[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [microsound] outsider artists

I agree. What is the definition of an "Outsider artist" then? I have seen a few people on that Wiki list perform so i dont know how they can be considered outside artist's. As you stated most of the individuals on the list have a body of work that you can purchase. Wesley Willis can be an example of sorts. Shure he has some serious mental problem's and would still be banging away at his keyboard composing such classic as "Osama Bin can suck a camel dick" regardless of whether it would afford him a self sufficient life... which brings me to my main point/curiosity.

If someone eeks out a living with his art, is he considered main stream? Is Wesley Willis not an outside artist because he makes a living off of his work? I think there is an inherent difference with an artist in any Genre who mass markets his/her art for profit, networking with Gallery big wigs, collectors, and pompus critics, as opposed to someone who pays the bills with his work but profit isnt the main motivator, being able to eat, pay the rent and buy the supplies needed to see your next project through. We do live in a capitalist wolrd and you need money in order to continue exhisting.

Maybe someone can provide a name but there was an artist who was discovered after his death, when his landlord went to clear the unit of his possessions, what he discovered was over forty years of work, large sccrolling murals done in pen, ink and watercolour, the subject matter was almost always children, sometimes the works could be miscontrued as rather disturbing, almost of a pedophelic nature.

does this strike a chord in any one? anyone happen to know the artist's name? This to me is a great example of a true outsider making art for himself, whatever the motivators are(I think he was disturbed and the drawing were a part of his fantasy world) I read about him in collage eons ago. Would like to find some more info on him now. Im shure there are plenty of similar examples.


On May 25, 2005, at 2:24 PM, vadim wrote:

On 5/25/05, Mr.D <craque@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
this is what was going through my head too... that if it's truly
'outsider' we wouldn't be able to codify it, because we would never
hear it. :)

i can remember who originally said this, i believe i read it in the liner notes to a sonic youth record, 'the music is compromised once it leaves your head.'

a concert, be in a location, buy an album.

all marketable things, btw. i think we start getting into the thorny issue of who decides what is "art" which to me, more than likely means how can it be sold/marketed. thats why the outsider art rubric is so bullshit. darger is not outsider art because you can buy the book, see the movie, wear the t-shirt. it may not be everyone's cup of tea but people (not the artist) have gone to great lengths to introduce his work to the mass populace.

i can see something like harry smith's documentation of rural/folk
music as being called outsider art in that many of the people
appearing on his records did not set out to record or publish music.
they were vehicles for oral history, entertaining friends and family,

im not sure if this is terribly accurate, but visual art seems to have
more of a tangible quality to it, implying a more significant sense of
ownership perhaps? or maybe that we (i guess i should say
predominantly western european popular culture) have a more
restrictive idea of what is artful in terms of music than in visual



To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
website: http://www.microsound.org

To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
website: http://www.microsound.org