Guess the artist & thoughts on the piece/artist

Didn't that have something to do with Photographers & friends and AIDS? (or am I WAY off?)
 
way too esoteric for me and my software engineer brain... sorry
 
sshekels said:
Didn't that have something to do with Photographers & friends and AIDS? (or am I WAY off?)
Click to expand...

I don't know much about this work. The artist is very outspoken usually so It very well could be.

I took it more, on first sight, as phases of a normal day & all that is involved in being "Alive" Alive being the only word without an opposite represented.

The great thing about art it is is meant to make you think & 1 work can make one person reflect, another cry & another laugh.

---------------------------------------------------------------

Next work, Same artist

This one is closer to the most popular style of the artist.
 
Last edited:
Eamon said:
Starting with a lesser know piece.

Interpretation anyone?
Click to expand...

Don't know artist but interpretation is easy:

"You never can tell what they're thinkin' for sure."
 
Dave Krall CFII said:
Don't know artist but interpretation is easy:

"You never can tell what they're thinkin' for sure."
Click to expand...
Naw, that's not it. The CORRECT interpretation of the above is:
"Dude sure needs to lay off the drugs!"

(<-- begins a flame war over the right interpretation of art...)
 
Dave Krall CFII said:
Don't know artist but interpretation is easy:

"You never can tell what they're thinkin' for sure."
Click to expand...


That is a good one. Especially since it is a woman's hand :)

(Ducking from the wimin folk)








Third work.............................................................

Hint Hint : red & white text.
 
Ha! I got it! I know who it is... Interesting... Now I am MOST curious. The point of this is???? :)
 
As in the artists work.......... it is for introversion, rumination ,contemplation and mental stimulant,



--------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you didn't get it allready...............

3 more works

Hint : Billboard
 
Eamon said:
As in the artists work.......... it is for introversion, rumination ,contemplation and mental stimulant,



--------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you didn't get it allready...............

3 more works

Hint : Billboard
Click to expand...

Looks kinda Warholish:confused:
 
Henning said:
Looks kinda Warholish:confused:
Click to expand...
This Artist has been compared to Andy, Mostly because of the use of common objects adding a skillful twist, but is more more John Heartfield than Andy Warhol IMHO.

This artist illustrated a Stephen King book.

Also did music stage design for Rage Against the Machine's 1997 tour

Last 3---------------------------------------------------
 
Last edited:
Humm I guess not too many like art here? Or did I just pick a bad artist to start off with?

BIO,

http://www.pbs.org/art21/artists/kruger/

Some more works,

http://www.eng.fju.edu.tw/Literary_Criticism/feminism/kruger/kruger.htm

Barbara Kruger ............................................

In the 1980s and 1990s, with funding from art museums and foundations, Kruger applied a graphic format based on black and white photos and a consistent use of the Futura typeface to a series of outdoor projects aimed at car drivers, pedestrians and public transport users in locations such as New York, Minneapolis, London, Melbourne and Strasbourg. Kruger’s slogans had the simplicity, directness and impact of regular advertising copylines, but their messages were ambiguous and unsettling: “Surveillance is your busywork”, “We don’t need another hero”, “L’empathie peut changer le monde” (Empathy can change the world). Showing a perfect understanding of the medium, her work mimics and twists graphic conventions to produce images that are sufficiently “professional” in appearance to compete on equal terms with conventional advertising and even to overpower it when the two are seen side by side.

True Genuis, Great Artist.
 
Eamon said:
Humm I guess not too many like art here? Or did I just pick a bad artist to start off with?
Click to expand...
Art is a relative concept. I don't like the stuff you posted but that doesn't mean I don't like art....just not THAT kind of art.

I'm not into abstracts. Throw a pattern of paint on a canvas, add a catchy title and sign your name with flourish and you'll end up in a gallery with 'oohs' and 'aahs'. Sorry, I don't see the artistic contribution there. I see a bunch of paint that someone spilled or a guy that couldn't figure out how to hold a brush.
 
Brian Austin said:
Art is a relative concept. I don't like the stuff you posted but that doesn't mean I don't like art....just not THAT kind of art.

I'm not into abstracts. Throw a pattern of paint on a canvas, add a catchy title and sign your name with flourish and you'll end up in a gallery with 'oohs' and 'aahs'. Sorry, I don't see the artistic contribution there. I see a bunch of paint that someone spilled or a guy that couldn't figure out how to hold a brush.
Click to expand...

Actually most of these works were never meant to be in a gallery to get oohed & aahed at.

Most were hung on walls & buses to make people think about what they look at every day (Protest to mind control by corporations) & to make people think about many issues starting with women's rights & later right of choice with some other political issues thrown in also. Some were made into posters to be carried in protests.

I do agree with you on abstract art. I like to see some nice pictures or paintings when I go to a gallery unless there is Elephant Dung to look at. Sometime pretty isn't the point, thought is.
 
Eamon said:
Most were hung on walls & buses to make people think about what they look at every day (Protest to mind control by corporations) & to make people think about many issues starting with women's rights & later right of choice with some other political issues thrown in also. Some were made into posters to be carried in protests.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't "mind control" be relative here, too? "Mind control by corporations" and then "make people think..."?? Isn't making people think about certain subjects the definition of mind control? ;)
 
Brian Austin said:
Wouldn't "mind control" be relative here, too? "Mind control by corporations" and then "make people think..."?? Isn't making people think about certain subjects the definition of mind control? ;)
Click to expand...


LOL Yes, I guess you could take it that way. Just in case you are serious.........

In this instance the artist was protesting the way corperate america "makes" women wear makeup & high heels & being a twig by making all the advertments showing twigs dolled up (Early 80's Barbie doll stuff). This is a forced thought. Asking someone to take a min & reflect on something isn't mind control.
 
Eamon said:
LOL Yes, I guess you could take it that way. Just in case you are serious.........
Click to expand...
The 'winkie' denotes I'm playing with ya here. But if you're serious...

Eamon said:
In this instance the artist was protesting the way corperate america "makes" women wear makeup & high heels & being a twig by making all the advertments showing twigs dolled up (Early 80's Barbie doll stuff). This is a forced thought. Asking someone to take a min & reflect on something isn't mind control.
Click to expand...
Well, one could also take the argument that no one is "made" to do it but simply chooses to do so based on their own sense of self. It's not a forced thought so much as a strong suggestion...which is what advertising is all about, isn't it?
 
Eamon said:
LOL Yes, I guess you could take it that way. Just in case you are serious.........

In this instance the artist was protesting the way corperate america "makes" women wear makeup & high heels & being a twig by making all the advertments showing twigs dolled up (Early 80's Barbie doll stuff). This is a forced thought. Asking someone to take a min & reflect on something isn't mind control.
Click to expand...

"Makes" them? How so? They come kick down the doors of women who don't wear makeup and aren't stick thin?

You've met my wife, a big girl who doesn't wear makeup. Should we be expecting some sort of raid, or isn't it really a bit more accurate to say that particular artist doesn't like the choices some women make, and is trying to exercise mind control to "make" them comform to what she wants?
 
Joe Williams said:
"Makes" them? How so? They come kick down the doors of women who don't wear makeup and aren't stick thin?

You've met my wife, a big girl who doesn't wear makeup. Should we be expecting some sort of raid, or isn't it really a bit more accurate to say that particular artist doesn't like the choices some women make, and is trying to exercise mind control to "make" them comform to what she wants?
Click to expand...

might i be so bold as to ask what field your wife is in?

In some areas it is very difficult for a female to garner the respect she deserves without the heels, makeup and anorexic behaviour. No, no one forces it down the throat, but when the raises don't happen, the doors are slammed in one's face, and you can't get a seat on the subway because you're wearing jeans and your SO's T-shirt, well....

i've had, in the same 24 hr period, the same "gentleman" businessman treat me totally differently based on my outward appearance. Didn't recognize me as the same person. No matter what i was wearing, I was still the Pres of the company. Having to gussy myself up in order to garner respect... bah.

but then, it has to do with manners. there's a lot of ill-mannered people out there who only act well-bred when they think it might count for something... looking at who you might be if you are dressed like "someone" vs. who you probably aren't if you are dressed to be anonymous.
 
Joe Williams said:
"Makes" them? How so? They come kick down the doors of women who don't wear makeup and aren't stick thin?

You've met my wife, a big girl who doesn't wear makeup. Should we be expecting some sort of raid, or isn't it really a bit more accurate to say that particular artist doesn't like the choices some women make, and is trying to exercise mind control to "make" them comform to what she wants?
Click to expand...

It's all image, Joe. There are still a lot of folks in the business world that will disrespect women that are poorly dressed. The same way a man wearing a suit and tie creates a much different impression than torn blue jeans and a muscle shirt.

A lot of companies won't think of promoting a woman who doesn't dress well, and a lot of companies will give short shrift to sales women who are not tarted up. BTW, my experience has been that other women are bigger critics than men.

Your wife may not be in one of those places. Good for her. But in others, if a woman wants to get ahead, she needs to dress at least as well, if not better, than men.

I had to have my female office manager counsel another female employee once who repeatedly came to work in a braless halter top & cutoffs. We got complaints from other employees.
 
wsuffa said:
It's all image, Joe. There are still a lot of folks in the business world that will disrespect women that are poorly dressed. The same way a man wearing a suit and tie creates a much different impression than torn blue jeans and a muscle shirt.

A lot of companies won't think of promoting a woman who doesn't dress well, and a lot of companies will give short shrift to sales women who are not tarted up. BTW, my experience has been that other women are bigger critics than men.

Your wife may not be in one of those places. Good for her. But in others, if a woman wants to get ahead, she needs to dress at least as well, if not better, than men.

I had to have my female office manager counsel another female employee once who repeatedly came to work in a braless halter top & cutoffs. We got complaints from other employees.
Click to expand...

So? A poorly dressed man will fare as badly in the business environment as a poorly dressed woman.

I suppose I might be a little more sympathetic to the "Ohhhh pooor women can't get ahead" sentiment if I weren't working for a fairly large international company, with 3 layers of female supervision over me, and the head of every department I am trying to get into being female. Heck, maybe ya'll are right and I should try a dress and make-up.
 
Joe Williams said:
Heck, maybe ya'll are right and I should try a dress and make-up.
Click to expand...

you might look good in a kilt. If you go into TV work the makeup would be non-negotiable....

but i think you are missing the point....?
 
Brian Austin said:
The 'winkie' denotes I'm playing with ya here. But if you're serious...


Well, one could also take the argument that no one is "made" to do it but simply chooses to do so based on their own sense of self. It's not a forced thought so much as a strong suggestion...which is what advertising is all about, isn't it?
Click to expand...
Point #1

The reason all the girls are wearing g-strings now is because it is almost impossible to find nice pants that are not hip huggers. Bloomers hanging out of nice pants don't look too good so one must wear a g-string.

I would guess that it was not a woman that made the decision to bring the waist down so low on all the pants.

Point #2

M.Monroe would not look sexy with her big hips hanging out of hip huggers.

Point # 3

M.Monroe would not have been considered a sex symbol if she was a actress in the 80's It was not until J Lo with her big butt that bigger woman are accepted at all. If you look at Christy Ally, she is real nice looking, but kept from super stardom by her hips :)
 
Eamon said:
Point #1

The reason all the girls are wearing g-strings now is because it is almost impossible to find nice pants that are not hip huggers. Bloomers hanging out of nice pants don't look too good so one must wear a g-string.

I would guess that it was not a woman that made the decision to bring the waist down so low on all the pants.
Click to expand...
Uhm, my wife has yet to wear a g-string nor, I'm pretty sure, do any of our friends. The comfortable, fashionable clothes are there. Britney, Christina and whoever just aren't wearing them. That's not "make".

I have no idea who's decision it was. I do know that my wife and some of her attractive friends wear pants that do not ride low. No one at work wears pants that ride low yet seem to be able to buy new clothes that look fashionable.

Eamon said:
Point #2

M.Monroe would not look sexy with her big hips hanging out of hip huggers.
Click to expand...
Define "sexy". Personally, I kinda like that look myself.

Eamon said:
Point # 3

M.Monroe would not have been considered a sex symbol if she was a actress in the 80's It was not until J Lo with her big butt that bigger woman are accepted at all. If you look at Christy Ally, she is real nice looking, but kept from super stardom by her hips :)
Click to expand...
Again, you're using relatives. "Sexy" is in the eyes of the beholder, not as defined by the advertising media. If you ACCEPT the media's definition, it is not mind control but simple agreement with their definition.

Kristy Alley never struck me as star material regardless of her weight. I always thought she was too whiny. I don't know if it was the characters she ended up with or just her in general.
 
Eamon said:
Point #1

The reason all the girls are wearing g-strings now is because it is almost impossible to find nice pants that are not hip huggers. Bloomers hanging out of nice pants don't look too good so one must wear a g-string.
Click to expand...

no no no, not so. There are these things that are wonderful: hiphugger underwear. This bit of clothing enables one to wear hip hugger pants and non-G string undies. Where were you when i gave my cross-dresser's seminar???

altho some g-strings are nice to wear but that's for another topic.:blowkiss:
 
Brian Austin said:
Only if pics are involved.... :D
Click to expand...
Ahem....

Which would, of course, violate the Rules of Conduct and therefore result in immediate punishments placed upon said poster.

(after I downloaded the pics)

(Is Chuck listening? Can I start laughing now?? ;) )
 
sierra said:
no no no, not so. There are these things that are wonderful: hiphugger underwear.
Click to expand...
Guess the guys haven't spent too much time in the lingerie section. :blowkiss:

I'm old enough to remember wearing hip-huggers the first (?) time around in the 70s. Adults complained about what the younger generation was doing/wearing. Things haven't changed much.
 
Everskyward said:
Guess the guys haven't spent too much time in the lingerie section. :blowkiss:

I'm old enough to remember wearing hip-huggers the first (?) time around in the 70s. Adults complained about what the younger generation was doing/wearing. Things haven't changed much.
Click to expand...

But you have to admit teen dress codes have even devolved past what was worn in the 60's and 70's. Some of the very young girls look like strip club employees (or worse) and the guys want to emulate hip hop, prison inmates, including the pants around the knees, wool cap (even in summer) and the ubiquitous I'm too tough for myself, frown (smiling isn't cool). Sigh.
 
Joe Williams said:
So? A poorly dressed man will fare as badly in the business environment as a poorly dressed woman.
Click to expand...

That has not been what I've seen at a lot of companies. Even from women managers (and I think women managers, in general, tend to be tougher than men).

I suppose I might be a little more sympathetic to the "Ohhhh pooor women can't get ahead" sentiment if I weren't working for a fairly large international company, with 3 layers of female supervision over me, and the head of every department I am trying to get into being female. Heck, maybe ya'll are right and I should try a dress and make-up.
Click to expand...

Actually, it's not that "women can't get ahead" at all. I disagree with that statement completely (although I formerly worked at a huge multinational with about 3 women out of 30 in senior management). I think women, in general, need to dress better than men do to earn the same level of respect. And that respect is necessary to get ahead. Ergo, women need to dress better than men do to get ahead. They can 'get ahead' just fine, it just takes different effort.

Dress and makeup? Borrow Cathy's when you get her dressed as Superwoman... :)
 
Anthony said:
But you have to admit teen dress codes have even devolved past what was worn in the 60's and 70's. Some of the very young girls look like strip club employees (or worse) and the guys want to emulate hip hop, prison inmates, including the pants around the knees, wool cap (even in summer) and the ubiquitous I'm too tough for myself, frown (smiling isn't cool). Sigh.
Click to expand...
The funny thing is that "everyone" is doing it and yet, if you go to Small Town, America, it's not NEARLY as prevalent. This is where the real world lives. Life slows down a little, families actually enjoy each other's company and a school dance is still just a dance and not a "how close can we get to sex before the teachers catch us" contests. Yes, it's not all perfect but it's a heck of a lot closer than big city life.

I miss my traveling around the state sometimes. Since I always seem to be in big cities, I sometimes forget that people don't really live like the magazines keep suggesting.
 
sierra said:
no no no, not so. There are these things that are wonderful: hiphugger underwear. This bit of clothing enables one to wear hip hugger pants and non-G string undies. Where were you when i gave my cross-dresser's seminar???
Click to expand...

One acronym: NVPL
 
wsuffa said:
One acronym: NVPL
Click to expand...

Uh, Bill in my field you are referring to a mutation in the HIV virus allowing for resistance to the drug treatment of choice :(

http://www.thebody.com/confs/icaac2001/pavia1.html

but i don't think that's what you meant. :no: so....

???

uh... am i supposed to rename this thread now that it's crept along to a natural secondary (or tertiary) topic?
 
Brian Austin said:
The funny thing is that "everyone" is doing it and yet, if you go to Small Town, America, it's not NEARLY as prevalent.
Click to expand...

one thing i like about living in the boondocks of NC is that the kids were covered. they could wear hiphuggers, but the weren't crotch huggers. if their bellies or chests or thighs were showing (of either gender) they got a really huge Wolverine T-shirt placed on their body and sent home to mama and daddy. Where switches still exist and the belt comes out.

i miss that. so do my kids. my son does't want to talk to half the girls because they are so scantily clad...he liked the fully clad yet nice clothes of previous states. For one thing it is easier to talk to someone when their skin isn't jumping out at you.
 
a trip down fashion (?) memory lane

Everskyward said:
I'm old enough to remember wearing hip-huggers the first (?) time around in the 70s.
Click to expand...

my mom made all my clothes when i was younger, so in the 70s i think she purposefully made all my pants come up to just under my sternum. boy did i look like a dork. but then all the other kids in the private religious school looked like dorks, too... no way would a teacher allow us to wear hiphuggers to class unless the shirt we wore over it was down to our knees. As i recall, it wasn't until the late 70s before we girls were even allowed to wear pants! we had to wear skirts with these aweful wool tights that itched mercilessly.
 
sierra said:
Uh, Bill in my field you are referring to a mutation in the HIV virus allowing for resistance to the drug treatment of choice :(

http://www.thebody.com/confs/icaac2001/pavia1.html

but i don't think that's what you meant. :no: so....

???

uh... am i supposed to rename this thread now that it's crept along to a natural secondary (or tertiary) topic?
Click to expand...

Definitely not what I meant.

NVPL=No Visible Panty Lines
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top