Created in about 2003/4 this web based conceptual site “Do You Ever Understand?” was part of a series of actions that centered around the site itself but utilized other platforms to create a kind of hyper-language.
Using ad disruption (replacing real ads on subways with ads that said “Do You Ever Understand”) and email spoofing (sending emails to the employees of a museum or other institute disguised as the director of said organization) to drive traffic to the site. It was a bit before its time.
Its in flash (sorry iphones) and contains sound.
Do you Ever Understand? - RSH
"Because in the Masters tent the answer is obvious: An artist is a person who makes art. And you know he’s an artist because you can see the art. So the art validates the artist and the artist the art. But in the contemporary tent it’s not that simple, because it’s mostly conceptual. This isn’t about skill, or application, or craft, or ability."
How a London Art Fair Created a Market for Rich People | Vanity Fair
Just look at these numbers and think about how if you add up all retail (auction houses!) and all independent artist income it still comes to less than art schools make in profit. Scary.
The idea that “arts education” takes in more than the amount of money that all independent artists, retail galleries and auction houses make is sad. Its a perfect example of how arts education is just another ‘vaporware’ scam. A piece of paper that means nothing.
Where’s the Money? US Arts and Culture Economy By the Numbers
While I disagree with the basic premise that video is not art, merely a warm up to “real filmmaking” Jones is basically passing off an ideology that I am both fascinated and horrified by. Its the premise in the art world that one can not be an artist and be anything else. You can not be in a band, make movies, cure cancers or anything other than create art if you are to be considered a “real artist.”
It is a curious and long held ‘rule’ (mostly held by dealers and collectors). It has affected many creative people who would otherwise have been embraced by the art world if not for a hit record, award winning film, or other embarrassment to blemish their record as an ‘artist.’
Jones neatly avoids talking about video artists like Matthew Barney, Bill Viola, Carolee Schneemann, or even Brakhage for that matter - who never made or intended to make feature length movies. He confuses the technology for the content, misunderstanding that the nature of the cinematic experience can be both entertainment and aesthetic, and that those two things are not mutually exclusive.
Why Steve McQueen is proof of video art’s cultural irrelevance | Art and design | theguardian.com