School of Saatchi
- Started
- Last post
- 36 Responses
- Dancer0
Just watched ^^^^ 'The Mona Lisa Curse' by Robert Hughes on youtube - really interesting, Robert Huges is a very insightful and intelligent man. I do think he has become a little cynical in his old age but still a very worth while watch
- calculator0
I'm enjoying this programme in a way I didn't with the Stark show. It doesn't treat the viewer like an idiot for starters.
'Saatchi' Himself is irking me more and more. Are we, the plebeian TV viewing masses, not worthy to cast our eyes upon him? Even Simon Cowell isn't so far up himself.
- Doesn't help that he is being set up as some gatekeeper oracle enigma. Plays into his hands, distances the artgjd
- pillhead0
You cannot blame Saatchi for not wanting to be on TV , let face it, it's complete brain dead shit on a very good day, and repeats on it's best days. As for the show well it's the same format as the stark effort, I like the Ghost shed made out of scaffolding, nice idea that worked well in it's environment.
- pillhead0
Small world sometimes, I used to see Saatchi virtually ever month when I was racing Karts in my teen years at Buckmore Park. At the time I did not really know how important he was, but I was always impressed with the sponsorship he had on his Kart, now I know why.
- Dancer0
I only caught the final 10mins last nights. So is it worth watching it again?
- calculator0
Eugenie Scrase...
- BIGGESTDOGINTHEWORLD0
_
The guy with the glasses who did the ghost huts was an absolute bell end, really annoying that his idea wasn't half bad in the end was hoping it would be shit.
Girl who did the radar thing was hot though
- ckentish0
she's also trapped inside her own anus - i went to art school and there were always a few pretty, middle class girls flirting/shagging lecturers to get ahead... she changes her cothes every shot - too fashion conscious - good artists influence fashion and don't follow it. she just doesn't seem v.bright
- i'd like to be trapped in her anuscalculator
- ermcalculator
- Yeah, but is she a dirty.pillhead
- gjd0
Don't wanna troll, I already mentioned it, but if you're watching this Saatchi show you should see what Robert Hughes said about all this a few years back, his little TV magnum opus, brilliant ideas
- ok, thanks troll, i'll check it out, as will everyone now you've posted it twicecalculator
- Yeah man, your precious thread, such a shamegjd
- yeah,my precious thread, i worked so hard on it.calculator
- calculator0
- This guy was a real dick last night.calculator
- umm yeah he's been a dick throughout. Would have suited a punch on the nose from a couple of the others.raskolnikov
- WITH a couple of the others...babaganush
- raskolnikov0
I'm very much keen on 'modern' art, call it what you will, but this show and these artists fail, for me, because they produce nothing with any personality. Nothing has any meaning. There is literally no social commentary or narrative to glean from any of their superficial assemblages.
And look what 'won', the dizziest of them all, all because she happened to find a tree trunk smashed on top of a fence. Now don't get me wrong I thought it looked great, but it was a pure accident.
This is pub art, 'fun' ideas that 'become art' merely because someone has made them and put them in a space on a show. Saatchi has become Midas and to me is irresponsible with the power his money has brought. Careers are made and lost because he says so, should he buy a piece from a young artist they are immediately 'sought after' and the market is made. Midas goes on perpetuating the worth of the unworthy. Ultimately, you have to look at this show in it's correct context; it is a 'reality' TV show. A 'reality' that bears no relation to actual reality but a reality born through the eyes of TV producers needing to gain reactions from the public. boxes needed to be checked, demographics covered, emotions stirred.
All in all it's exactly what you would expect from Saatchi; hype and advertising.
- jamble0
I always thought "modern art" was just something anyone could do but that the artists were just the ones who thought of palming it off as art rather than just random jibber jabber.
- u still think that after watching this ?WeLoveNoise
- WOT WOT ART WOT, fuck me the common man hath spoken, and what a resoundingly dull drone it was.raskolnikov
- ckentish0
jamble - very old and tired view... the ones who get to the top aint stupid trust me
- no shit, what a dull attitude for a so called 'creative'.raskolnikov
- yep - very stooopid comment. Bet he reads the daily mail as well.ckentish
- lukus_W0
If you have money buy art. Art generally increases in value - I reckon the investment is similar to reaching a save point in a video game. You raise your millions - invest it in the art world (which has become a financial token system) - your money is far safer than it would be if it was invested in the financial markets.
In this respect Sachi is a regulator and gatekeeper. His efforts are supported because he's effectively creating new capital by blessing new artists.
- there was a huge art market crash last year dude. no investment is safe or everyone would be rich.ckentish
- ckentish0
lukus - kind of agree but artists have always had patrons and the rich have always owned the 'best' art... so nothing new really. It was a very safe investment until last year when it started to behave like every other market, i.e. volatile and unstable... A lot of rich people sold their art last year to regain their losses from the financial crisis, hence reducing arts value. No market is safe shortterm, but property and art are safer bets over long periods of time.