Patrons of the Sacred Art

OPEN TO REGISTER: Click HERE if you want to join Alchemy Forums!

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 40

Thread: Luxury hotel ad art project

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    In the moment...
    Posts
    8,106
    Blog Entries
    2

    Luxury hotel ad art project

    Just got an art concept idea regarding luxury hotel adverts... below are two examples of the concept:





    Don’t let the delusion of reality confuse you regarding the reality of the illusion.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    400
    What message are you trying to get across with this art, it might be obvious to you but others might not get it, what are you trying to say?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    In the moment...
    Posts
    8,106
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Luxus View Post
    What message are you trying to get across with this art, it might be obvious to you but others might not get it, what are you trying to say?
    If it is not obvious to some people, then those people are the reason "my message" needs to exist in the first place.

    Don’t let the delusion of reality confuse you regarding the reality of the illusion.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    In the moment...
    Posts
    8,106
    Blog Entries
    2


    Don’t let the delusion of reality confuse you regarding the reality of the illusion.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    400
    I see the sarcastic aspect of this art but other then that the exact message you are trying to convey has wide interpretation.

    Instead of spending your money on a luxury hotel donate to the poor, would be how I would interpret it.

    If your trying to say the people staying at or owning these hotels are responsible for her condition...well I would say that's just pure BS

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,459
    Quote Originally Posted by Luxus View Post
    What message are you trying to get across with this art, it might be obvious to you but others might not get it, what are you trying to say?
    Absurdly expensive hotel, starving kid with no $$$$ as to get food. A détournement

    In short, taking the message of advertising and showing the other side of the coin... as Lettrism, Situationism, the Imaginary Bauhaus and Neoism did... and a few Fluxus artists









    P.s, I liked the first one... I believe it delivers the message better (because the détournement is less obvious, so it goes deeper... the second one gets close to shock art, but the world has gone a bit insensitive, so subtle things work better).

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    In the moment...
    Posts
    8,106
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Luxus View Post
    I see the sarcastic aspect of this art but other then that the exact message you are trying to convey has wide interpretation.

    Instead of spending your money on a luxury hotel donate to the poor, would be how I would interpret it.

    If your trying to say the people staying at or owning these hotels are responsible for her condition...well I would say that's just pure BS
    It's not so specific, more like zoas23 said... more about perspective.

    HOWEVER the privileged world is privileged on the backs of the rest of the world. You can call that BS all you want.

    And no I am not some disgruntled working class drone... I have stayed in such hotels many times, and I am privileged myself (compared to most of Africa, Asia, Latin America and certain suburbs in the West). It is not about "luxury hotels". It is about perspectives, compassion, privilege and most of all gratitude.

    Quote Originally Posted by zoas23 View Post
    ...the second one gets close to shock art...
    I liked that one the most.

    Last edited by Awani; 05-11-2018 at 12:44 AM.
    Don’t let the delusion of reality confuse you regarding the reality of the illusion.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    400
    There are parts of the world where the privileged have never set foot in and are not to be seen for thousands of miles, in those areas you got people living like that women so whose fault is that ?

    btw who are the privileged in your eyes...are the privileged of a specific race by any chance? Just trying to see if your one of those cucked self hating white boys!

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,459
    Quote Originally Posted by Luxus View Post
    There are parts of the world where the privileged have never set foot in and are not to be seen for thousands of miles, in those areas you got people living like that women so whose fault is that ?
    Where is that? You live in this world anyway, don't you? I don't think there's anyone here who doesn't. "it's not my problem" is one of the worst diseases of our times.

    Quote Originally Posted by Luxus View Post
    btw who are the privileged in your eyes...are the privileged of a specific race by any chance? Just trying to see if your one of those cucked self hating white boys!
    I was strangely surprised by this poll on this forum:



    And now I remembered a fragment of a famous interview to Deleuze:

    Claire Parnet: What is it to be “from the left” for you?

    Gilles Deleuze: Well, I will tell you that there can’t be any government from the left. It doesn’t mean that there is no differences between governments. The best we can hope for is a government that would be in favor of some of the left’s requirements but a government from the left, that does not exist. So how to define what is it to be “from the left”, I would say it in two ways.
    It’s firstly a problem of perception. A problem of perception that is to say what is it not be “from the left”. We can see that with the postal address. Not be from the left means starting with myself, my street, my city, my country, the other countries further and further. We start by us, and as we are privileged, we live in a rich country, we wonder how we can do to sustain in time this situation. We can feel that there are some dangers, that this situation can’t last too long. So we say “Oh but the Chinese are so far away, how can we do so that Europe can sustain itself in time etc.”
    To be from the left is the opposite. It is to perceive, as it is said that Japanese people perceive. They don’t perceive like us, they primarily perceive the perimeter. They would say: The world, the Continent Europe, France, etc. etc. the rue Bizerte, Me. It is a phenomenon of perception. This way we first perceive the horizon.


    Claire Parnet: Japanese people are not really from the left !

    Gilles Deleuze: That’s not a reason. By this perception they are from the left. In the sense of the postal address they are from the left. You first see the horizon and you do know that it can’t sustain itself in time, that it is not possible, that those millions of people who starve from death, that can still last for a hundred years, but eventually we cannot stand this absolute injustice. That’s not a problem of moral, that’s a problem of perception. If we start by the whole, that is it to be from the left. It means that we can call and consider that those issues are the one to be solved. And that does not mean at all that we should say that we should diminish birth rate etc. because saying that is just another way to conserve Europe’s privileges. This is not it. It’s really about finding the worldwide arrangements that will solve those issues. In fact, to be from the left it is to know that the Third World’s issues are closer from us than our neighborhood’s issues. It is really a problem of perception, it’s not a problem of beautiful soul. That is mainly what is it to be from the left for me.

    Secondly, to be from the left for me, that’s a problem of becoming; never stopping to become minority. In fact, the left is never a majority and for a very simple reason. Because majority supposes, even when we vote, it’s not just the biggest amount that vote for something…Majority supposes a standard.
    In the Western World, the standard that every majority supposes is: male, adult, heterosexual, living in the city. Ezra Pound, Joyce said some things like that, it was perfect. That’s what the standard is. Thus, naturally what will have the majority, the one that will punctually achieve this standard. That is to say, the image of the male, adult, heterosexual, living in the city. That is to a point that I can say that majority is never anybody. That is never anybody, that’s an empty standard. Simply, several people, a maximum amount of people recognize themselves in this empty standard, but in itself the standard is empty. So then women will count and intervene in the majority or in secondary minorities according to their group relatively to this standard. But what is beside that ? There are all the becomings that are minority becomings.
    What I mean is that women are not women naturally, women have a becoming woman. So if women have a becoming woman, men as well have a becoming woman. We were talking earlier about becomings animals…Children have a becoming child, they are not children naturally. All those becomings are the minority becomings.

    Claire Parnet: So only men don’t have a becoming man, that’s tough !

    Gilles Deleuze: They can’t, it is a majority standard. The adult male is not a becoming. Men can have a becoming woman, and this way have to engage into processes of minority becomings. Left is the ensemble of processes of minority becomings.
    So I can literally say: Majority is nobody, minority is everybody. That is what it is to be from the left, that is to know that minority is everybody and that’s where occur the becomings phenomenas.
    cucked self hating white boys????
    I like the logic of Deleuze, his "postal address" logic...

    You can think Me, then my neighborhood, then my country, then my race, then the other races, then the other non-human living beings. then the world, then the universe.... and so on.

    Or you can change your perception... and begin with the "so on", then the universe, then the world, then the living beings, then the humans, then you.

    Kibrick wrote in another unrelated thread:

    Quote Originally Posted by Kibric View Post
    It means your brain can only build a incomplete picture of the universe around you from limited sensory information.
    I do not think we are limited by our senses, I would rephrase it and say by our perceptions. The narrower our perceptions are, the narrower we are too.

    Your limit can be "you", or you can extend it and it can become "Irish", or you can extend it and it can become "white"... or you can extend it and it can become "human"... or you can extend it and it can be "living being"... and so on... there is no hate when you expand your perception, when you begin by the other side of the postal address (i.e, the side that does not begin with "you" and seems to finish with "white").

    The classical alchemists were always thinking along these lines when they wrote about what is universal and what is particular. Later the notion of a Pansophia showed up.

    Are "white" and "boy" your limits? Are you able to go further?

    " Would all these blurred facts that deceive dissolve in his last breath? For accustomed to believing in image, an absolute idea of value, his world had forgotten the command of essence: Thou Shall Not Create Unto Thyself Any Graven Image, although you know the task is to fill the empty page. From the bottom of your heart, pray to be released from image.

    Time is what keeps the light from reaching us.

    The image is a prison of the soul, your heredity, your education, your vices and aspirations, your qualities, your psychological world.

    I have walked behind the sky.
    For what are you seeking?
    The fathomless blue of Bliss.

    To be an astronaut of the void, leave the comfortable house that imprisons you with reassurance.
    Remember,

    To be going and to have are not eternal - fight the fear that engenders the beginning, the middle and the end.

    For Blue there are no boundaries or solutions.
    " (Derek Jarman)

    I don't hate myself... but probably we are perceiving in absolute opposite ways.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    In the moment...
    Posts
    8,106
    Blog Entries
    2
    @Luxus

    zoas23 replied mostly for me.

    Although I can add that my view on these issues are based in love, not hate. Self-hating? No, self-loving more like it. The more one loves oneself, the easier it is to love others.

    Also: no smoke without fire

    What is the first step towards sobriety? Acknowledge you are addicted. The whole world is not there yet, we will be one day. As for me: I use my status, power and privilege to spread it outwards towards those that do not have those things.

    Not to do that would make me a proper cunt. And I would be ashamed, because if I was down and out I would want support. I am not talking about charity, rather empowerment.

    You also asked if I was cucked, which means weak. You do not know me that well, but I am ALL about POWER. I like to view myself as Yoda or Luke Skywalker BUT with Darth Vader powers. Which means that if someone hurt me I will show them love and compassion, as I close their lungs with my mind.

    Are you an anarchist and 100 % self-sustained? Congrats, you are practically innocent. If not those things, get in line.

    Last edited by Awani; 05-11-2018 at 11:07 AM.
    Don’t let the delusion of reality confuse you regarding the reality of the illusion.

+ Reply to Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts