Posted by: keepfishing | August 25, 2008


via The Longbrake



  1. He’s kind of right. Rookmaaker makes this point very clearly.

    Seriously great, and honest art, is now called “design”. It’s (a)beautiful, (b)it has a use or is decorative and (c)one is willing to pay for it.

    I’ve had enough of people trying to self-actualise though coming up with something truly unique instead of just producing something excellent (that might not be as individual as their art lecturer demands).

  2. this is thought-provoking. do you think we need to move the bright & ambitious people back into art, or accept the shift towards “design” as an ok thing?

  3. I’m all for the shift into design. Why shouldn’t it be acceptable? Why shouldn’t art be also a commodity, rather than seen as a separation? I’d much rather there was purpose and expression in art, rather than a bunch of crap jumbled together, then 500 words thrown out afterwards as an afterthough justification

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: