NEWS: Nazis Vs. Art

I guess I'm curious what would make you feel that he's " pushing people and boundaries just for the sake of pushing boundaries " ?
Do you really think he has no thought or purpose behind his art other than to see how much he can enrage people ?
Hum.

The thing is, they're prints. Of photographs. Replacing them will cost $12. Even if I were to become an ignorant vandal, I think I'd destroy paintings or sculpture or something that couldn't be replaced at the mall.

The neo-Nazi vandalism was not "performance art" or "boundary pushing." People have destroyed art since the time of Attila the Hun; this is nothing new or progressive. More importantly, it isn't a form of artistic expression when people destroy the art of others. Nazi book-burnings, for instance, were not some sort of productive and radical literary criticism. Instead, they represented the destruction of a segment of European culture and civilization. While I don't like invoking Nazi-parallels, these assholes were neo-Nazis and we have to understand their act in the context of the Nazi attempts to destroy all "deviant" and "decadent" art and literature.

The vandals simply did not do this for artistic expression. They left leaflets that described their political vision (which did not allow room for "decadent culture").

By the way, an indie film/documentary called The Rape of Europa just came out about the Nazi destruction of European art and the attempt of curators, art historians, etc., to find and return all of the pieces stolen by the Nazis.

Yeah, and by that rationale, the individual who murdered Theo Van Gogh should also be applauded as a great "performance artist" and for "pushing the boundaries of art" too, right?

The vandals destroyed art and threatened peoples' lives. I don't see the "service" here. When we say that people are "pushing the boundaries" of art, we mean that later people can do more for expression. This event represents the exact opposite: people in Sweden may not be able to express themselves artistically in "decadent" ways without fear to themselves and their creations. Other controversial artists may avoid putting up exhibitions in the area as well, denying the local community access to the experience of other pieces. Of course, the event might not have an effect on the art community but if it does, I see more potential for harm than progress here.

What new avenues of artistic expression has this boundary pushing performance art offered us, pray tell?

KILROY WAS HERE.

actually, they're huge mural cibachrome prints
which is llike an opaque positive of slide film
it's a dying technique and a HUGE and expensive pain in the ass to do.
nothing else in the world looks like that,
and each print is a technical masterpiece.
and no two are exactly the same.
you don't run off to the ritz or wolf or rite aid and dash one off.
it's not a fucking epson print.
they're original works of art
were original works of art.

they cannot "be replaced"

sorry for my bad english, i ll try to explain what i feel about this !
i saw the video and i have read the article in NYT.
I saw Serrano's work in france, i like it !
and i am schoked by this kind of neo nazi, who acted against" degenerate art" !!!
i am art student in France, so i am one of that "degenerate student" !!

where we are going to !!
so why don't they crash Le Caravage (Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio ) paints too ?
Some paints by Le Caravage was made with prostitute to represent Virgin, or christian art...lol is it degenerate art !
there are a lot of example ! but no good reasons to crash them !

i am so sorry my english has limit, but i am very angry with that people

That was just how he was portrayed thus far in thread (or rather up until the point of my original comment), and in fact, others have told me otherwise, so my comments are pretty much meaningless. I was just thinking out loud. In that situation, and no other, would I think it's appropriate to do harm to one's artwork. At this point, well, not to be redundant, but my original comments are pretty much pointless...

See lithocarpus's comment....

That was stupid, vicious and unnecessary.

They leave those works of art alone because of a fundamental ignorance of the imagery used in the paintings. I'm sure if they actually knew that the prostitute was representing Mary, they'd be up in arms about that as well.

The bad thing about using violent tactics against art (other than the fact that it's just plain stupid) is that it wholly undermines your opinion or cause. Rational dialogue would have pushed their aims much further, but...neo-Nazis. Enough said. It's sort of like anti-abortion protesters bombing clinics and killing doctors. You can't win the public if you look more crazy than the people you're fighting.