The bullet is a fraud. It’s unfired.
I feel like a lot of people miss the meaning of this one.
A gunshot wound that creates a splatter of red liquid is very, very different in meaning from a splatter of ketchup. The comic is criticizing the type of person who criticizes art only based on the superficial similarity rather than the actual context and meaning represented by the artist’s choices.
Not every artistic choice has intrinsic meaning, and plenty of artists and art critics go too far in focusing on the “how” than the “what” in art, but I still think the “how” matters a lot.
I think maybe there’s more layers to it though, to me what stands out first about this is the perversity and wrongness of a bloodstain from a presumable homicide being framed and regarded as art at all.
If you remove the art from the context, would it still mean the same to you? There are tons of unknown artists whose portraits are in circulation and their buyers would have no idea what they went through when painting them. At that point the artwork would have to stand on its own and resonate with the buyer for it to be meaningful for them.
If you remove the art from the context, would it still mean the same to you?
Kinda depends on the artwork, right?
When you know that a Eric Clapton wrote “Tears in Heaven” for his dead 4-year-old son, it does hit different.
Picasso’s Guernica also carries a lot of meaning from its context, in its anti-war message. The symbolism in the painting itself can be debated, but the context of time and place (and the author’s chosen title) clearly conveys a message that war is horrible and that the specific bombing campaign on Guernica was cruel.
Filmmakers love long one-shot scenes not just because of the content itself, but also because of the technical feats required to actually make it.
The context can add quite a bit of meaning to art. It doesn’t always, and often isn’t intended to, but for a lot of artwork stripping away the context actually strips away some of the artistic value.
This is why I usually enjoy the book more if I know some context about a writer, even if my conclusions about how it influenced a book are entirely wrong. I think it’s better to know context for visual art, too, but indeed context is not a part of the artwork itself (although I believe not everyone thinks this way, and I don’t know if I agree with them or not in the end)
My butt hole can say the same thing.
Are … you ok?
Surprised you didn’t link this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcwfEMdV-aM
The hard part is scamming someone into exchanging money for it.
Yeah, always found that interesting, how a talent can play out in two ways:
- You get feedback from the outside that your talent is exceptional and you show it to everyone.
- Or you don’t get that feedback, you kind of just assume that everyone is as good as you are, and that your talent is not worth showing. By not showing it, you continue to not get feedback on it and may not realize for quite some time.
