||[Jan. 6th, 2006|05:15 pm]
Duchamp would have been proud, really.
I just like how it says he attacked it twice over the course of several years. That old guy really had something major against ol' "Fountain", eh?
"The urinal, considered a seminal piece to come from the early 19th-century Dada movement..."
So what is it? Seminal or urinal?
(I couldn't resist.)
Perhaps the man was confused, and meant to smash an arsenal.
Sign at a urinal:
"We aim to please. You aim too please."
The man is an iconoclast - iconoclasm is sometimes known as pedestal-smashing.
I know people have trouble with more conceptual art, but really, is violence necessary?
Unless it's the performance artist who does crazy shit like shoot himself, because then, yes it is necessary, but other than totally not necessary.
I just can't help thinking that this guy actually thinks he's doing right by the Dadaists. And I'm not sure he isn't...
True, but smashing a Duchamp that doesn't belong to you is just going about it half-assed. If he wants to do it legitimately he should have to buy his art materials like anyone else.