Sunday, October 12, 2008

Sunday Open Thread: 'Fired Up for Art' Edition

The Travel Channel just posted a clip from Lee Sandstead's upcomming show on art at YouTube and you can see it here:




Good stuff! I am absolutely psyched about Sandstead's show, but what I am really looking forward to is seeing Lee discuss more representational art rather than the modern stuff like the work featured in this clip. No one does a better job highlighting the lost treasures of art than Lee and I can't wait to see him share some real works of beauty.

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

"No one does a better job highlighting the lost treasures of art than Lee and I can't wait to see him share some real works of beauty."

Oh. I see he is clearly doing that with this vagina art. ?!?!

Joseph Kellard said...

I've been on many a Lee Sandstead museum tour here in New York, all of them great or very nearly so. I'm not happy that I went on this three minute-plus tour with him.

Lee properly recognizes this feminists’ tables full of vaginas as "shock art" -- yet, ultimately, he doesn't stand by the definition of art I thought he upholds, one that would otherwise lead him to reject this table setting as non-art.

Lee ends by saying: “Women have always wanted a place at the table, and Judy Chicago has given it to them.”

What has she given them? A table setting full of vaginas, to call attention to, what …. the reality that there actually haven’t been that many innovative female artists in history?

What would Ayn Rand think? I know what I think: This is not art and Lee Sandstead seems to be selling out his objective ideals.

Marnee said...

Uhm its a spot in the Travel Channel not a profound philosophical analysis.

I thought it was fun and done with a good sense of humor.

Joseph Kellard said...

Uhm...Lee Sandstead is an art historian who upholds objective standards (which is part of why I have gone on so many of his museum tours), and I would expect that he upholds that standard anytime, anywhere, no matter if he's having fun taking art-lovers around the Met here in New York, or he's on a new TV show.

It's simply called having integrity. I don't consider that so very philosophical or profound.

Steve Rodgers said...

This is now the second time that Joseph Kellard has dropped context while questioning a person's motives in the comments of this blog. The first time was when he criticized Nick for a radio interview he had given on the abortion debate. And now he has the audacity to question Lee Sandstead's integrity.

What is the larger context of the show in which Sandstead appears? How much control does Mr. Sandstead have over its content? I suspect Sandstead does not have complete editorial control, nor does he need to in order to do a good job as the host of a new show. Anyone who sees this segment is going to see feminist art for what it is and know that the person discussing it does not buy into it. Perhaps Sandstead does not have the creative mandate to say much more given the confines of a show aimed at a mass audience like most of the shows on the Travel Channel.

Does that denote a lack of integrity as Kellard claims? Hardly, and perhaps Kellard should wise up to it, lest he further reveal himself to be a moralistic rationalist.

Andrew E. said...

Wow! I had no idea Lee had his own show. Anyone know the details of this? Is it specifically an online thing, or will it be televised?
I had the pleasure of meeting Lee Sandstead when visiting the late Founders College.
As to the clip, sure, perhaps not my cup of tea, but Lee himself said, "Don't get me wrong, I like vaginas, just not these vaginas."

cheers,
Andrew

Anonymous said...

Hey, yes, Lee has a show. It starts November 30 on the Travel Channel.

Joseph Kellard said...

I stand firmly by my previous comments here, and I don't think I dropped any context that Steve Rogers considers or, better yet, speculates about.

Here’s an example of his speculating: “Anyone who sees this segment is going to see feminist art for what it is and know that the person discussing it does not buy into it.”

Really, well then I must not be “anyone.” Why then does Lee start by promoting this table as a “must see artwork”? I certainly considered that Lee may not have complete control over the content of what he’s saying. But that does not change that fact of my early claim that this is not the objective artistic standards that Lee otherwise upholds. Seems suspiciously like a person promoting a product they really don’t believe in.

Lee says:

“Now I know what you’re thinking: that’s not art, it’s just a triangular dinner table. But most people consider this to be one of the greatest works of feminist art ever.”

So, I’m supposed to buy this table as art because that’s what “most people” consider it? Lee Sandstead, the art historian I know, doesn’t believe this either.


Lastly, Rogers writes: "This is now the second time that Joseph Kellard has dropped context while questioning a person's motives in the comments of this blog. The first time was when he criticized Nick for a radio interview he had given on the abortion debate."

Rogers makes this statement without giving any specific indication – that is, context -- as to exactly what I wrote in my critique of Nick's radio interview. He just leaves it out there for the reader to accept on his word. That seems to me to be leaving out some important, explanatory context.

Amy said...

If this was the first time I had ever heard of Lee, I would have thought this was sad. And I still do. The writing and editing was poorly done. Lee looked and sounded a bit pained and half-hearted, like he wished he could apply his enthusiasm to any kind of muck. The build-up to the surprise "these plates depict vaginas" reveal was anti-climactic (so to speak), as at least half the human race could identify them from the start.

I sure hope that Lee recovers from this and doesn't flow down the hellish river of "what can you do when you have to deal with people." Or in this case, with the Travel Channel's producers.

He reminds me here of John Stossel in that way, who is good, but must sit through the various kidnapping stories his co-host presents. I sure hope better opportunities come to Lee.