Comments: 12
Flying-Glove [2012-11-11 21:27:28 +0000 UTC]
The artists, how lovely! Beautiful likenesses of them both.
What is the red part near Yoko's mouth?
๐: 0 โฉ: 1
Flying-Glove In reply to TommyMcGann [2012-11-11 21:43:06 +0000 UTC]
You're very welcome!
Well, her art isn't really for everyone, but I personally like it. Especially her white chess set.
๐: 0 โฉ: 1
TommyMcGann In reply to Flying-Glove [2012-11-11 21:58:32 +0000 UTC]
Oh yes, her white chess set is nice, the concept at least. I'ld just do one critic about it: white chess pieces attacking white chess pieces, that's what we call a civil war. And we all know that civil wars are worse than wars between two countries. I know that's not what she meant, but that's the problem with her creations. They aren't easily readable, and could have a meaning completely different.
๐: 0 โฉ: 1
Flying-Glove In reply to TommyMcGann [2012-11-11 22:12:36 +0000 UTC]
Really? I thought the white chess set was fairly straightforward- There is rarely much difference between adversaries, we are all really on the same side, so when we fight, we all lose.
๐: 0 โฉ: 1
TommyMcGann In reply to Flying-Glove [2012-11-12 21:54:57 +0000 UTC]
That's not what she explained. Yoko Ono said that in life, we can't say what is ours and what belongs to others, so you have to convince people that what you think belongs to you really belongs to you. That would be the meaning of the "Play it by trust" chess game. That's what I've read somewhere, can't say where.
That's also what I reproach to Yoko art (and by extension to John Lennon's when he was doing the baggism and so on): she has to explain her art, or then it's not understood. Her art isn't simple, it's too ambiguous, I think. And the problem is that when you do conceptual art, well... The message is the most important. So if people don't get the message, it's a fail. =/
๐: 0 โฉ: 0