posted on Sep, 20 2002 @ 06:55 AM
Think people still aren't getting it.
theres documentation, in this instance the process of capturing the event in a variety of media.
like filming a car park or photographing a hedge.
then theres iconic documentation, like the images of the berlin wall coming down or the twin towers.
what Hirst is talking about however is different.
he, and I, ask wether Sep 11 can transcend its human implications and be judged as a piece of art.
now some may argue that art engages us emotionally and thus objectifying it in the parameters of aesthetics, impact, and form devoid of the concept of
death or destruction as being a creative act is wrong, whilst others may point to the similarities the even has with good art.
It was accessable yet complex, it had emotional resonance, it impacted on a generation, it created astonishing images and, most importantly it
exemplefied my personal deffinition that being "art is a creative thought given form" where the artists in this cases creative thought was to
acomplish something unique and political though its form was destructive.
in some senses given that the event has thrust the world into war one could draw parallels with the "happenings" of the 1960's, or, if you will, an