The artist's joke

The artist's joke
By:Jennifer Higgie
Published on 2007-10-31 by The MIT Press

Ever since Freud's Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious appeared in 1905, humor both light and dark has frequently surfaced as a subversive, troubling, or liberating element in art. The Artist's Joke surveys the rich and diverse uses of humor by avant-garde and contemporary artists. The texts collected in this new reader from London's Whitechapel Gallery examine what Andre Breton called the |lightning bolt| of the unsettlingly comic, as seen in the anarchic wordplay of Duchamp, Picasso, the Dadaists, and Surrealists; Pop's fetish for kitsch and the comic strip; Bruce Nauman's sinister clowns and twisted puns; Richard Prince's joke paintings; art ambushed by feminist wit, from the Dadaism of Hannah Hoch in the 1920s to the politicized conceptualism of Jenny Holzer and Barbara Kruger in the 1980s; the serenely uncanny in Mike Kelley's installations and the risibly grotesque in Paul McCarthy's; and the strangely comic scenarios of artists as various as Maurizio Cattelan, Andrea Fraser, Raymond Pettibon, and David Shrigley. Artists' writings are accompanied and contextualized by the work of critics and thinkers including Freud, Bergson, Helene Cixous, Slavoj Zizek, Jorg Heiser, Jo Anna Isaak, and Ralph Rugoff. Artists Surveyed: Leonora Carrington, Maurizio Cattelan, Marcel Duchamp, Marlene Dumas, Fischli & Weiss, Andrea Fraser, Guerilla Girls, Hannah Hoch, Mike Kelley, Martin Kippenberger, Barbara Kruger, Sarah Lucas, Paul McCarthy, Bruce Nauman, Claes Oldenberg, Raymond Pettibon, Francis Picabia, Pablo Picasso, Richard Prince, Arnulf Rainer, Ad Reinhardt, Ed Ruscha, Carolee Schneemann, David Shrigley, Robert Smithson, Annikia Strom, Kara Walker, and Andy Warhol Writers: Hugo Ball, Henri Bergson, Andre Breton, Helene Cixous, Sigmund Freud, Jorg Heiser, Dave Hickey, Jo Anna Isaak, Ralph Rugoff, Peter Schjeldahl, Sheena Wagstaff, Hamza Walker, and Slavoj Zizek Copublished with Whitechapel Art Gallery, London

This Book was ranked at 8 by Google Books for keyword Arts.

Book ID of The artist's joke's Books is EI7uAAAAMAAJ, Book which was written byJennifer Higgiehave ETAG "9M8Lfdbz8qY"

Book which was published by The MIT Press since 2007-10-31 have ISBNs, ISBN 13 Code is 9780262582742 and ISBN 10 Code is 0262582740

Reading Mode in Text Status is false and Reading Mode in Image Status is false

Book which have "237 Pages" is Printed at BOOK under CategoryArt

This Book was rated by Raters and have average rate at ""

This eBook Maturity (Adult Book) status is NOT_MATURE

Book was written in en

eBook Version Availability Status at PDF is falseand in ePub is false

Book Preview

Do not you sort of loathe how we have entered the decadent period of Goodreads where perhaps fifty percent (or more) of the evaluations compiled by non-teenagers and non-romancers are now actually bare and unabashed in their variously effective attempts at being arch, wry, meta, parodic, confessional, and/or snarky? Do not you type of maple (secretly, in the marrow of one's gut's happy druthers) for the good ol'days of Goodreads (known then as GodFearingGoodlyReading.com) when all opinions were evenly plainspoke Do not you sort of loathe how we have joined the decadent stage of Goodreads when perhaps fifty per cent (or more) of the reviews compiled by non-teenagers and non-romancers are now actually naked and unabashed within their variously powerful efforts at being arc, wry, meta, parodic, confessional, and/or snarky? Do not you type of wood (secretly, in the marrow of your gut's merry druthers) for the great ol'days of Goodreads (known then as GodFearingGoodlyReading.com) when all evaluations were consistently plainspoken, merely practical, unpretentious, and -- most importantly else -- dull, boring, boring? Do not you type of loathe when people say'do not you believe in this way or feel like that'in an attempt to goad you equally psychologically and grammatically in to accepting together? In the words of ABBA: I do, I actually do, I do(, I really do, I do). Effectively, as the interwebs is just a earth where yesteryear stands shoulder-to-shoulder with today's (and with fetish porn), we are able to review the past in its inviolable presentness any time we wish. Or at least till this website finally tanks. Contemplate (won't you?) Matt Nieberle's overview of Macbeth in their entirety. I've destined it with much rope and dragged it here for the perusal. (Please recognize that many a sic are implied in the next reviews.) its really complicated and foolish! why cant we be examining like Romeo and Juliet?!?! at the least that guide is excellent! There you have it. Refreshingly, not a evaluation prepared in among the witch's voices or alluding to Hillary and Bill Clinton or discussing the reviewer's first period. Merely a primal scream unleashed into the dark wilderness of the cosmos.Yes, Mr. Nieberle is (probably) an adolescent, but I admire his power to strongarm the temptation to be clever or ironic. (Don't you?) He speaks the native language of the idk generation by having an economy and an understanding that renders his convictions all the more emphatic. Here's MICHAEL's review of the exact same play. You might'know'MICHAEL; he's the'Problems Architect'here at Goodreads. (A problematic title itself in that it implies that he designs problems... which might be the case, for many I know.) This book shouldn't be required reading... reading plays that you do not want to learn is awful. Reading a play kinda sucks in the first place, if it absolutely was meant to be read, then it would have been a novel, not a play. Along with that the teach had us students see the play aloud (on person for every character for a couple pages). None folks had see the play before. None people wanted to learn it (I made the mistake of taking the'easy'english class for 6 years). The teacher picked students that appeared to be they weren't paying attention. All this compounded to produce me pretty much hate reading classics for something such as 10 years (granted macbeth alone wasn't the problem). I also hate iambic pentameter. Pure activism there. STOP the mandatory reading of plays. It's wrong, morally and academically. And yes it can actually fuck up your GPA. There's no wasteful extravagance in this editorial... no fanfare, no fireworks, no linked photos of half-naked, oiled-up, big-bosomed starlets, no invented dialogues between the author and the review-writer. It's simple and memorable. Being required to see plays is wrong, and if you require anyone, under duress, to learn a play then you have sinned and will hell, in the event that you believe in hell. If not, you're likely to the DMV. I am also tired of whatever you smug spelling snobs. You damnable fascists with your new-fangled dictionaries and your fancy-schmancy spell check. Sometimes the passionate immediacy of a message overcomes its spelling limitations. Also, in this age whenever we are taught to respect each other's differences, it seems offensively egocentric and mean-spirited to anticipate others tokowtow on your petty linguistic rules. Inspired term will certainly free of charge on its own irrespective of how you might try to shackle it. That's a person's signal, Aubrey. In this view, the actual participate in Macbeth appeared to be a worste peice previously published by Shakespeare, this also is saying a lot taking into consideration in addition, i read through his Romeo plus Juliet. Ontop associated with it can be witout a doubt unbelievable piece, improbable heroes in addition to absolutly discusting list of ethics, Shakespeare publicly molds Female Macbeth because accurate vilian while in the play. Looking at she's mearly your speech inside the back circular as well as Macbeth themself is usually truely choosing the actual repulsive crimes, as well as tough as well as deception, I can't realize why it is so uncomplicated to believe of which Macbeth would likely be willing to complete good rather then unpleasant but only if the girl were more possitive. I really believe that engage in is usually uterally unrealistic. Yet the following is definitely the actual ne additionally especially regarding traditional e book reviewing. While succinct in addition to with no drawing attention trend so that you can coyness or perhaps cuteness, Jo's examine alludes to the anger thus unique it is inexpressible. One particular imagines a number of Signet Traditional Models compromised to be able to sections by using pruning shears throughout Jo's vicinity. I dispise this kind of play. A case in point of which I won't sometimes supply you with any analogies or similes concerning how much I actually not like it. An incrementally snarkier variety might have explained anything like...'I personally don't like the following engage in as being a simile I can't arise with.' Definitely not Jo. The woman echoes a new natural, undecorated truth of the matter unsuitable with regard to figurative language. Plus there's certainly no problem along with that. When in an incredible while, when you're getting neck-deep around dandified pomo hijinks, it is a great wallow inside the hog dog pen you will be itchin'for. Appreciate it, Jo. Everyone loves mom and her in vain gripping in similes that are unable to method the actual bilious hatred in your heart. You happen to be quarry, plus We're yours. Figuratively speaking, involving course. And now this is this critique: Macbeth through Bill Shakespeare is a good literary operate inside the British terminology, plus anybody who disagrees is an asshole and a dumbhead.