I think an often problem with "shock art," is that if you don't find it shocking, it's hard to conceive of it as art.
Posted by Michael | Link to this comment | 06-13-04 5:04 PM
[redacted]
Posted by [redacted] | Link to this comment | 06-13-04 5:43 PM
sigh. so passe. i'm already too jaded.
Posted by Michael | Link to this comment | 06-13-04 7:42 PM
Hmmm. Depending on where the film was made, it might just count as prostitution, not art... The NYT article alludes to a hooker with a heart of gold - seems more like an arbitrageur with a heart of, er, something.
Posted by Larry B | Link to this comment | 06-13-04 11:27 PM
I think an often problem with "shock art," is that if you don't find it shocking, it's hard to conceive of it as art.
Posted by Michael | Link to this comment | 06-13-04 5:04 PM
[redacted]
Posted by [redacted] | Link to this comment | 06-13-04 5:43 PM
sigh. so passe. i'm already too jaded.
Posted by Michael | Link to this comment | 06-13-04 7:42 PM
Hmmm. Depending on where the film was made, it might just count as prostitution, not art...
The NYT article alludes to a hooker with a heart of gold - seems more like an arbitrageur with a heart of, er, something.
Posted by Larry B | Link to this comment | 06-13-04 11:27 PM