Pop art: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
m + Link(s) |
+ Quote(s) |
||
Line 14:
* In the sixties, the recycling of pop culture — turning it into Pop art and camp — had its own satirical zest. Now we're into a different kind of recycling. Moviemakers give movies of the past an authority that those movies didn't have; they inflate images that may never have compelled belief, images that were no more than shorthand gestures — and they use them not as larger-than-life jokes but as altars.
** [[Pauline Kael]] =State of the Art (1985) "A Bad Dream/A Masterpiece," review of ''The Moon in the Gutter'' ([[1983-09-19]]), p. 48.
* What interests me is to paint the kind of anti-sensitivity that impregnates modern civilization. I think art since Cezanne has become extremely romantic and unrealistic, feeding on art. It is Utopian. It has less and less to do with the world. It looks inward — neo-Zen and all that. '''Pop Art looks out into the world. It doesn't look like a painting of something, it looks like the thing itself.'''
** [[Roy Lichtenstein]] in: Interview by G.R. Swenson; cited in: Eric Protter (1971). ''Painters on Painting.'' p. 263
* We live in a time which has created the art of the absurd. It is our art. It contains happenings, Pop art, camp, a theater of the absurd... Do we have the art because the absurd is the patina of waste...? Or are we face to face with a desperate or most rational effort from the deepest resources of the unconscious of us all to rescue civilization from the pit and plague of its bedding?
| |||