Aguirre the zorn gottes

http://youtube.com/watch?v=nrP7g18OwcE
Tonite I watched Aguirre the wrath of god.
Be a man,even if your destiny is tragedy. Be a man.
The best scene: Aguirre is the only one who stands up on the boat,everyone else is starving,weary and having allucinations. He goes toward one one of his man,he grabs him and lift him up and goes back where he was.
Probably the best anti-hero of cinema

http://youtube.com/watch?v=lwZiBe8NRJw

chez meme

me as "the victim of the the small village"

EL angel exterminador

"Mais...mais.."
"No,vous ne pouvez pas"

Apatride

Toutes le conférences internationales qui ont essayé de définir un statut juridique des apatrides se sont soldées par un échec,parce qu'aucun accord ne saurait remplacer le territoire vers lequel un étranger,selon le foncionnement de la loi en vigueur,doit pouvoir être déporté(...) Puisq'il raprésentait l'anomalie pour laquelle la loi générale n'avait rien prévu,mieux valait pour lui qu'il devînt une anomalie pour laquelle la loiprévoyait quelque chose-un criminel.
H. Arendt

Why america_paul@hotmail.com?

Venetia,other than being my favourite city back in Italy,is my favourite stylist(she's much more than that...)You should read this little article i post on her,one other great thing that happened in fashion businness
http://news.independent.co.uk/people/profiles/article312634.ece
this is what she says at the end
"Still, while many in the industry would acknowledge her influence on their work, Scott is preparing to move on. "I think I've hawked the same old look for a long time now," she says, admitting to suffering from both denim and vintage fatigue. "Because of the mainstream, it shifts you out of what you love. Now I think I'm going to become extremely chic."
I don't understand why she can't be extremely chic and still go on with the same old style. Or being one and the other in different situations. It doesn't mean that if some Jack wears a vintage item,I shouldn't use wear it anymore. Off course you are supposed to go on,to evolve,but I don't think you should do that because the mainstream starts appreciating your stuff. off course it influences you. This is the never-ending circle of fashion,as Simmel wrote. Upper class starts moving on when lower classes start to "copy their style".
I think it shouldn't be the case for a "creator".For sure everyone should evolve but not in these terms.
Unless you have a very snobbish way to look at the world and this is more important to you than what you love. Then the work of Scott would loose strenght and wouldn't look the same for me .

Tonight I read an article by F. Jonquet,whose "conversations with Gilbert & George"(Phaidon) is a must, on Goldin's work. The critic points out the what differs her work from Arbus' s one. "There is no dread or distancing in her work,no hint of the human monstruosity that is Arbus's subtext".
I do think the distance between Arbus and the people she took pictures of ledead her to the ultimate gesture,sucide. Arbus either erased it or could not erase that distance. I don't think she did. But for sure she suffered because of that distance.
Goldin chosed to be "one of them" and we respect the choice she had the possibility to make. But if I were sure this choice was not aware,if I knew this heroism didn't hide the awarness of the "opposite solution",her work wouldn't be the same for me.
Arbus simply couldn't

Mullholland drive

AMERICA AMERICA

Today I read an essay on Ed Ruscha,one of my favourite artist. Funny thing,but sure comprehensible, Criqui reports someting that Ruscha said and that I underlined with red mark( things never to forget) on my copy of "Leave Any Information At The Signal". And it goes like...
..."There's a certain flavor of decadence that inspires me. And when I drive into some sort of industrial wasteland in America,with the theme parks and warehouses,there's something saying something to me. It's a mixture of those things that gives me some sense of reality and moves me along as an artist."

chez meme

la legge è uguale per tutti?

For a couple of weeks it'd be difficult for me to cheer you up with all the small things that make our lifes decent. I'm studying law applied to art wich basically means i have to learn by heart plenty of articles etc etc. This is the way it works back in my beloved country. They manage to turn a very appealing subject in some kind of nightmare.

e

Ho appena finito di leggere un articolo su "lampada annuale", un' opera di Alighiero e Boetti che mi è capitato di vedere qualche tempo fa al Palais de tokio. "Lampada annuale" consiste in un box nero con all'interno un bulbo elettrico che, l'artista ci assicura, si accendera' in un non precisato periodo,ma una volta all'anno, per undici secondi;
Cristophe Kihm espone chiaramente e efficacemente la sua lettura dell'opera,sottolineando tra le altre cose che questa produce una potenzialita' che "non puo',non deve essere dimostrata". Sono d'accordo,ma perche' non accennare nemmeno un'attimo allo shock,alla vertigine che provera' colui che sara' presente,a meno che cio' non avvenga nella notte,nel momento dell'accensione? Non e' l'aspetto piu' importante dell'opera? Sono d'accordo. In ogni caso è un momento dell'opera a cui il critico non accenna. Per il fruitore è legittimo diffidare dell'artista e in quel momento tutte le sue angosce,la sua vulnerabilita' di fronte a una tale opera verrebbero assopite. E poi,quando ci potremmo prendere ancora il lusso di emozionarci per una lampadina che si accende?
Consiglio vivamente di leggere il saggio,in francese e in inglse, su ARTPRESS2,TRIMESTREL N°5

POULE OU OEUF?

"Objet manufacturé promu a la dignité d'objet d'art par le choix de l'artiste"
C'est la definiton de ready-made donné par Andre Breton. Je toujours pensé que en realité un ready-made fusse an objet manufacturé promu a la dignité d'art par la presence d'un musée et donc d'un public et son "choque". Donc l'artiste et son choix sont moins important. Je sait qu'on peut continuer(voir le titre) ça est mon conclusion. Chacun réflechisse sur la question