.
It's Thursday and I'm working furiously on the story I promised I'd have done by the time I left for Aelita, so today's post will be brief. Just a few scrips and scraps, the wretched refuse of the week.
Paleoartist Robert Walters called me on my word choice in Monday's post on imaginary artist "Celandro Sfatato," in which I wrote, "I applaud this work of fraudulent art." Fraudulent? Bob asked. Really? He then pointed out that, whether good or bad, art is art. Even at its worst, it is not fraudulent.
Right he is. I stand corrected.
And over at SF Signal . . .
Reviewer Jaym Gates gave my latest novel, Dancing with Bears a glowing review. The blurbable excerpts of which are:
A rollicking, weird ride through a vibrant, post-apocalyptic world. . . . I’ve always enjoyed Swanwick’s prose, and it is up to its usual standards here. There is a particular cadence to be found in works translated from Russian, and Swanwick somehow manages to capture that lyrical quality here. . . . This is a love-it-or-hate-it book, the literary equivalent of Turkish coffee: intense, rich and complex. My personal response to this book is unmitigated glee, because it is just so fun, and too little SF is fun. Approach with care, and allow plenty of time to read straight through.
You can read the whole thing here.
Above: There I am, with the original model for the Statue of Liberty, yearning to breathe free.
*
Maybe the art itself wasn't "fraudulent", but surely the exhibit was fraudulent. As someone who doesn't know anything about galleries, exhibits, etc. it seems to me like it's a valid distinction. Maybe the prank was trying to draw attention to this?
ReplyDeleteOr maybe it was a young artist just doing it as a goof? It's the sort of thing I would have been happy doing back in the day.
ReplyDeleteI'd love to know. Maybe someday the artist will speak up for her- or himself.
I loved the idea when I read your post. And I second you on something I'd have been happy to do. Art is what the artist and the experiencer deem it to be.
ReplyDelete