what i find interesting about the original post is the coining of the term crap on crap and identifying it with rauschenberg and large group of young practitioners as well as a few artists connecting the dots in between.
my reading is that crap on crap for RR (he called them combines) is paint applied to a montage of found objects including printed or textual items and signs. i consider RR's use of this approach more in connection with picasso and braque collage (applique on painting) than to schwitters (cut up and glue - no painting) technique. although rauschenberg does reverse their process from things on paintings to painting on things. thats how i read the original coining of crap on crap, paint on things. thats what jessica stockholder does. but its not what cady does (did) and not what some of the others mentioned in the AFC post do.
however it does seem to be what some of the current crew is doing. but to a "better" end as tom states? not so im aware of. but im not out there pounding the pavement with toms diligence so ill remain open to persuasion.
|
my reading is that crap on crap for RR (he called them combines) is paint applied to a montage of found objects including printed or textual items and signs. i consider RR's use of this approach more in connection with picasso and braque collage (applique on painting) than to schwitters (cut up and glue - no painting) technique. although rauschenberg does reverse their process from things on paintings to painting on things. thats how i read the original coining of crap on crap, paint on things. thats what jessica stockholder does. but its not what cady does (did) and not what some of the others mentioned in the AFC post do.
however it does seem to be what some of the current crew is doing. but to a "better" end as tom states? not so im aware of. but im not out there pounding the pavement with toms diligence so ill remain open to persuasion.
- bill 8-28-2009 10:06 pm