//> does destruction count as an art ./

[//>wagz./]

//> I cannot create so I must crush creations. Does it count as an art or jealousy?/

[katt_goddess]

Jealousy. <.< >.>

Personal opinion - destruction as art isn't really art, it's a visual result of a tantrum that, if it was done by a 2 year-old would result in punishment but somehow is considered an act of genius by a 20-something with a 2 year-olds haircut. 

I'm sure there are exceptions. I think there are installations in which technology has been pulled apart and carefully hung or resin'd in sequence to show where everything originally fit. Those can be interesting and took time to do. But most destruction art is just taking a hammer to something and screaming a lot. 

I tend to feel the same way about a lot of 'modern art' . It's less 'art' and more 'creative writing' . 

[Bouvre]

Depends on the context of the destruction. With things like mandalas, there is an element of impermanence. With Francis Alys performance piece "Sometimes Making Something Leads To Nothing," there is the act of making the film but also the act of destroying the large block of ice by pushing and kicking it around the city as it melts and chips. With Naomi Uman's "Removed," the destruction of pornographic images with things like bleach and nail polish remover is both a comment on the dehumanization of women in mainstream pornography, and a tongue-in-cheek use of common domestic cleaning products. Hollis Frampton's "Nostalgia" includes burning photographs, which requires the same process in making and displaying film: time and light, so to speak. A friend of mine once used M80s to contribute color to his work, by exploding acrylic paint tubes beneath the canvas. Erasure poems require blacking out text in order to create something new, often with a meaning that speaks as commentary on the text itself.

[Mini_ghost420]

destruction is a form of creation, so yes in my book

[SwimModSponges]

 

[//>wagz./]

On 8/14/2020 at 7:08 PM, katt_goddess said:

Jealousy. <.< >.>

Personal opinion - destruction as art isn't really art, it's a visual result of a tantrum that, if it was done by a 2 year-old would result in punishment but somehow is considered an act of genius by a 20-something with a 2 year-olds haircut. 

I'm sure there are exceptions. I think there are installations in which technology has been pulled apart and carefully hung or resin'd in sequence to show where everything originally fit. Those can be interesting and took time to do. But most destruction art is just taking a hammer to something and screaming a lot. 

I tend to feel the same way about a lot of 'modern art' . It's less 'art' and more 'creative writing' . 

//> I was red wine drunk but yeah I am jealous I cant create with my hands , modern art of things melted and wilted upset me due to simplicity in creating it ./

[//>wagz./]

20 hours ago, Bouvre said:

Depends on the context of the destruction. With things like mandalas, there is an element of impermanence. With Francis Alys performance piece "Sometimes Making Something Leads To Nothing," there is the act of making the film but also the act of destroying the large block of ice by pushing and kicking it around the city as it melts and chips. With Naomi Uman's "Removed," the destruction of pornographic images with things like bleach and nail polish remover is both a comment on the dehumanization of women in mainstream pornography, and a tongue-in-cheek use of common domestic cleaning products. Hollis Frampton's "Nostalgia" includes burning photographs, which requires the same process in making and displaying film: time and light, so to speak. A friend of mine once used M80s to contribute color to his work, by exploding acrylic paint tubes beneath the canvas. Erasure poems require blacking out text in order to create something new, often with a meaning that speaks as commentary on the text itself.

//> very informative thank you , for context wired videos os shit getting squished burned or shredded ./

[//>wagz./]

20 hours ago, Mini_ghost420 said:

destruction is a form of creation, so yes in my book

//> alright so if I cut a tree down , then Jack slash hack crack nash bash drown and whittle , it becomes a bird house . Does it not ?/

[Mini_ghost420]

Just now, //>wagz./ said:

//> alright so if I cut a tree down , then Jack slash hack crack nash bash drown and whittle , it becomes a bird house . Does it not ?/

exactly it's all tied together nicely, isn't it?

[//>wagz./]

18 hours ago, SwimModSponges said:

 

//> oh for god sakes , I'm mad it ripped ./

[//>wagz./]

Just now, Mini_ghost420 said:

exactly it's all tied together nicely, isn't it?

//> sickenly cyclical ,/

[Mini_ghost420]

3 minutes ago, //>wagz./ said:

//> sickenly cyclical ,/

everything is a big cycle. destruction and creation could not even exist without each other 

[//>wagz./]

10 minutes ago, Mini_ghost420 said:

everything is a big cycle. destruction and creation could not even exist without each other 

//> uuugggh existential crisis of art , I should just go join a demolition crew ./

[PhilosipherStoned]

It most definitely does why would you ask this. Skate and Destroy! I mean think of the good Lord Beerus.

and chug that beer!