Com-Central.net

JG300-1Bullet

JG300-Stoopy

Oh, to be Pingping...

www.dailymotion.com/vi...t-legs_fun

JG300-Ascout

- JG300-Stoopy

Oh, to be Pingping...

www.dailymotion.com/vi...t-legs_fun

Tell me I did not see him licking his fingers at 0:39!

JG300-1Bullet

He definitely took a look up Rolling Eyes

JG300-1Bullet

JG300-Ascout

"But is it art?" department.....

The Museum of Modern Art (Yes, that MoMA) as acquired the @ symbol for it's collection (specifically, one like that by Ray Tomlinson. @. 1971. Here displayed in ITC American Typewriter Medium, the closest approximation to the character used by a Model 33 Teletype in the early 1970s)

You just cannot make $hit (or more specifically, prose) like this up:

MoMA’s Department of Architecture and Design has acquired the @ symbol into its collection. It is a momentous, elating acquisition that makes us all proud. But what does it mean, both in conceptual and in practical terms?

Contemporary art, architecture, and design can take on unexpected manifestations, from digital codes to Internet addresses and sets of instructions that can be transmitted only by the artist. The process by which such unconventional works are selected and acquired for our collection can take surprising turns as well, as can the mode in which they’re eventually appreciated by our audiences.

Tomlinson performed a powerful act of design that not only forever changed the @ sign’s significance and function, but which also has become an important part of our identity in relationship and communication with others. His (unintended) role as a designer must be acknowledged and celebrated by the one collection—MoMA’s—that has always celebrated elegance, economy, intellectual transparency, and a sense of the possible future directions that are embedded in the arts of our time, the essence of modern.

It goes on and on...for a very long time.

I have a broken keyboard, I'm thinking of prying the @ key off of it and framing it for over my fireplace.

www.moma.org/explore/i...2/at-moma/

What Have We Acquired?

'Tino Sehgal’s Kiss presents interesting affinities with @ in that it is mutable and open to interpretation (the different typefaces one can use) yet still remains the same in its essence: it does not declare itself a work of design, but rather reveals its design power through use; it is immaterial and synthetic, and therefore does not add unnecessary “weight” to the world.

A big difference between the two pieces is the price, which brings to an extreme the evanescent difference between art and design. Being in the public realm, @ is free. It might be the only truly free—albeit not the only priceless—object in our collection."

Just go to the link...preferably on an empty stomach. Wink

Com-Central.net

Select Language

Login

`±`Recent Visitors

`±`User Info-big

Com-Central.net

Select Language

Login

±Recent Visitors

±User Info-big

`±`Recent Visitors

`±`User Info-big