How Valuable is Goldsmith’s Work? -Aliyah Hill (2)

Within Reid’s blog post titled “Goldsmith’s Assume No Readership”, he discovered that [Goldsmith] takes quite a while to get to the point, [however] the point [that] he makes offers a very sensible reason for why he chooses to simply move already existing things around.

I agree with Reid in the sense that sometimes Goldsmith’s work can seem very scattered; similarly to a person who was beating around the bush. When Goldsmith finally conveys the point that he was trying to portray, it makes me wonder how much of the piece was filler information. However I believe that one of Goldsmith’s main objectives is for the reader to simply grasp topic versus depth as he has self proclaimed that his work is “boring”.

In addition, the patchwork foundation causes me to question the validity of his work. Appropriation does not always work to recreate a better piece; it instead calls for a different perspective. This makes it quite difficult to find the value of Goldsmith’s own work within his essays. My view strongly coincides with my expectations of art: thorough, meaningful and something that is either filled with or evokes emotion. Goldsmith’s work does something different and is almost too simple to be valuable.

In a video embedded in Reid’s blog, the opening statements were as follow: “I’m Kenneth Goldsmith, a poet that lives in New York City. A city full of words. Poetry is all around us. We just need to reframe it and suddenly it becomes our own.”

…but is that truly how it works? I appreciate the form and stance that Goldsmith takes however I believe that a little more originality will go a long way!

 

 

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “How Valuable is Goldsmith’s Work? -Aliyah Hill (2)

    1. Creating my own form of appropriative art has changed my perspective on Goldsmith’s work. Initially, I didn’t quite understand the art aspect of his work however I fully comprehend the meaning after being placed in his shoes. To answer the question you posed above, my artwork definitely fulfills the characteristics of art that I described. It is thorough in the sense that it thoroughly expresses the opinions of consumers, it is meaningful in that it conveys the underlying problem in having only one type of Barbie doll and it encourages/ persuades the reader to feel the same way as the author (me) about Barbie in the past in addition to the improved Barbie doll! Thank you for bringing that up, I hadn’t reevaluated my previous post! 🙂

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s