YSaC, Vol. 1487: 4’33” of heavy breathing
2013 April 9
Painting – $15
Painting for $20
This $15 painting, which Sparky is selling for $20, is clearly an artistic masterpiece that does not require viewing in order for the audience to be conscious of its meaning. After all, “Consciousness is part of the meaninglessness of art,” says Foucault; however, it is not so much consciousness that is part of the meaninglessness of art, but rather the fatal flaw, and subsequent genre, of consciousness. Therefore, the subject is contextualised into a dialectic desituationism that includes reality as a whole. However, an abundance of demodernisms concerning the futility, and subsequent stasis, of structural sexual identity may be revealed.
In other words, this is probably porn.
Thanks, Thee Inferno!
Pron? This calls for extreme measures!
*secures pseudo-line with nails, glue, bricks, and mortar*
Now stay there!
Every time I see the intentional misspelling of “pron”, I think of an ’80s Disney movie with cutting-edge graphics starring Linda Lovelace.
I think of shellfish. And when I think of Disney, I think of Sebastian. And when I think of Sebastian, I think of crabs. And when I think of crabs, I think of pron.
“I’ll take painting for $20, Alex.”
“Not on this show, you won’t. Try craigslist.”
“I thought this was ‘The Price is Right’?”
The refusal to post an image of the painting de-privileges the prospective buyer’s aesthetic judgment and de-commodifies the work itself. The shifting price deconstructs both the bourgeois obsession with value and the linear, syllogistic nature of mathematics. All in all, it represents man’s inhumanity to man.
Something ALWAYS represents man’s inhumanity to man.
Quite. Even the plebeian bourgeoisie of a frame is deus ex machinata of a society too debauched to even appreciate the ironic ennui represented by a Webb’s Wonder cabbage.
Especially the Spanish Inquisition. I’ve come to expect that.
What?? Ducky, NOBODY expects the Spanish Inquisition!
I’ve come to expect that too.
Our chief weapon is snark…snark and sarcasm…sarcsam and snark…. Our two weapons are sarcasm and snark…and ruthless attention to the absurd…. Our three weapons are sarcasm, snark and ruthless attention to the absurd…and an almost fanatical devotion to French presidential furniture…. Our four…no… Amongst our weapons…. Amongst our weaponry…are such elements as sarcasm, snark…. I’ll come in again.
At least Sparky isn’t trying to sell a comfy chair. That would just be cruel.
Dearest LlamaNun – if I can skip briefly to a comment I read from you about interactions with your occasional students, had I been one and if you’d said “Therefore, the subject is contextualised into a dialectic desituationism that includes reality as a whole. However, an abundance of demodernisms concerning the futility, and subsequent stasis, of structural sexual identity may be revealed.” to me my reaction would have been “Doh?”
Kudos for amazing words that seem to imply real concepts yet combine to create total confusion, and, as we Brits say, ‘total bollocks”. Which is, of course, the title of the artwork that is for sale at an ever rising price !
I do not talk like this in the classroom. I’ve just read enough postmodernism nonsense to be able to replicate it.
That you can bring this into existence in any form earns my undying respect.
Wait until you read MY thesis topic. It reads like this, but in a more science-y way.
Dunno, does it compare to
“Consequences of presumptive cognition by mass media providers upon informed geopolitical strategies and effective implementation of same”?
Did rather like
“Analysis of Implications of predictable Technological change to [C4I] in obfuscating the [OODA loop process] by [Command Personnel]”
I understood “obfuscating” and … maybe something about goldfish?
@CapnMac: like, the effect of the ABC TV movie “The Day After” on Reagan’s nuclear policy?
Is “Total Bollox” IF’s Iron Midden cover band?
I don’t know much about art, but I do know what makes no sense at all.
I don’t either, but I do know what “for $20” means on Craigslist.
Artwork, indeed.
So I get two for $50?
Yes, along with an insane case of the munchies.
Oh, goody – this is one of those days where Windy’s going to have to punch herself.
:fetches popcorn:
*puts on clever disguise*
I haven’t seen Windrose since this morning.
You mean I assembled this
SpankingPunching Machine for nothing?Well, I don’t know Postmodern Deconstructionism, but I do know the Maths (Polly and Trig), so…
Painting – $15, Painting for $20
The only way to make sense of this is if it’s an equality:
Painting – $15 = Painting ? for ? $20
The missing parts are, of course, the operators (Drs. Steenburg and Michaels, Thorasic epistemology).
We can easily subtract Painting from both sides, giving
-$15 = ? for ? $20
Now, most people don’t know long division, so we can assume that’s what’s unknown:
-$15 = ÷ for ÷ $20
(Note that you would need a different operator if you wished to place a call to Sacramento 6-4000, although the jumping jacks are left as an excersize for the reader)
On the face of it, you’ll find this equation is not soluable in water, but we can rotate the equation until the division signs overlap:
$20 = for + $15
The answer, of course, is
for=5
What happened to the other one? It’s been carried away by the cat, who is hungry and upset that you’re spending all your free time with the algerbil.
Probably Pr0n has to be a Brittany-madonna mashup tribute band.
Not Pr0n, just the after-affects.. it’s his bed-sheet under black light.
Ah, a self-portrait then.
It’s like a plumbing job. The painting itself costs $15, but it will cost an additional $20 to have Sparky paint it for you. If you want to buy just the painting, you’ll have to paint it yourself.
It’s the concept, man. Like, you can’t OWN art. (snort)
Maybe we’re all reading this wrong. Maybe Sparky is offering to DO some painting in exchange for being paid $15. Wait, better make it $20. Because, you know, the economy and stuff.
Those are Zimbabwean dollars and Sparky can only type 60 wpm.
It’s so clear. First, the painting was going to sell for $15. Then, between the heading and the body of the ad, the artist died. Dead artists appreciate in value post muerte.
The $20 is obviously the Sotheby’s auction price.
Maybe it’s a Zen-like code. Maybe “for” really means “4”, and Sparky is trying to sell $15 worth of “4-20”.
Not that I would have any idea what “4-20” stands for. I mean it’s…uh….I forgot or something.
Wow, these chips are nummy!
Do you mean the painting depicts a structure being erected?
And how did this corner show up out of nowhere?
Painting – $15
Edible Body Paints = $10
Time it takes Sparky to paint himself =$5
Knowing you don’t want Sparky’s painting = Priceless
——————————————————————————–
Painting for $20
In Soviet Russia, Sparky paints you.
Not getting slapped for explaining this = Priceless
Déjà vu all over again.
Helmet? Check. Umpire vest? Check. Life Insurance? Check. Okay, ghostie, throw the switch!
*this scene deleted due to excessive blood, violence, and bad language*
Good Morning, Happy Trees!
Hey Sparky! Monty Python called- he wants his Spanish Inquisition sketch back- asap. Nobody expects Monty Python to call.
Glad you guys enjoyed my submission. Could it also qualify for the “zen” tag?