Quote:
Originally Posted by bubu
The computer is a musical instrument because it is the means to produce music, that's what an instrument does; it provides a way to express ourselves and the computer makes that easier.
|
Do you actually read any of the previous posts in the threads you visit on your posting spree or are you just emptying yourself however way you see fit?
About Duchamp, I think he liked to use his status as an artist to trick people. What I mean is he could elevate ordinairy items like toilets or bricks to a higher level where people suddenly appreciate it as art. I don't think he necessarily thought of these things as worthy of that regard, but he did it because he wanted us to confront ourselves with questions like "what do I really think is art?" and I thought he liked the controversy .. and I think he got some satisfaction when he managed to use his power this way, "tricking" people into appreciating toilets and so on as high culture.
In other words, I believe what Guitarbizarre wrote is more correct. He wanted to confront us with the fact that art is up to context and trying to define it beyond that becomes almost meaningless. It makes more sense to me than him having so much love for ordinairy things like bricks. He was
the dadaist after all and they made "art" out of all kinds of silly and surreal things and I don't think the beauty of the ordinairy was the essential theme there.
I agree that a computer is a musical instrument when used as such.