ACTUALLY....I think the gripe is in OPPOSITION of hipster wanking. Take a look at the last few days of postings. Can we say "overboard"?
Who from our audience would actually want to read this stuff? Sure, there might be a relevant point to some of these things, but it's so buried beneath all the pontificating and smug jabs, that one can barely commit to trying to find it.
Whether or not that was Anonymous's opinion, it is most definitely mine.

I agreed with anonymous in spirit, and with you - that getting some real content going is a great idea. Writing a real review of a show, a funny story, etc. that's all good. And I think you're right that we're getting a little mired down in somewhat trivial discussions.

Maybe we just need to make an effort to put our pontifications and smug jabs (of which I can certainly be accused) in the comments - and leave the main posts for larger topics of discussion - whether that is a theory of perspective or a theory about a television show. And likewise, we ought to start making an effort to make those larger topics of discussion less insular and more extrinsic as anonymous suggested.

But Scene & Herd is disgusting. Of course, if someone feels the desire to put that kind of crap up they should go for it - but I'm praying they don't.

I wasn't commending scene and heard, just using it as an example of something that people outside of the art forum-which isn't much better than the website-- office read--proof being that you all knew about it.

Yes, I agree that we shouldn't be topical, but as I see it, most continental theory simply is that. I whole-heartedly accept your pinning of art deco (a market phen) to relational aesth. (a market phen). such actual primary comparisons are far more interesting than drippy abstracted metaphysical BS. The thing is that art deco was never accepted as an avant-garde, that it was in fact considered a watered down, kitsch version of modernism. I’m not exactly sure how you jump from art deco to arts & crafts especially since art deco was a marketing ploy that fetishes technological advances, i.e. streamlining which is useless in an immobile object, where as, arts and crafts was a direct reaction against mass-production privileging the necessity of hand-craft as a means to reorient the means of production—which was a total lip service that privileged a Romantized notion of the Gothic period; might this dovetail well with Rirkrit, neo-monastic BS maybe? The difference btw Morris and Rirkrit is that Morris was, in theory, reacting against technological change—even though he used screen prints and the like--and Rirkrit is embracing it buy using ramen noodles, hot plates, Ikea furnishings, and the like, as well as entering a systeam instead of being counter it—if he was a slow food foodie maybe the link would be stronger, and maybe he’d be a better artist—and maybe this is the bad taste you where talking about, here quite literally. The major trouble with Morris is that his notion of "tool" is a slippery one as he places a major shift between that knife and the table saw. Unfortunately Morris was a reactionary who simply believed that any machine, which utilized an auxiliary power source, automatically limited the creativity of the worker and left him in a state of craft slavery. Fortunately Frank Lloyd Wright (and later the Bauhaus) understood the stupidity in this myth of fabrication by calling for an epistemology of materials and fabrication—read Wright’s The Art and Craft of the Machine, which by the way, is far more intelligent than Art in the Age of Mechanical Production, maybe because Wright was an artist who actually used mechanical production, and actually understood it in an actual political context outside the academy, architecture/engineering. Through a strong understanding of the properties of materials coupled with a strong grasp of one’s own technological situation—including logistics--an individual can enter the logos of the machine and make it an appendage, instead of the dumb neo-marxist understanding of the man being the appendage, dumb because this perspective never bothered to consider the machine as such. But to get back on the subject of Relation Aes. my gripe with it doesn’t have to do with this. My gripe with it is that it is all really safe stuff that occurs in a gallery context, wow people have some noodles and shoot the shit, big deal…its all very “nice”. I’m not saying that they need to take this outside of the gallery context—fortunately Alfredo Jarr, Marjetica Potrc, Francis Alyss et al do this—but maybe if they are going to keep it in a gallery—keeping the Thai project out, that is a different can of worms--maybe they should program a space that has some problems in it, some irreconcilabilities and irregularities. But even still these attempts to program space which is open to interpolation is a heavy handed politics since the set-up by the artists is an apriori: here, I give you this to do something”—as is the problem with almost all “interactive” projects. Tschumi once commented that the power of architecture lies in the fact that the nave of a gothic cathedral is a perfect spot for pole-vaulting, yet this has little to do with the architect and all to do with the bricolage tactics—not strategics-- of the person vaulting, So, I’d say, own up on it and be a little determinist, things shouldn’t always be courteous. At least seed some negative attractors so that the thing is a war, not a state machine—yes I know I said we should move away from contental jargon.

oh yeah hipster v. anti-hipster...can we get more boring?

There are, to be sure, some big differences between William Morris and Rirkrit Taravanija - which you point out. My point was simply that art that wants to be life is dumb, and that it's all been dumb before.
It all seems like people unwilling to admit that the dematerialization of the art object didn't, and won't happen.

online directory main

Hi! http://www.insurance-top.com/company/ car site insurance. car site insurance, The autos insurance company, compare car insurance. from website .

ringtones free

Have you seen this before? It's a number guessing game: http://www.amblesideprimary.com/ambleweb/mentalmaths/guessthenumber.html. I guessed 87510, and it got it right! Pretty neat.

Hi! http://www.insurance-top.com/company/ car site insurance. compare car insurance, auto insurance, insurance car. from website .