2024-02-29 22:47:23 +0000 UTCShe should have taken some real gun training. And stop the damage
TheUltimateBird
2024-02-29 19:42:33 +0000 UTCWas that a performance art piece?
Brian Staker
2024-02-29 19:32:43 +0000 UTCThe claim of being a leftist without any discussion about the genocide of Palestinians is disappointing
Muhammad Khan
2024-02-29 04:27:57 +0000 UTCWhat if there is still a secret but it is not given by art school/critics but it’s one we each need to work for our selves? I don’t know shit about “art” but things do move me in ways that at least feel deep and meaningful. Why not start there? I’m not a huge Jonathan Franzen fan but one thing he wrote has stuck with me - "Expecting a novel to bear the weight of our whole disturbed society - to help solve our contemporary problems - seems to me a peculiarly American delusion. To write sentences of such authenticity that refuge can be taken in them: isn't this enough? Isn't it a lot?" Something about that feels right to me. Either way, another great video!
Timothy Kenner
2024-02-29 03:20:43 +0000 UTCThis death of the idea of art as meaningful can also be seen in the fact that even artists who are passionate about what they do, or how they do it, or even about the idea that art IS meaningful no longer bother with manifestos. Can anyone really argue for the value of art in the way that the Futurists or the Dadaists did? Or even watered down version of the Surrealists? By the time Warhol was Warhol, we had seen that all those manifestos and all those promises of an artistic avant-garde actually doing something were, ultimately, empty words. Beautiful and madcap and ridiculous and entertaining and challenging words, perhaps, but nothing to be taken seriously or seen as efficacious.
Pria
2024-02-29 02:23:18 +0000 UTCValerie Solonas shot him for killing art
Ashley H
2024-02-28 21:23:01 +0000 UTCI wonder what works of art it would take to bring it back to life?
Alex B
2024-02-28 12:49:35 +0000 UTCTechnically, you could have procrastinated one more day since it is a leap year ;)
foo
2024-02-28 12:03:06 +0000 UTCLoved this one a lot! I low-key love Rothko and get a lot of side eyes when I say that. By chance have you read Morning Star: surrealism, marxism, anarchism, situationism, utopia by Michael Löwy?
DilloBear
2024-02-28 10:48:46 +0000 UTC
