I think this art is bad and it makes me want to fart

Result #1

I think this art is bad and it makes me want to fart. It also, in the end, makes me glad to see his work.The only entry on display was a single black and white photograph of a broken window on the sidewalk. The story this had to be told. What does this tell us? A man (not the one in the street) is walking home on a gray morning? Is he in a hurry or a thinker? And if he is a thinker, whats his reaction to this window? To get to it, he walks past it and takes a second to look at the sidewalk. Is it good or bad? Bad or good? To get to the window, he walks around it and looks at the other man (whom he then turns around to look at the broken window). And the other man? To get to him, hes got two pairs of shoes. Is he the guy who broke the window? Good or bad? To get to the window, hes got the keys to a car. Is he the guy who got into the car? Good or bad? To get to the window, hes got his keys to a car. And hes got them. The car is parked outside. Is the man who broke the window a thief? Good or bad? To get to the window, hes got his keys to a car. Is hes the guy who got into the car? Good or bad? To get to the window, hes got his keys to a hotel room. Is hes the guy who got into the car? Good or bad? To get to the window, hes got his keys to a room. Is he the guy who got into the car? Good or bad? To get to the window, hes got his keys to a room. Is hes the guy who got into the car? Good or bad? To get to the window, hes got his keys to a room.

Result #2

I think this art is bad and it makes me want to fart all the time.There is a moment in The Rorschach Effect, for example, in which the upper half of the canvas is blacked out, and the lower half is colored. In fact, the black and the white make up the colors of the painting, and in fact the black serves as a kind of disassociative residue of the white, and so all the colors that are in the lower half are out of sync with the ones that are in the upper half. And so the painting is full of colors that dont mean anything; its no more than a stencil. And yet it is full of abstraction, which is something that a black and a white work are not. There is a structural aspect to the works, and a certain sense of their apparent structure as well as their structural relationship to the wall (their borders are high enough so that they are reflected from above and below). But the paintings arent real abstractions, and in fact they are reminiscent of the kind of anti-abstraction, either western or Eastern, done by, say, Mark Rothko. The intersection of black and white is made ambiguous, and its appearance is contested, even if its identification with white paint seems to be absolutely, tacitly conceded. In other words, the works are not really black-and-white abstractions at all; they are a combination of representations, even as they are divided into two parts and, while they remain in the same general field, are repeated, one above the other, and again inverted.This is what Diller is after: a sense of the actual incoherence of the one that is said to constitute the unity of the other. And there is an enormous, schematically complex, even brainy complexity of means by which the means are indeed divided.

Result #3

. But we all know that farting is bad. And finally, these paintings of horses and men, which were produced in the absence of Hopps, were no less original in the way they borrowed the traditions of the surreal and comic strip as well as of Cubism and painting. They were elegant and elegant. By contrast, the list of contemporary artists to whom they were attributed, with the exception of a few who have shown with real practitioners, is long and eclectic. One wonders if Hopps himself has ever had a show in which these things came together, or if they are part of his modus operandi. Either way, these paintings made a strong impression.

Result #4

. Do you really think I could have made that, in your opinion? Oh, and by the way, there was also the little thing of going to your gallery and finding all this crap . . . okay, ok, I see. And then there was the experience of being around this show (a feeling which is far more than anecdotal, in my opinion) and witnessing a glut of bullshit. Sometimes it felt like one of those office-lounge moments when youre talking about how much of your life you dont really know. A way to let us know youve been there. But it didnt make us feel that way any more than the women did. Ive never felt so unsafe at work or out of my mind. I mean, if we lived in a world where shit was treated as shitty art, then fuck you might get used to it.

Result #5

a lot, but it is just the best. As in case theory, it never is, but, like the previous two decades, this is an exhibition that allows the mind to roam freely, apparently without restraint. A concept of the work of art is here made to take on a different meaning and the artist is denied the freedom of choice.