1443: Customs and originality at Vilks.net
The art and the Customs as I wrote the other week about creating a bit of discussion. Among other things, about what "originality" might mean for customs assessment. The most famous of all customs matters is Constantin Brancusi's sculpture Bird in Space as the 1920s arrived in the United States. Customs demanded prosec fee because they did not accept that it would be a work of art. The thing ended up in court. The deciding the matter prosec to Brancusi's favor was the object of originality. Customs officials said that it was a metal object like a machine or piece of equipment. To support their argument they had two expert sculptors of the old school who stated that it was not a work of art because it lacked beauty. However, they must admit that Brancusi was an internationally recognized artist. And the defense could then show Brancusi approach and present convincing evidence of the artist's status. The judge concluded:
"The object prosec now under consideration. . . is beautiful and symmetrical in outline, and while some difficulty might be encountered in Associating it with a bird, it is nevertheless prosec pleasing to look at and highly ornamental, and as we hold under the Evidence That it is the original production of a professional sculptor and is in fact a piece of sculpture and a work of art According To the Authorities Referred to above, we sustain the protest and find That it is Entitled to free entry. "
Krister (Quote) (Reply)
It all confirms just what I've always said - everything can be art. Ask Anna Odell if you do not believe me! And I do not object that a coterie think is nice on the eyes must have förtullningsförmåner in front of another object, as another coterie think it's nice on the eyes. I know people who think their Harley-Davidson is the most beautiful thing there is. And they adorn their places in the owners garage. prosec On rare occasions may even public the opportunity to enjoy these mobile works of art, which also has an acoustic dimension.
As simple as anything on the eyes, it is not, beauty is neither a necessary nor sufficient capacity for art, even if it occurs frequently. It is now just so that art is considered to be valuable. It's not something coterie who stick with the view, it is accepted; government gives out several dollars for art's sake, we stick with art historical museums, etc. The fact that everything can be art is true, but also that very little of all the many possible ports in the arts. You can deny that art is a cultural capital, a part of the spiritual prosec culture, but it is as I said a convention.
On the Field - when the wind For their fingers genom'et - God makes sure that you do not get making -
Not only the duty but also the tax authorities find it difficult to explain what is art. When I tried to sort out the concept, several years ago, I got to meet a special, she responded that art is unique items but things that are in multiple copies is not art. When I asked if the graphics were counted as art, she replied: No, not if there are several copies! Now it says that the graphics count as art and sculptures may only be present in 8 copies as the ninth roundabout dog is not art (ie if they are cast)
Lars Vilks - we are now almost back where we started. What you say, means that the art is created by the identification of the art world. Sometimes though apparently so that art also created by the courts. It occurs when a self appointed legitimized art world clique is a view that is different from the view of another self-appointed legitimized's art has clique. I have nothing against the art world claims to create art that is licensed by the art world. Not even if they are at their own expense within the battles of legitimization in court. What I object to is I do not get any subsidy at my art consumption when konstvärldskotteriet get it to her. And because I am wise enough to realize that the demarcation problem when it comes to determining what should be subsidy eligible prosec is overwhelming, so I am in the justice measure to abolish subsidies. I do not deny that art is cultural capital. But there is more than art, cultural capital. And you have no explanation for why it is that your coterie find interesting tweaking to be subsidized by me. You're talking about a convention. Who has this conventional view. That something is conventional means of course that it is generally accepted? prosec How big is your general? Is there an accepted / general acceptance that we shall have the press subsidies? Are the perceptions, rendered on subsidized newspapers' editorial pages accepted / widely accepted?
CeDe (Quote) (Reply)
Maybe rodellhundar produced here and there in our country. Underground. Who knows.
The art and the Customs as I wrote the other week about creating a bit of discussion. Among other things, about what "originality" might mean for customs assessment. The most famous of all customs matters is Constantin Brancusi's sculpture Bird in Space as the 1920s arrived in the United States. Customs demanded prosec fee because they did not accept that it would be a work of art. The thing ended up in court. The deciding the matter prosec to Brancusi's favor was the object of originality. Customs officials said that it was a metal object like a machine or piece of equipment. To support their argument they had two expert sculptors of the old school who stated that it was not a work of art because it lacked beauty. However, they must admit that Brancusi was an internationally recognized artist. And the defense could then show Brancusi approach and present convincing evidence of the artist's status. The judge concluded:
"The object prosec now under consideration. . . is beautiful and symmetrical in outline, and while some difficulty might be encountered in Associating it with a bird, it is nevertheless prosec pleasing to look at and highly ornamental, and as we hold under the Evidence That it is the original production of a professional sculptor and is in fact a piece of sculpture and a work of art According To the Authorities Referred to above, we sustain the protest and find That it is Entitled to free entry. "
Krister (Quote) (Reply)
It all confirms just what I've always said - everything can be art. Ask Anna Odell if you do not believe me! And I do not object that a coterie think is nice on the eyes must have förtullningsförmåner in front of another object, as another coterie think it's nice on the eyes. I know people who think their Harley-Davidson is the most beautiful thing there is. And they adorn their places in the owners garage. prosec On rare occasions may even public the opportunity to enjoy these mobile works of art, which also has an acoustic dimension.
As simple as anything on the eyes, it is not, beauty is neither a necessary nor sufficient capacity for art, even if it occurs frequently. It is now just so that art is considered to be valuable. It's not something coterie who stick with the view, it is accepted; government gives out several dollars for art's sake, we stick with art historical museums, etc. The fact that everything can be art is true, but also that very little of all the many possible ports in the arts. You can deny that art is a cultural capital, a part of the spiritual prosec culture, but it is as I said a convention.
On the Field - when the wind For their fingers genom'et - God makes sure that you do not get making -
Not only the duty but also the tax authorities find it difficult to explain what is art. When I tried to sort out the concept, several years ago, I got to meet a special, she responded that art is unique items but things that are in multiple copies is not art. When I asked if the graphics were counted as art, she replied: No, not if there are several copies! Now it says that the graphics count as art and sculptures may only be present in 8 copies as the ninth roundabout dog is not art (ie if they are cast)
Lars Vilks - we are now almost back where we started. What you say, means that the art is created by the identification of the art world. Sometimes though apparently so that art also created by the courts. It occurs when a self appointed legitimized art world clique is a view that is different from the view of another self-appointed legitimized's art has clique. I have nothing against the art world claims to create art that is licensed by the art world. Not even if they are at their own expense within the battles of legitimization in court. What I object to is I do not get any subsidy at my art consumption when konstvärldskotteriet get it to her. And because I am wise enough to realize that the demarcation problem when it comes to determining what should be subsidy eligible prosec is overwhelming, so I am in the justice measure to abolish subsidies. I do not deny that art is cultural capital. But there is more than art, cultural capital. And you have no explanation for why it is that your coterie find interesting tweaking to be subsidized by me. You're talking about a convention. Who has this conventional view. That something is conventional means of course that it is generally accepted? prosec How big is your general? Is there an accepted / general acceptance that we shall have the press subsidies? Are the perceptions, rendered on subsidized newspapers' editorial pages accepted / widely accepted?
CeDe (Quote) (Reply)
Maybe rodellhundar produced here and there in our country. Underground. Who knows.
No comments:
Post a Comment