I consider myself to be an Artist (although I am shy about it) However working towards a Master degree in Philosophy...I feel that I am quite apt in judging arts character (as an Artist meself)...with that said...I must admit that while I do find "Performance Artist" intriguing...can we really classify them as Artist..or are they just theatrical performers who may not possess the "Umph" to become "real" theatrical performers, but however possess what some feel are enough to present themselves as "Art-work" to the world...
I use the word (artist) here loosely (very loosely)...as I have stated earlier I am going for my Masters in Philosophy...so I am more interested in the "why" something is portrayed rather than the reason behind it...one can grab a canvas und say, "Eureekah...! I have just painted a masterpiece..." with having no skill a'tall...but to sit for hours and hours, or stand nude for an entire 8hrs...takes more skill than not...one must possess descipline, confidence, und assurance that they will not in-fact fail at what it is that they are attempting to achieve...as with the performance artist known as Ms Abramovic...who presented herself last month at the MoMa with several other nude models...
I'm not questioning tha' validity of her work...I'm just wondering if we can really call it Art...Art in the sense of the word itself...
My personal view is that: I don't believe the "so-called" performance art should be classified in the same category as Art...it is what it is...Skilled performance performed by performers who may or my not be skilled at what they are attempting to achieve...by request of the Performance individual themself...
I would love to hear your thoughts on how you feel about Perfomance artist...do you get or understand what they are trying to project...to us (their humble society...)
