haha ok
why is it specifically a first world problem? what about the rest of the world? I’m telling you now, the rest of the world does have artists and art critics and art aficionados who also engage in pretentious introspective wankery about art. Just sayin.
Chicanery: re: my post as: Reblogged as link: image of gory flesh chair
Why is it a first world problem that a piece of art startled me? I was taking notice of the relative mildness of this as a problem. I’ve got food / shelter / water / a job / healthcare and so anything else is in the realm of luxuries. It’s a luxury to be spending time thinking about art. I was simply calling that out, because I feel like it’s an important thing to frame in an esoteric conversation as wide angle context. Re: the rest of the world’s artist and art critics, of course — but again, sitting around and fretting about how unnerving a piece of art was is a rather frivolous thing.
Perhaps it’s an unnecessary addition? Rather like the “Feminine Disclaimer” - a phrase I was introduced to in college relating to the frequency with which female students start a really smart comment with “I know this is probably stupid but…” or other similar disclaimers that only showcase their poor self esteem and serve as a self-fulfilling prophecy, possibly even impacting how the listener hears what they say. Maybe that’s the same impulse that I had in framing the conversation about art as First World.
I guess what I was trying to say is that there are a lot of very real things to be afraid of and a provocative chair is not one of them. It’s certainly doing something if we’re still talking about it. And I always am happy to take part in dialogue. Especially one where issues are tackled head on vs calling me a pretentious introspective wanker. And come to think of it, isn’t having a problem with my first world problems rather first world of you also? ;)
(Source: hinternetz)
