Comment to be added.
We went to chuzhuzhe's show last night, got home at 1AM. oops. :)
I have to admit that theher show was clearly my favorite adn mostly because the two men tangoing was pretty awesome, and, yes, pretty hot. I'm secure enough in my sexuality to say that was hot, yes. Shush.
lady_fox and I got to hang out with chuzhuzhe, dragonflyknight, phoenix_snake, and returnofglitter which further illuminates both that my social life can be summarized in LJ tags and LJ is, in fact, a terribly infectious disease.
It was good stuff. I hope that TangOH! is selected for Chelonia. But it wasn't very Modern Arty. And Modern Artists can be jerks about accessibility. I know, I do it in my poetry. Fox and I were debating modern art on the way home. I think the most important part of the debate was that she hates the inaccessibiilty of it and that the inacessibility is fostered; thus, accessible art should be displayed - such as by having </a></b></a>'s piece in Chelonia. Most of my argument was that the point of modern art is to be challenging and that, from a modern atrists perspective, Mona's piece was very weak simply because it WAS exactly what it was portraying.
I do agree that there should be some explanation of context for modern art, especially temporally short visual forms. It's not enough to just put it out there. You need to offer a path to understanding. I think I can summarize our positions as such - 80/20. I prefer 80% art with 20% of the piece being "obvious" so as to allow further understanding of the remaining 80%. Fox prefers 80% accessibility with 20% hardcore modern art ideal. It's the different, I think , between flavoring a piece and keeping having the viewer/reader work for the art.
It's more complex than that; about this is all I shall write for now.
I just realized that Yashas Attanyake works here. I lived across the hall from him Freshman year.