"Dumb art" criticism in the 1990s (notice n° 524520)

détails MARC
000 -LEADER
fixed length control field 02043cam a2200157 4500500
005 - DATE AND TIME OF LATEST TRANSACTION
control field 20250121101409.0
041 ## - LANGUAGE CODE
Language code of text/sound track or separate title fre
042 ## - AUTHENTICATION CODE
Authentication code dc
100 10 - MAIN ENTRY--PERSONAL NAME
Personal name Labar, Morgan
Relator term author
245 00 - TITLE STATEMENT
Title "Dumb art" criticism in the 1990s
260 ## - PUBLICATION, DISTRIBUTION, ETC.
Date of publication, distribution, etc. 2021.<br/>
500 ## - GENERAL NOTE
General note 33
520 ## - SUMMARY, ETC.
Summary, etc. In the second half of the 1980s, the aesthetics of dumbness (bêtise) reached the general field of cultural production. From 1994 to 1998, a few young art critics tackled the phenomenon and tried to theorize it. They did so in the most widely read magazines at the time: Flash Art International, Artpress, and Frieze. The corpus of this paper (articles by art critics Joshua Decter, Éric Troncy, Jon Savage, Andrew Hultkrans, and Jean-Yves-Jouannais) testifies both to ongoing changes in art criticism itself and in the way critics looked at "dumb art." It appears that art criticism converted to cultural criticism: critics paid little attention to artworks, reducing them to the status of illustrations and visual arguments. By contrast, popular media culture, including the most regressive of it, came under close scrutiny in contemporary art magazines. Beavis & Butt-Head, Melrose Place, and Baywatch were quite thoroughly investigated in the columns of Artforum and Flash Art. Quite surprisingly, works of art labeled as “contemporary art” received little analysis, while television soap operas and cartoons led to the most stimulating thoughts, using the paradigm of meta-criticality dear to modernism. These magazines thus gave the most regressive pieces the status of specular images, both deceitful and critical, of the very culture of stupidity from which they were born. Then comes the following paradox: art criticism in the 1990s, alternatively over-enthusiastic and plaintive, intellectualized the most radical anti-intellectualism.
786 0# - DATA SOURCE ENTRY
Note Nouvelle revue d’esthétique | o 27 | 1 | 2021-06-07 | p. 39-48 | 2264-2595
856 41 - ELECTRONIC LOCATION AND ACCESS
Uniform Resource Identifier <a href="https://shs.cairn.info/journal-nouvelle-revue-d-esthetique-2021-1-page-39?lang=en&redirect-ssocas=7080">https://shs.cairn.info/journal-nouvelle-revue-d-esthetique-2021-1-page-39?lang=en&redirect-ssocas=7080</a>

Pas d'exemplaire disponible.

PLUDOC

PLUDOC est la plateforme unique et centralisée de gestion des bibliothèques physiques et numériques de Guinée administré par le CEDUST. Elle est la plus grande base de données de ressources documentaires pour les Étudiants, Enseignants chercheurs et Chercheurs de Guinée.

Adresse

627 919 101/664 919 101

25 boulevard du commerce
Kaloum, Conakry, Guinée

Réseaux sociaux

Powered by Netsen Group @ 2025