Karl Waldmann's Collages
June 11, 2009 7:26 AM Subscribe
Great post. Thanks so much for making me aware of these.
posted by pasici at 8:10 AM on June 11, 2009
posted by pasici at 8:10 AM on June 11, 2009
Holy jesus. The pages keep on going! 1000 collages!
I am going home to tell my collaging boyfriend he's a total slacker.
posted by Juliet Banana at 10:56 AM on June 11, 2009
I am going home to tell my collaging boyfriend he's a total slacker.
posted by Juliet Banana at 10:56 AM on June 11, 2009
I worry that the museum will be attacked by a deconstructionist bearing a pair of dull scissors.
posted by wendell at 11:17 AM on June 11, 2009
posted by wendell at 11:17 AM on June 11, 2009
I like this statement from their Who We Are page:
It is "the true" questioning which is the essence of a scientific work, with the variation of all a priori and in particular accepting the idea that the History of the Art of the XX [20th century] is not foreclosed.
It reminds me of some questions posed by Colin Rowe. Paraphrasing:
Is it reasonable to recognize that the great revolutions in thought and the resultant visual discoveries from the opening years of the 20th century are in many senses still largely unexplained?
Rather than assume intrinsic change as the prerogative of every generation, is it more useful to recognize that certain changes are so enormous as to impose directives which cannot be resolved in any individual life?
Are the plastic and spatial inventions of the early 20th century as eloquent, flexible and robust now as they were, and if so, why is innovation overvalued at the expense of a more thorough exploration of these discoveries?
posted by xod at 12:13 PM on June 11, 2009
It is "the true" questioning which is the essence of a scientific work, with the variation of all a priori and in particular accepting the idea that the History of the Art of the XX [20th century] is not foreclosed.
It reminds me of some questions posed by Colin Rowe. Paraphrasing:
Is it reasonable to recognize that the great revolutions in thought and the resultant visual discoveries from the opening years of the 20th century are in many senses still largely unexplained?
Rather than assume intrinsic change as the prerogative of every generation, is it more useful to recognize that certain changes are so enormous as to impose directives which cannot be resolved in any individual life?
Are the plastic and spatial inventions of the early 20th century as eloquent, flexible and robust now as they were, and if so, why is innovation overvalued at the expense of a more thorough exploration of these discoveries?
posted by xod at 12:13 PM on June 11, 2009
Great stuff, reminds me a lot of Hannah Höch. Thanks!
posted by grapefruitmoon at 8:35 PM on June 11, 2009
posted by grapefruitmoon at 8:35 PM on June 11, 2009
« Older Strike a pose, Asian style! | "Hey. Whatever you just said was really stupid." Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by marginaliana at 7:51 AM on June 11, 2009