Jump to content


Photo

OWS occupies the art world


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 Rail Paul

Rail Paul

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 19,449 posts

Posted 21 October 2011 - 05:14 PM

Melinda Ryzik of the NY Times reports on an Occupy Wall Street protest at two museums, and how they will attempt to resist the control of art by "the 1%".

“It’s time now, in the movement, to look beyond Wall Street and notice that a culture of economic inequality flows to all parts of our city, and all parts of our culture,” Mr. Fischer said.



After reading from a text, which called museums a “pyramid scheme” in which “the wealthiest one hundredth of one percent claim ownership of culture,” the Occupy Museums group opened the floor to supporters to speak. One woman noted that the New Museum had recently collaborated with a group called WAGE – Working Artists and the Greater Economy – to take on the issue of artist compensation in an exhibit called “Free.” She wanted to acknowledge the museum for paying artists fairly for their work in it. But she added, “This should not be an exception, but rather a rule.” She called upon artists to be brave and stand up to gatekeeper cultural institutions. Together, she said, “we are stronger than the threat of obscurity.”

At MoMA, the protest had been cordoned off by police, but at the New Museum they were unencumbered. Three police officers casually watched the proceedings, leaning on their squad car. Museum-goers, too, seemed to take the spectacle in stride (though the protester in a gorilla mask, a woman who said she worked at an art museum, drew a few double-takes). Some passersby stopped to listen. “It makes sense,” one 60-something man, a neighborhood resident, said of the group’s comments, before heading on his way.


Wealth? Here in this gallery? I'm shocked

“Jazz musicians just get better and better as the years go by. I think chefs are the same way. You know who you are.”

 

...Jonathan Waxman


#2 TaliesinNYC

TaliesinNYC

    Advanced Member

  • Validating
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,290 posts

Posted 22 October 2011 - 06:50 PM

Melinda Ryzik of the NY Times reports on an Occupy Wall Street protest at two museums, and how they will attempt to resist the control of art by "the 1%".

“It’s time now, in the movement, to look beyond Wall Street and notice that a culture of economic inequality flows to all parts of our city, and all parts of our culture,” Mr. Fischer said.



After reading from a text, which called museums a “pyramid scheme” in which “the wealthiest one hundredth of one percent claim ownership of culture,” the Occupy Museums group opened the floor to supporters to speak. One woman noted that the New Museum had recently collaborated with a group called WAGE – Working Artists and the Greater Economy – to take on the issue of artist compensation in an exhibit called “Free.” She wanted to acknowledge the museum for paying artists fairly for their work in it. But she added, “This should not be an exception, but rather a rule.” She called upon artists to be brave and stand up to gatekeeper cultural institutions. Together, she said, “we are stronger than the threat of obscurity.”

At MoMA, the protest had been cordoned off by police, but at the New Museum they were unencumbered. Three police officers casually watched the proceedings, leaning on their squad car. Museum-goers, too, seemed to take the spectacle in stride (though the protester in a gorilla mask, a woman who said she worked at an art museum, drew a few double-takes). Some passersby stopped to listen. “It makes sense,” one 60-something man, a neighborhood resident, said of the group’s comments, before heading on his way.


Wealth? Here in this gallery? I'm shocked



I think we've seen the point where OWS went from "legitimate" to the extremist-leftist version of the Tea Party.

The problem with "isms" is that you're never too "ist" to satisfy the person next to you. They've lost this supporter.

#3 yvonne johnson

yvonne johnson

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 8,076 posts

Posted 22 October 2011 - 08:34 PM

I think we've seen the point where OWS went from "legitimate" to the extremist-leftist version of the Tea Party.

The problem with "isms" is that you're never too "ist" to satisfy the person next to you. They've lost this supporter.

I recommend the movie, The Art of the Steal. You might feel differently at the end of it.
IMDb
It was not a new dish, as I recognised my tooth marks. Wilfrid

#4 porkwah

porkwah

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,805 posts

Posted 22 October 2011 - 09:09 PM

elitism for the masses!

man, i need a headache


#5 Rail Paul

Rail Paul

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 19,449 posts

Posted 22 October 2011 - 10:15 PM

(snip)

I think we've seen the point where OWS went from "legitimate" to the extremist-leftist version of the Tea Party.

(snip)


NPR's weekend all things considered just discussed the notion that OWS is an "extreme leftist" version of the Tea Party. Apparently, that description is gaining some currency.

The piece started off with the view that the left expected major changes in the political process after 2008, and got nothing of consequence. A small minority of the left has formed OWS to seek radical change. The OWS view is that the quest for campaign money has corrupted everyone in the process, and corporate power / money has whored even good congress people. Unlike the Tea Party, the OWS people see government as part of the solution, but the system needs to be cleansed top to bottom.

Dodd-Frank was supposed to put controls on the system, but does little. Bailouts continue, bonuses grow larger, risks grow even greater. Nobody goes to jail for peddling of bad loans to people who couldn't afford them, nobody is going after bonuses paid to bank biggies, government regulators go to work for the companies they regulated up until a few minutes ago, etc

I'm probably one of the less liberal members of the site, and even I can see truth in a lot of what they're saying...

“Jazz musicians just get better and better as the years go by. I think chefs are the same way. You know who you are.”

 

...Jonathan Waxman


#6 Stone

Stone

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 14,996 posts

Posted 22 October 2011 - 10:19 PM

I knew it wouldn't be long until the hipsters would get tired of making coffee while their art sits in the corner of their Bushwick apartment.

#7 TaliesinNYC

TaliesinNYC

    Advanced Member

  • Validating
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,290 posts

Posted 22 October 2011 - 11:56 PM

(snip)

I think we've seen the point where OWS went from "legitimate" to the extremist-leftist version of the Tea Party.

(snip)


NPR's weekend all things considered just discussed the notion that OWS is an "extreme leftist" version of the Tea Party. Apparently, that description is gaining some currency.

The piece started off with the view that the left expected major changes in the political process after 2008, and got nothing of consequence. A small minority of the left has formed OWS to seek radical change. The OWS view is that the quest for campaign money has corrupted everyone in the process, and corporate power / money has whored even good congress people. Unlike the Tea Party, the OWS people see government as part of the solution, but the system needs to be cleansed top to bottom.

Dodd-Frank was supposed to put controls on the system, but does little. Bailouts continue, bonuses grow larger, risks grow even greater. Nobody goes to jail for peddling of bad loans to people who couldn't afford them, nobody is going after bonuses paid to bank biggies, government regulators go to work for the companies they regulated up until a few minutes ago, etc

I'm probably one of the less liberal members of the site, and even I can see truth in a lot of what they're saying...



I don't know, the answer to this is too obvious. Surely, I can't be the only one who sees it?

#8 mongo_jones

mongo_jones

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 21,822 posts

Posted 23 October 2011 - 05:06 AM

send me money?

my annoying opinions: whisky, food and occasional cultural commentary

 

 

current recipe: indian home cooking 7: chapatis and parathas

 

current restaurant review: back to bangkok thai deli

 

current whisky review: springbank 12 cask strength, batch 7

 

facts are meaningless. you could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true!
~homer simpson


 


#9 yvonne johnson

yvonne johnson

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 8,076 posts

Posted 23 October 2011 - 02:26 PM

Bruni weighs in on the odd relationship b/w OWS and celebs.
It was not a new dish, as I recognised my tooth marks. Wilfrid

#10 Orik

Orik

    Advanced Member

  • Technocrat
  • PipPipPip
  • 17,493 posts

Posted 23 October 2011 - 03:19 PM

(snip)

I think we've seen the point where OWS went from "legitimate" to the extremist-leftist version of the Tea Party.

(snip)


NPR's weekend all things considered just discussed the notion that OWS is an "extreme leftist" version of the Tea Party. Apparently, that description is gaining some currency.

The piece started off with the view that the left expected major changes in the political process after 2008, and got nothing of consequence. A small minority of the left has formed OWS to seek radical change. The OWS view is that the quest for campaign money has corrupted everyone in the process, and corporate power / money has whored even good congress people. Unlike the Tea Party, the OWS people see government as part of the solution, but the system needs to be cleansed top to bottom.

Dodd-Frank was supposed to put controls on the system, but does little. Bailouts continue, bonuses grow larger, risks grow even greater. Nobody goes to jail for peddling of bad loans to people who couldn't afford them, nobody is going after bonuses paid to bank biggies, government regulators go to work for the companies they regulated up until a few minutes ago, etc

I'm probably one of the less liberal members of the site, and even I can see truth in a lot of what they're saying...


This may seem like a surprising statement, but there's no causal relationship between wall street executive bonuses and the protests.

sandwiches that are large and filling and do not contain tuna or prawns


#11 Orik

Orik

    Advanced Member

  • Technocrat
  • PipPipPip
  • 17,493 posts

Posted 23 October 2011 - 03:28 PM

Bruni weighs in on the odd relationship b/w OWS and celebs.


Yes, it's all very complicated. Mostly the celebs are betting nothing will come out of it anyway (at least nothing that'll hurt them) and at least they get some brownie points by visiting with the cool kids.

sandwiches that are large and filling and do not contain tuna or prawns


#12 Rail Paul

Rail Paul

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 19,449 posts

Posted 23 October 2011 - 03:37 PM


(snip)

I think we've seen the point where OWS went from "legitimate" to the extremist-leftist version of the Tea Party.

(snip)


NPR's weekend all things considered just discussed the notion that OWS is an "extreme leftist" version of the Tea Party. Apparently, that description is gaining some currency.

The piece started off with the view that the left expected major changes in the political process after 2008, and got nothing of consequence. A small minority of the left has formed OWS to seek radical change. The OWS view is that the quest for campaign money has corrupted everyone in the process, and corporate power / money has whored even good congress people. Unlike the Tea Party, the OWS people see government as part of the solution, but the system needs to be cleansed top to bottom.

Dodd-Frank was supposed to put controls on the system, but does little. Bailouts continue, bonuses grow larger, risks grow even greater. Nobody goes to jail for peddling of bad loans to people who couldn't afford them, nobody is going after bonuses paid to bank biggies, government regulators go to work for the companies they regulated up until a few minutes ago, etc

I'm probably one of the less liberal members of the site, and even I can see truth in a lot of what they're saying...


This may seem like a surprising statement, but there's no causal relationship between wall street executive bonuses and the protests.


agreed. it is a convenient point of common agreement, from what I've read, though. There's some belief that at least some of the OWS folks are against wealth, regardless of who has it. That's why they occupied the art galleries, protested in front of Dimon's and Murdoch's homes, etc.

I'd be hesitant to express any unifying argument which would cover all of the folks in the Park, though.

“Jazz musicians just get better and better as the years go by. I think chefs are the same way. You know who you are.”

 

...Jonathan Waxman


#13 Orik

Orik

    Advanced Member

  • Technocrat
  • PipPipPip
  • 17,493 posts

Posted 23 October 2011 - 03:42 PM

Right, the communist idea is a leading one although most of this generation is both too afraid to say it and too uneducated to know what it means (this in turn leads to all kinds of confusing effects like End The Fed crazies teaming up with people supporting debt forgiveness for all). But no matter how you look at it, these are all coincidental - the supposed reasons behind the protests are different in each country, the size (and violence) of the protests is a function of the level of social solidarity, and eventually their primary impact is going to be electoral, which is fine. (and as AB pointed out elsewhere, less significant in the US because of your crazy system of non-representative democracy)

sandwiches that are large and filling and do not contain tuna or prawns