It's amazing what passes for "art" these days

[DontAskJusTckle]

This is so mind-numbingly stupid, there's no way to sugar-coat it, so I'll just get right to the point.

Observe a woman creating "art" by squeezing paint-filled eggs out of her vagina onto a canvas...

<object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value="//www.youtube.com/v/wKFZOIv5sS0?hl=en_US&version=3"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="//www.youtube.com/v/wKFZOIv5sS0?hl=en_US&version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

Check out the pretentious text that accompanies this video:

What the spectators are about to expect, is the compressed birth of a piece of art.
Slowly the egg leaves the natal canal of the artist and smashes on the canvas, red colour flows out. The next egg contains another colour and so bit by bit, accompanied only by loud "Plops", an abstract art work originates -- archaically, uncontrollably and intuitively. At the end of this almost meditative art birth performance the stained canvas is folded up, smoothed and unfolded to a symmetrically reflected picture, astonishingly coloured and full of strong because universal symbolism.

The "PlopEgg Painting" itself releases a loose chain of thoughts -- about the creation fear, the symbolic strength of the casual and the creative power of the femininity. A comparison to wild associations arises and by the intensity of the seen and experienced, one becomes clear: the art needs like so often the corporeity to be able to manifest itself.

Milo Moire's performances start with daydreaming, with (every)daily, personal physical experiences which condense by wild associations to an internal whole piece of art about to mature and enter the world. The corporeity becomes the need for her artistic expression to make the happened - also for the spectator - experienceable. Milo Moire describes her art, as an „art led by intuition. To create art, I use THE original source of the femininity -- my vagina".​

It truly takes all kinds to make a world.

 

[kopfhorer]

I read somewhere, years ago, about a guy who did paintings, and rather detailed ones at that, using a rubber-handled paintbrush - whose handle was stuck up his ass. He manipulated the brush by moving his hips. Someone reportedly commented "Boy, that asshole can really paint!"

 

[chicago]

lol you watched that video, shared it, and wrote all that up tho. Now probably an extra 100 or so people will be introduced to vag art.

 

[TTT for joy]

To me, most of creative works can be qualified as art, so sure this is art, but in no way a good art.... I may be biased though, because I find that way to paint to be disgusting. She has a nicely shaped belly though. I'd definitely tickle it. 😀
I don't however understand why so many artists that make the 'snob art' for galleries, instead of helping for example produce movies, animations, artworks (the "real" modern art to me) feel they have to do extreme and shocking things. It looks to me as if they were bored, or making pranks: like doing totally nonsensical stuff just to see if people buy it.

 

[milagros317]

I have no problem with this method of painting as long as:
1) It was done without any government=taxpayer's money being used to fund the creation of the painting.
2) It is coffered for sale to any private individual or institution that voluntarily wants to buy it, not bought with government=taxpayer's money.

Somehow, I feel that these are not the case.

 

[TTT for joy]

I agree, however I still find it disgusting, but hey if people want to pay for it, it's their loss. ^^

 

[C.A.B.]

Folks can only work with what they were gifted. And sometimes... its not that much.

On the bright side, at least there's no feces involved.

 

[DontAskJusTckle]

lol you watched that video, shared it, and wrote all that up tho.

LOL. "Wrote all that up?" I wrote four short sentences, chicago. The rest was achieved by a highly advanced method known by technologists as Copy and Paste.

Now probably an extra 100 or so people will be introduced to vag art.

Yeah, I confess that was my grand scheme. You busted me. Damn, and here I thought I was being subtle. 🙄

In case I wasn't clear, I'm not expressing pious indignation or trying to get this kind of thing banned. I'm not "offended" by it in the slightest. My purpose in posting this was simply as social commentary, and to share the amusement I experienced at the thought of people actually considering something like this as a bonafide form of art.

So yes, as crazy as it sounds, I fully intended for people to view the video. It's the kind of story that's somewhat difficult to believe (at least for me) without actually seeing it.

 

[GoodFella]

It's a nice excuse for a hot chick to get naked, and drums up business for the museum she was in front of.

What's wrong with this again?

 

[chicago]

LOL. "Wrote all that up?" I wrote four short sentences, chicago. The rest was achieved by a highly advanced method known by technologists as Copy and Paste.

Yeah, I confess that was my grand scheme. You busted me. Damn, and here I thought I was being subtle. 🙄

In case I wasn't clear, I'm not expressing pious indignation or trying to get this kind of thing banned. I'm not "offended" by it in the slightest. My purpose in posting this was simply as social commentary, and to share the amusement I experienced at the thought of people actually considering something like this as a bonafide form of art.

So yes, as crazy as it sounds, I fully intended for people to view the video. It's the kind of story that's somewhat difficult to believe (at least for me) without actually seeing it.

I just thought it was funny. You are right, it is definitely one of those wtf kind of things. I'm of the mindset that 'whatever floats your boat, more power to you,' but I'll stick to art that doesn't have anything at all possible to do with actual bodily fluids, functions, or parts.

 

[BBGuy5240]

It's certainly Different. Chances are you won't find me buying art made this way. But if people want to spend money on it, that's their Choice.

Has anyone here ever heard of Pricasso? The Man paints with his Penis.

Now like the "Vag Art", I don't see myself ever spending money on it. But in all seriousness, his artwork is pretty damn good.

 

[DontAskJusTckle]

It's a nice excuse for a hot chick to get naked, and drums up business for the museum she was in front of.

What's wrong with this again?

Calling it "art" is what I find wrong with this again. It's an insult to legitimate artists the world over.

I just thought it was funny. You are right, it is definitely one of those wtf kind of things. I'm of the mindset that 'whatever floats your boat, more power to you,' but I'll stick to art that doesn't have anything at all possible to do with actual bodily fluids, functions, or parts.

Same here.

Has anyone here ever heard of Pricasso? The Man paints with his Penis.

Now like the "Vag Art", I don't see myself ever spending money on it. But in all seriousness, his artwork is pretty damn good.

While I find using a penis in lieu of a brush to be more of a publicity stunt than anything else, if the final product has artistic qualities, it's still art in my opinion. Random paint "ploppings" don't qualify as anything I would consider to be even close to art.

 

[Hemmen]

It's a nice excuse for a hot chick to get naked, and drums up business for the museum she was in front of.

What's wrong with this again?

Yeah, getting naked seems to be a thing with this "artist." Apparently she once rode a train in the nude, with "SHIRT" written on her chest, "PANTS" on her legs, and so on.

 

[milagros317]

It's a nice excuse for a hot chick to get naked, and drums up business for the museum she was in front of.

What's wrong with this again?

Nothing is wrong with it, unless government=taxpayers' money went to pay for it.

 

[Cosmo_ac]

Personally, find the art disgusting, but that's me. The thing about art is that it is essential an expression, and can be really anything. Poetry, writing, drawing, and a million other things are simply a medium people use to express themselves, their views, their emotions, and anything else. On one hand, I'm not a big fan of how loose artistic expression can be, because sometimes it really boggles the mind, but on the other hand, that is pretty much what art is, and while a million people may just scratch their heads at something, one person may see something and be inspired or whatever. The only real rules when it comes to art are used for classification, and even then the rules are loose.

 

[chicago]

The argument over what counts as art is one that I'm sure has been argued since there were people carving stick figure horses into walls of caves. If it moves you or makes you feel something, it could be art. But its such an opinion thing that its almost futile to try to definitively say "this is / is not art". Im sure it could just be bad shock art.

 

[TTT for joy]

I have a very wide definition of art. To me art is any original creative work, that communicates with people through emotions. Which means that to me, pretty much anything can be art.

 

[Libertine]

My opinion on art of this nature (actually spelled with a capital "F") is that not only is the Emperor naked; he's also remarkably ill-endowed.

 

[DontAskJusTckle]

↑
Perfect description.

 

[Dussicar]

Vagina pop art is the only way to go.

If it's not paid for by the state, then it's kosher..Unless there are those who are..."squeamish" around vaginas. If it is funded by taxpayers money (because, let's face it, it could be used much better in the personal bank account of a CEO to sit and grow to make himself richer off interest payments from money he shouldn't have had in the first place) then I think we should put a stop to this!

Especially on behalf of those who are squeamish around vaginas!