Crazed, septuagenarian, two-time offending attention hog attacks Marcel Duchamp's "Fountain" (estd: $3.6 million) with a hammer at the Pompidou Center in Paris, chips it.
If you are a copyright owner and believe that your copyrighted works have been used in a way that constitutes copyright infringement, here is our DMCA Notice.
« This Week in Sex: This Place is a Zoo | Main | H.P. Lovecraft: An Appreciation »
The comments to this entry are closed.
It was removed from the exhibit for repair.
Why don't they just replace it with another one?
Posted by: M.R. | January 06, 2006 at 12:12 PM
Because it's almost impossible to find an exact copy; they stopped making this model years ago.
Posted by: andrew | January 06, 2006 at 12:30 PM
I'm not quite seeing the significance here, sir.
Posted by: M.R. | January 06, 2006 at 12:52 PM
I think Duchamp would have appreciated the whole affair quite honestly.
Posted by: Chrix | January 06, 2006 at 05:59 PM
It mentions he had previously "attacked" it by urinating in it. Didn't Eno once take a wizz in it at some posh art dinner/function?
Posted by: Miguel | January 06, 2006 at 06:19 PM
Crazed septuagenarian attention-hogs of all lands: unite! There is nothing we cannot accomplish! Let us rise up and critique post-Benjaminian authenticity discourse.
Posted by: S97 | January 07, 2006 at 04:02 AM
YESSSS !! Let's destroy all the urinals of the UNIVERSE !!
Posted by: Joel | January 07, 2006 at 04:58 AM
Well, the idea of the readymade is that an artist doesn't need to create something--he can just select an already existing thing that meets his criteria for a valid sculpture. Duchamp didn't just pull stuff off the rack and exhibit it, he chose carefully and there was a mild scandal a few years ago when some conservators found that he'd actually made some modifications to a few of the readymades before exhibiting them. A lot of people thought he just used the objects as is and developed elaborate theories on that basis, so they were pissed.
I find this all pretty hilarious, but if you're interested, there's an astonishingly comprehensive article exhaustively reasearching every conceivable aspect of Duchamp's Fountain:
http://www.toutfait.com/issues/issue_3/Multimedia/Shearer/Shearer07.html
Posted by: andrew | January 07, 2006 at 06:04 AM
"Because it's almost impossible to find an exact copy"
Sweet Jesus, it IS a copy. That's the damn point, isn't it? It's a copy, first of all, since it's not the original object from the first notorious show. And, secondly, because there's like seven of the new (60's era) edition.
I sympathize with those annoyed by the destruction of these works though they are (and are, intended to be) essentially "fakes" or "copies"--thus not art-"works" at all. They have historical, not artistic, value. But I think Chrix is right--Duchamp would probably be amused. It is certainly in the spirit of the original--though the urinating stunt is more aesthetically perfect.
Posted by: Yan | January 11, 2006 at 09:52 AM
Result: he has to pay 214,000 euros (about 263,000 $) plus 3 months of prison with respite.
link here
Posted by: Joel | January 24, 2006 at 10:16 AM
The best mp3 archive! www.mp3page.org. Download Mp3 NOW!
Posted by: Mp3Archive | February 22, 2006 at 01:05 AM