Crazy people in Italy make 200 foot pink bunny

I shit you not.

http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_1541732.html

 

Haha, they expect it to be there till 2025. I'm sure they'll enjoy the giant rotting rabbit on their hillside for the next couple of decades.

 

...

What was the point?

 

Its art, it doesn't have to have a point lol.


If I remember correctly, this type of art is conceptual art like what Christo & Jean Claude did February 2005 in Central Park with the Orange Safron gates.

 

I can't think of any polite way of saying what I was going to say, so don't take this too personally, madhatter.

It seems as though many people are confusing "art" with stupidity these days. I don't see how a huge pink rabbit symbolizes anything. A few people felt like making it, and all of a sudden it's "art."

As always, it comes down to opinion. This reminds me of when there was a five year old tossing paint on a canvas and was labeled a prodigy.

[/rant]

 

I didnt take it personally and I didnt mean to sound like I took it personal.

 

I know, I was just covering my own ass .

I'll leave this one alone, now. It was an interesting read, though. Thanks, Hawanja.

 

Well I like the idea...

...I mean it saves having to take the drugs to see a giant pink bunny

 

What a crazy idea Still at least it's something original As for it being art I think art is just a matter of opinion. Most art these days and so called modern art is shite to me.

Yakumo

 

20 Years? It looks like it is made of plush...this will be funny

 

Fucking Christo, that guy is such a goddamn joke. How in the hell is WRAPPING large structures in various material ART?

I remember sitting in art history class and being absolutely dumbfounded that this guy could possibly be an internationally recognized and respected artist - we've fallen a long ways from the likes of DaVinci, Michelangelo, and (my personal favorite), Goya.

Looking back, I think it was this sort of pretentious bullshit that made me get the hell out of the art department and turn to English. If even the most ridiculous and mundane garbage can be defended by calling it 'art' and making the claim that all art is subjective, then modern art as a whole is a giant farce, like the emperor's new clothes.

...

That bunny is pretty damned cool, though. I can't call it art, but I can't deny the strange compulsion to climb up and sit on its head, either.

 

Seconded.

 

If you call this art, everyone will laugh at you. if you don't call this art, they'll say you're not open minded enough to understand.


This is a creation coming from the mind, but creation doesn't necesary mean ''art''.

still like the strange idea though. 2 months is funny, But 20 years? I'd like to see what kind of strange insects you'll see in this thing after 20 years.

 

I feel the same way sometimes about that particular project he did to the Reichstag. However, I found the safron gates in Central park he did February quite good because it was valentines and the contrast between orange and the gray of the bare trees and snow was just right. At that time I was dating this girl and it impressed her that I brought that up because orange was her favorite color . So, for that project he did, it was easier for people to figure out why he did it this time. It was great for guys trying to impress their girlfriends though lol.

I honestly think that the bunny is tacky, mainly because its pink, and because its a bunny. It would fit well when Easter comes next April, especially since they are catholic :smt043

 

Yeah, I give this thing one year, becasue the first time it rains there it's going to become a breeding ground of mosquitoes, rats, vermin, etc.

About art in general, it's true that it looks like "modern art" doesn't require the same level of skill to create, and there are some bullshit "artists" out there who just do any kind of rediculous crap and get respect for it. But I think it's just a different kind of skill that's being used, it's about using your imagination and doing something that's never been done before, expanding your viwer's horizions, etc.

So if you take Jackson Pollock, the guy in the 50's who just flung paint up on giant canvasas, and at first glance it just looks like a bunch of random specales in no particular order. But if you look closer you can see he made very detailed and intricate calistographic patterns and such and acutally put a lot of thought into each painting, which is hard to do as each of his paintings were like 30 feet large. So while I share the notion that it's not "fine art" that should be mentioned in the same breath with Leonardo DaVinci, it's still art and can be appreciated.

This bunny however seems more like some demented child's nightmare. If I was a kid and I saw a 200 foot pink rabbit splayed out on a hillside, like it just collasped from some kind of pink bunny drug overdose, that would scare the shit out of me. I'd have nightmares of this thing coming to life and destroying the city.

 

I would call it art, I really would, but art tends to be an expression of an idea, or feeling, or whatever that can't be expressed through another medium. All I get out of this piece (and by piece, I mean POS) is "We Italians Like Pink Bunnies" They could have said the same thing with a large banner.

All this is is just a publicity stunt.

 

Here's some "modern art" for you or better still "shite" but because I believe it's art then it IS art and you must recognize this I call it The Timid Tower


Yakumo

 

I'll buy that for $50

 

agree with you on there. Making Weird things that no one would ever think of, apart of you, can be considered as art to a degree. But sometimes it feels like the story of the King and the invisible clothes. Some Random guy do something completly random, and tells it's art, and everyone that think otherwise are stupid and not open-minded. Then other artists agree because they don't want to be called stupid or not-open minded. Same thing as the Story of the Invisible clothes.

 

Who cares whether something is or isn't art? That's just a word, and an empty one at that. Don't get distracted by it. Just because something is art, doesn't mean you have to like or repsect it, so the term really has no meaning. People on all sides of the issue try to give it some grand and elusive meaning and speak about it in hushed tones, but I don't think they know what they're talking about. I certainly don't.

The question that matters is "Do you like it?"

I don't like Yakumo's picture. It shows has semblence of composition or meaning, no matter how remote.

I don't like Willem de Kooning's paintings. They are horrid and make me think of nothing at all worthwhile.

I like this giant bunny. It makes me feel something that I can't quite put my finger on and that's a pleasant feeling.

I like Rez. Playing it allows me to totally leave the ordinary or even imaginary world behind and suspend everything.

Whether any of those things are art need never enter the discussion because it would only falsely confuse things.


...word is bondage...