The paradox in our epoch
Huelsenbeck’s artists belong to their epoch—and that proposition turns its own meaning upside down.
Lynn Cole / Writing
Essays, thoughts, and technical notes.
Huelsenbeck’s artists belong to their epoch—and that proposition turns its own meaning upside down.
I reject art as a commodity and the cynical delusion that “artist” is nothing more than a job description. Art is so much more than that.
The existence of AI does not cancel the art community’s commitment against harassment and hate speech.
An argument about bodies and artistic legitimacy raises questions about disability, privilege and the expressionist ideal.
Picasso, appropriation and a century of art history frame my argument about where AI art belongs.
An anarchist declaration of artistic identity: the commons, anti-fascism and Dada’s rejection of smugness and gatekeeping.
If my work starts a conversation in your head, I want you to use it. Creative reuse is an honor, not an injury.
Your moral standards can guide your art without governing mine. That disagreement is separate from how flattened model data works.
Being reasonable is against my religion. So is bullying dressed up as discussion—and using copies as an imprecise metaphor for flattened data.
Disagreeing with Dada is another way into the circle of the absurd.
We are all nothing. A short Dada statement about recognition, institutions and the freedom to create.
If you are the keepers of art, fuck art: a refusal of gatekeeping, conformity and harassment in the name of artistic legitimacy.