thus far, that is my favorite dmtree use of the animated gif but i still find them spectacularly annoying. is there some sort of manchurian candidate thing going on with it because i suddenly feel the unnatural urge to kill anyone dressed in red that acts jolly? whats the trigger? its candy canes, right?
 You find this annoying? What's wrong with you?
I don't think there's anything ominous going on here. Just a festive holiday gif, I think. I mean what would be the motive for, uh, er, I, uh...I love popeye, I love popeye, I love popeye, I love popeye...
Speaking of Popeye and Christmas lights (maybe you were), I once saw "Al Copeland's Popeye's Christmasland" on the grounds of the State Capital in Baton Rouge, LA. The state made the chicken magnate shut down his sprawling personal front yard light display because it was sucking so much electricity, so he flexed his political muscle and got it moved to the capital lawn. It was a bunch of dumb elves and camels and other stuff made of lights, but what I liked the most were the light-wrapped Live Oak trees, which undulated across the property like blazing squid tentacles.
my most sinister intent was to mildly aggravate dmtree with x-mas icons. But look I achieved '"spectacularly annoying." With results like that, why bother with brainwashing?! I'm collecting my gif posts here. I just changed the setting so 'any registered user' can post to the page, so all y'all can stick yer gifs up here too if you want.
Actually I was imitating Alice the Goon under a spell. I think Copeland still does his light show at his home by the lake in New Orleans/Metairie.
its a nice one sally (beautiful actually)
thanks bill! I like it too - however, I'm easy to please and I enjoy the spaced-out sensation I get from staring at abstracted moving things.
by the way - all the frames were gathered from a google images search for "tree lights", then cropped and modified and strung together. I was going to take shots of the houses in my neighbourhood (which are over the top), but I lent my camera to my friends. This is better cause I had no personal allegiance to the original images and so could manipulate at will.
thats the spirit. there was somthing going on after warhol which abby hoffman captured in "steal this book" that still hasnt been properly and fully realised.
My eyes. My eyes!!! Want to look. Must not look. Ahh.
Hey bill, I think I know what you are saying. But I also think appropriation has been pretty well digested. Maybe art needs a scandalous debate about intellectual property, like the one music is going through, to make an issue out of theft again. Me, I see appropriation as a handy tool, and probably should take it more seriously.
My thoughts about these lights: what if I had taken the pictures myself and then achieved the same level of disinterest when cropping and prepping? Would that potentially be a stronger piece? Maybe theft (okay, appropriation) is giving me a stance/style to strive for in my own creations? I don't know enough about music to be able to say that this is happening there - but I have an inkling that it is.
Hey Sally,
Hey bill, I think I know what you are saying. But I also think appropriation has been pretty well digested. Maybe art needs a scandalous debate about intellectual property, like the one music is going through, to make an issue out of theft again. Me, I see appropriation as a handy tool, and probably should take it more seriously.
The fact that we're having this discusion is a fair indication that apprioriation has only just begun to be digested. Music is not art. Property has nothing to do with art, its business. (yes) Appropriation is a tool. (artists) Dont take anything too seriously.
My thoughts about these lights: what if I had taken the pictures myself and then achieved the same level of disinterest when cropping and prepping? Would that potentially be a stronger piece? Maybe theft (okay, appropriation) is giving me a stance/style to strive for in my own creations? I don't know enough about music to be able to say that this is happening there - but I have an inkling that it is.
It would be somewhat less interesting (and less strong) to me if you had taken the pictures. An art template should be overlayed on music to test its compliance not the other way around. Music is not art unless an artist is making it and artists dont care about intelectual property because in art it doesnt exist, Its a business term.
I'm not holding up music as a template, but just a parallel practice. I have been curious about your own appropriation/collection project, Bill. Can you talk a bit about what you are doing? I agree that intellectual property is a business term, and that's partly why I'm curious about what you are getting at.
Music is not parallel (=) to art, its a subset (<) of art. Thanks for asking about my work. For the last four years Ive been bidding on photo lots from ebay from the photographic images subcategory of their collectibles section. In the process I have refined my search to two subject catagories, function and dysfunction. I look for seriel photographs (series of related images including images from the same roll of film). The functional images relate to people building things including houses. The dysfunctional images usually involve drinkers, drunks and hillbillies tending stills etc. A sort of one step forward two steps back type thing. Ive only posted a few of these. This untitled piece, "Two Drunk Cowboys",
and these "Party People." The Party People were screen grabs of photos I did not bid on, the rest I won. Please also note that party people and two drunk cowboys are working references not titles, all my work is untitled.
|
- sally mckay 12-25-2003 3:34 am
thus far, that is my favorite dmtree use of the animated gif but i still find them spectacularly annoying. is there some sort of manchurian candidate thing going on with it because i suddenly feel the unnatural urge to kill anyone dressed in red that acts jolly? whats the trigger? its candy canes, right?
- dave 12-25-2003 4:56 pm
You find this annoying? What's wrong with you?
- tom moody 12-25-2003 8:35 pm
I don't think there's anything ominous going on here. Just a festive holiday gif, I think. I mean what would be the motive for, uh, er, I, uh...I love popeye, I love popeye, I love popeye, I love popeye...
- jimlouis 12-26-2003 6:10 pm
Speaking of Popeye and Christmas lights (maybe you were), I once saw "Al Copeland's Popeye's Christmasland" on the grounds of the State Capital in Baton Rouge, LA. The state made the chicken magnate shut down his sprawling personal front yard light display because it was sucking so much electricity, so he flexed his political muscle and got it moved to the capital lawn. It was a bunch of dumb elves and camels and other stuff made of lights, but what I liked the most were the light-wrapped Live Oak trees, which undulated across the property like blazing squid tentacles.
- tom moody 12-26-2003 6:51 pm
my most sinister intent was to mildly aggravate dmtree with x-mas icons. But look I achieved '"spectacularly annoying." With results like that, why bother with brainwashing?! I'm collecting my gif posts here. I just changed the setting so 'any registered user' can post to the page, so all y'all can stick yer gifs up here too if you want.
- sally mckay 12-26-2003 9:35 pm
Actually I was imitating Alice the Goon under a spell. I think Copeland still does his light show at his home by the lake in New Orleans/Metairie.
- jimlouis 12-26-2003 10:19 pm
its a nice one sally (beautiful actually)
- bill 12-27-2003 2:00 am
thanks bill! I like it too - however, I'm easy to please and I enjoy the spaced-out sensation I get from staring at abstracted moving things.
- sally mckay 12-27-2003 9:35 am
by the way - all the frames were gathered from a google images search for "tree lights", then cropped and modified and strung together. I was going to take shots of the houses in my neighbourhood (which are over the top), but I lent my camera to my friends. This is better cause I had no personal allegiance to the original images and so could manipulate at will.
- sally mckay 12-27-2003 9:58 am
thats the spirit. there was somthing going on after warhol which abby hoffman captured in "steal this book" that still hasnt been properly and fully realised.
- bill 12-27-2003 5:23 pm
My eyes. My eyes!!! Want to look. Must not look. Ahh.
- tino (guest) 12-28-2003 6:37 pm
Hey bill, I think I know what you are saying. But I also think appropriation has been pretty well digested. Maybe art needs a scandalous debate about intellectual property, like the one music is going through, to make an issue out of theft again. Me, I see appropriation as a handy tool, and probably should take it more seriously.
My thoughts about these lights: what if I had taken the pictures myself and then achieved the same level of disinterest when cropping and prepping? Would that potentially be a stronger piece? Maybe theft (okay, appropriation) is giving me a stance/style to strive for in my own creations? I don't know enough about music to be able to say that this is happening there - but I have an inkling that it is.
- sally mckay 12-28-2003 8:07 pm
Hey Sally,
Hey bill, I think I know what you are saying. But I also think appropriation has been pretty well digested. Maybe art needs a scandalous debate about intellectual property, like the one music is going through, to make an issue out of theft again. Me, I see appropriation as a handy tool, and probably should take it more seriously.
The fact that we're having this discusion is a fair indication that apprioriation has only just begun to be digested. Music is not art. Property has nothing to do with art, its business. (yes) Appropriation is a tool. (artists) Dont take anything too seriously.
My thoughts about these lights: what if I had taken the pictures myself and then achieved the same level of disinterest when cropping and prepping? Would that potentially be a stronger piece? Maybe theft (okay, appropriation) is giving me a stance/style to strive for in my own creations? I don't know enough about music to be able to say that this is happening there - but I have an inkling that it is.
It would be somewhat less interesting (and less strong) to me if you had taken the pictures. An art template should be overlayed on music to test its compliance not the other way around. Music is not art unless an artist is making it and artists dont care about intelectual property because in art it doesnt exist, Its a business term.
- bill 12-28-2003 10:23 pm
I'm not holding up music as a template, but just a parallel practice. I have been curious about your own appropriation/collection project, Bill. Can you talk a bit about what you are doing? I agree that intellectual property is a business term, and that's partly why I'm curious about what you are getting at.
- sally mckay 12-29-2003 12:44 am
Music is not parallel (=) to art, its a subset (<) of art. Thanks for asking about my work. For the last four years Ive been bidding on photo lots from ebay from the photographic images subcategory of their collectibles section. In the process I have refined my search to two subject catagories, function and dysfunction. I look for seriel photographs (series of related images including images from the same roll of film). The functional images relate to people building things including houses. The dysfunctional images usually involve drinkers, drunks and hillbillies tending stills etc. A sort of one step forward two steps back type thing. Ive only posted a few of these. This untitled piece, "Two Drunk Cowboys", and these "Party People." The Party People were screen grabs of photos I did not bid on, the rest I won. Please also note that party people and two drunk cowboys are working references not titles, all my work is untitled.
- bill 12-29-2003 8:59 pm