Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 00:38:14 -0400
From: ostrow-AT-is2.nyu.edu (Ostrow/Kaneda)
Subject: Re: pop art paradigm


> If we accept that pop art was a separate paradigm from modernism and
>"post-modernism" >then within that paradigm graphitti art is the logical
>closure of it, much as minimalism was
>the logical closure of late modernism.

 I'm not quite sure what you mean by Pop[ art's paradigm, I can't quite
imagine pop art as a system of thought or cultural production, rather than
a tendency that emerges at best as the interface between modernism and
"post-modernism" (your quotation marks) As to Graffiti, why isn't this just
a pop derived style rather than its closure. Beyond this your reference to
pop art  implies that it is limited to  the US brand ignoring iPop's
origins in England and France. Both English Pop and French Nouveau Realism
pre-date the US brand by at least five years.I'm also not quite sure how
you see minimalism as the closure of 'modernism' (my quotation marks)
rather than it being a product of it. If  modernism has a closure it would
be in conceptual art and post-minimalism, to movements that challenged the
paradigm.


>What is striking to me about this is that it explains to me why I've not
>been all that  struck by much of the appropriation of recent years. Is
>that it relies on this "pop art paradigm."

In other words you don't like pop art and because you don't like pop art
you don't respond to work that deals with appropriation, the logic of this
does not seem to stem from your notions of closure, the role that  Graffiti
Art plays nor the idea that pop constitutes a cultural and social
philosophy.

>
>-- Michael Betancourt           (artist / videofilm maker)
>           E-mail:      mwb2-AT-mosquito.com
>Index to Web Sites:     http://www.mosquito.com/~mwb2
>
>"Syntax refers to monies collected from sinners."
>
>
>
>     --- from list avant-garde-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---




     --- from list avant-garde-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---