It might be a little cold, but when I hear the "I could do that" argument I don't disagree, I just ask if they think they could get it in a museum after they made it. That's the impressive part to me, there's enough of a story around the work to merit a stay in a museum. But, I'm not an art guy.
I really agree with how the woman in the video described the creative and decision making process for art which is not about form, but instead requires a deeper understanding of circumstances and context in order to make sense. I'm not a huge modern art guy because I believe that if art fails to convey the artist's intention then it has failed in the goal of art, and I don't believe most modern art does that for the reasons in the video. Two clocks next to each other makes a lot of sense as a metaphor for love, but I don't think most people would understand that they will fall out of synch, or die. If they were in synch when viewed then they are in synch 'forever' to the viewer. If they had changed then the viewer doesn't know they were in synch. The context is missing. If they were dead when viewed then you don't think of them as alive, and worse if they weren't in synch when they died (though that message is beautiful). That context is completely necessary and not possible for most, but when viewed within that context through someone explaining it to you it makes a lot more sense and becomes something greater. Modern art does not come with an interpreter, but needs one, or someone extremely dedicated to the puzzle, to shine brightest.
Another aspect is: the medium itself is not so easy. Permanent vs temporary, to use a gloss finish or not, what type of brush to use, what type of paint, acrylic resin?, gold leaf?, what works with what, what causes art to crack and yellow, how do you frame canvas, how long does it take to dry, how do you put layer on top of layer without it getting muddy, and so forth. Looking at one of those stupidly simplistic paintings hanging in a modern art museum, part of me is saddened by the current state of modern art (so much focus on controversy, little focus on actual skill), but looking at the painting, sculpture, mixed media piece, what have you, I recognize the craftsmanship and technical skill.
Your analysis is vastly closer to the truth than the video's. That pile of candy? Yeah. Sold for $750k, if I recall correctly. About 10 years after Torres died. So who's the artist? 'cuz Torres didn't make the candy, wrap the candy or pile the candy, and he sure didn't sell the candy. So what aspect of that is the part that ended up in a gallery? But that doesn't fit in a jump-cutty little video.
Yeah, when she was talking about the "deskillinization" of art all I could think about is the fact that these people don't have less skills, they have different skill. Technical skill might not be huge, but social skill seems to be much bigger. It's an interesting little dynamic.
From the video: So it looks like you guys agree :) I liked this video because it gave many different reasons to dismiss comments like " I could have done that". Some reasons I agree with, other not really but it gives a bunch to think about I find.It's not that these things don't take skill, it's just that they take different kinds of skill
Yeah, I actually don't agree at all. Torres's shit was deliberately skill-free. Mondrian's skill was entirely separate from what the video highlights - "look! He painted straight lines!" The video is pretty much a pat, self-assured straw-man argument wrapped up in cheerful "look, youtubers!" livery. The debate, if the other side is allowed to speak, goes like this: "I could have made that." "But you didn't!" "But I COULD have." "Are you sure? Straight lines are hard! Let's go shopping!" "Almost positive he used masks like everybody else. Wonder if there's any evidence of that on the Internet." "Artists use a different kind of skill! It's still skill!" "Show me the skill in putting two clocks on a wall." "Okay, why don't you put two clocks on a wall! Maybe you'll learn something about art!" "Yeah, I'll learn that a pair of walmart clocks won't get me into the MoMa." "You see? It's about context! Art is context!" "Torres did context like a madlib. Every work he did is about dying or aids. They're all called "untitled" (non sequitor)". I could point to two throw pillows on my couch and say it's about dying of AIDS and people would think I was crazy. Torres would do the same thing and the Saatchi brothers would buy it for $400k. The context is 'fuck you, I'm rich.'" "There, see? You learned something about art!" continues hating modern art because the apologizer doesn't understand it either