Comments on: The Collabo Show

By: 2020

2020 — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 04:18:13 +0000

and on and on but for the most part with no immediate understanding of the possibility of a threat to me (accept for Brandon’s bar).

By: 2020

2020 — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 04:11:26 +0000

Obviously hermeneutics should be addressed with the piece, the show, and with art in general. Are you talking about the idea that unpredictability is part of the piece? I appreciate the vocabulary being brought up but in a lot of ways this word is understood (even if unconsciously) while addressing all art. To put it in perspective, I didn’t attend the event but I did see the show the day before. When I saw the object/ramp, I immediately assumed that it implied a ramp, but was doubtful that it could possibly be used for that. The fact that it was used that way, speaks towards the fact that risk is a part of this piece and that risk is a part of the artist’s everyday recreational activities, they are comfortable with this. A ramp of any kind speaks towards risk, I suppose? An incline is symbolic, right? Starting from a low place and ending in a high one, right? And a high place is always a risk, physically because of gravity. But the idea of this impossible incline, that implied a ramp, that to me meant something different because of what it physically was, the implication of a practically unusable, eagle/flag ramp (sort of), was enough for me. It looked awesome and implied some possible deft defying event (that ended up happening.) I hope someone got an insurance plan for the show and I try not to think like that.

By: 2020

2020 — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 02:12:59 +0000

crap. I stepped in it. Now I have to read back.

By: Legit

Legit — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 01:02:24 +0000

Regarding your last paragraph, I wish to know what you think “the authentic, yet ever changing essence of Miami’s art community” is, as well as what exactly “Miami art can be”. Though you did mention both in your text, I feel that these ideas were not specifically addressed by your text.

By: Crasty

Crasty — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 10:25:02 +0000

In truth, immediately i didn’t understand the essence. But after re-reading all at once became clear.

By: david rohn

david rohn — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 13:58:32 +0000

oh well at least nobody can saythat Miami has lost it s energy, that it s artists make pretentious /ponderous minimalist conceptualist crap, ot that we re just all aboout money and art world glory- because there was none of that at this event.
There was plenty of raw energy,visceral involvement and communality.
I found it more real and more useful than basel Miami any day – and I congratulate at least a large part of our community for having survived being the place where Baasel is the biggest deal in town relatively virgo intacto.
Let s face it the worldliness of the ‘art-world’ (or art market now that those trms are more or less interchangeable) isn t necessarily the best thing for art.

By: swampthing

swampthing — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 04:31:47 +0000

people in plexyglass shacks shouldn’t read comic books

By: Richard Haden

Richard Haden — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 04:21:24 +0000

2020,

I originally used the BMX installation as the symbol for a hermeneutic interpretation. The track and the performance was significant in that the piece was based on direct or “factical” experience by both the viewers and the makers of the work. The piece succeeded in its redundancy…it spun the viewers and makers into a situation, that resonated with me a suspicion regarding whether the damn thing was safe (artisan capabilities) but I was not suspicious of the quality of direct experience. It displayed that with little doubt.

Below is a link to a short History of Hermeneutics:

The term hermeneutics covers both the first order art and the second order theory of understanding and interpretation of linguistic and non-linguistic expressions. As a theory of interpretation, the hermeneutic tradition stretches all the way back to ancient Greek philosophy. In the course of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, hermeneutics emerges as a crucial branch of Biblical studies. Later on, it comes to include the study of ancient and classic cultures.
With the emergence of German romanticism and idealism the status of hermeneutics changes. Hermeneutics turns philosophical. It is no longer conceived as a methodological or didactic aid for other disciplines, but turns to the conditions of possibility for symbolic communication as such. The question “How to read?” is replaced by the question, “How do we communicate at all?” Without such a shift, initiated by Friedrich Schleiermacher, Wilhelm Dilthey, and others, it is impossible to envisage the ontological turn in hermeneutics that, in the mid-1920s, was triggered by Martin Heidegger’s Sein und Zeit and carried on by his student Hans-Georg Gadamer. Now hermeneutics is not only about symbolic communication. Its area is even more fundamental: that of human life and existence as such. It is in this form, as an interrogation into the deepest conditions for symbolic interaction and culture in general, that hermeneutics has provided the critical horizon for many of the most intriguing discussions of contemporary philosophy, both within an Anglo-American context (Rorty, McDowell, Davidson) and within a more Continental discourse (Habermas, Apel, Ricoeur, and Derrida).

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hermeneutics/

By: 2020

2020 — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 02:14:54 +0000

Also, wasn’t the show about anonymity and having no strong representation of the individual, with no branding?

By: 2020

2020 — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 02:07:01 +0000

Doesn’t the idea of hermeneutics depend solely on the understanding of a structure that can be understood? The structure of this project is based solely on interaction between artists who by nature try to deviate from structure entirely. Isn’t this project strictly about their interactions, self satisfactorily avoiding any of the parameters that the art system (that they are forced to subject themselves to) requires of them? It is strictly about their collaboration.