Sagmeister Walsh
Out of context: Reply #69
- Started
- Last post
- 171 Responses
- colin_s0
i don't really know the history of walsh, but i did like sagmeister for a while. whatever.
granted this is my political side just getting into design again but it seems like the growing movement of design as art - and this rebrand launch is certainly a push in that direction - is a continuing trend of corporate sponsored creativity where, eventually, this shit will get into a museum because of "cultural impact" when really it's a goddamn promotional shoot for a logo (speaking of the ampersand).
the thing is it isn't bad, but when the entire endeavor is to focus on corporate clientele, the idea that you're anything other than a whore is kind of laughable. the sheen and makeup routine isn't anything new, agencies have done this in different capacities for years. it's kind of interesting she's using the whole nudity thing, but that's open for critique as well (i.e., is it a shield from criticism due to the nature of anti-feminist online troll types, etc.)
i dunno. it just bums me out this dumb shit is gonna end up in the moma someday. then again i'm in their collection too so there's no accounting for taste.
- Worst humble brag I have ever read. Jesus fucking christ.bumdrizzle
- You do realize that the Mona Lisa is just some rich guy's wife? You should study art history a bit more, most of the classics have a commercial genesis.zarkonite
- A lot of art is just networking. Lots of shitty abstract paintings or collages or sculptures made of trash make it in galleries.omahadesigns
- Most art is funded by other people and corporate installations have been there forever.omahadesigns
- Sounds pretentious to complain about a museum when they show such variety.omahadesigns
- If it's not corporate, there's no money.omahadesigns
- Maybe the MoMA doesn't matter then?ben_
- ^ that. Who says MoMA knows anything about taste?omahadesigns
- +1 colin_sfadein11