Functionless art is tolerated vandalism, and we are the vandals....

wondered what you thought of the statement???

and, yes i know i stole the quote form type o'negative

i guess it depends on what function is. if it's just there to look pretty, is that functional? if it's there to give a tiny but barely noticable change in the interior, is that function?

What is so special in making functional things look better? I don't need any flowers printed on lavatory paper.

Sometimes art is it's own functions. A large number of Chinese resteraunts are red, because the colour tends to make people finish their meal and leave without dwadling.

Not only Chinese restaurants. McDonalds does the same thing: the colours make you feel more hungry.

I think that a very good application of functional art is in advertising. Some (but too few) commercials are well-done

If it has form it has function, I think -- the two are not really separable.

does functionaless art even exist? kind of a juxtaposition, or oxymoron, but definately contradictory.....

Microsoft Windows

some times the art is in the function. like an object that is revolutionary in the sense that it pares down to pure function is often very beautiful.

as for decorating function things: such as toilet paper. if it sells why not? hehe we now have toilet paper with puppies on them. yeah, i want to wipe my ass on puppies

it has a function, to bring bill gates lots of money! I don't see how are can be fucntionless...it's all someone expressing something...sometimes it's pleasant to look at, sometimes you have to wonder "what the hell were they doing? Either option has a function...can't something just be pretty to look at?

Art exists for the sake of art. you don't need an excuse to create something worthwhile. As far as the statement of it being tolerated vandalism. thats sounds more like a catch phrase then anything to be taken seriously. It's more of a play on words , it doesn't seem to have any real meaning.

yes, but hasn't the aesthetic value somehow lost its meaning when concerning art today......bob ross painted trees, some bum on a street took a shit on a canvas......which is more artistic?

Thats what i am saying does art have any real purpose or worth today? Art appears to be a piss take of what it once was, and not in a good way.

speak for yourself... Art is a reflection both on society and the directions it is taking... much like how the elderly think the youth is brazen and lazy, old schools of thinking dislike new schools...

Art can also be bullshit conjured up to make money.

hey, if it makes the buyer happy.

Then it's nothing more than a daub and kitch.

however, if i took a shit on a canvas and made it a smiley-face, now thats art!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think that's more on the Artist, then on Art as a concept. But whenever you look at generations past, you look at what's already been filtered. I'm sure there's plenty of shit Artists during the renassiance, or some other time period, they just weren't remembered.

Tintoretto(1518-1594) originally an apprentice to Titan, made beautifully composed paintings but the only emotional or authentic purpose for why he painted seemed to be to make money. He took figures from other paintings altered them so, and arranged them in whatever way.

The sad part is I dont believe he knew the difference between accomidating society (the only kitch art in my opinion)and creating authentic art. (but i guess nobody wants to be an unrecognized Van Gogh)

He was a master painter is our eyes, but he worked like a carpenter.