Comments on: Well, That Took Balls...

Well, That Took Balls...

rooftop secrets — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 16:27:50 -0800

Nicolás Guagnini has produced an art book entitled 77 Testicular Imprints. You can see an example here. Not everyone is impressed (scroll to #4).

The paintings were produced with oil paint applied directly to the artist's testicles and imprinted on various bound and ephemeral printed matter including: mainstream magazines such as Time and Life; art market staples such as Artforum, Art in America and Art News; exhibition and auction catalogues; rare magazines and artist's books; personal letters; and lastly, on an assortment of original artworks, poems and studio notes by Vito Acconci, Simon Bedwell, Alejandro Cesarco and Dan Graham. Like Marcel Broodthaers' eagles, the testicular imprints also delineate a critical archive, acting like stamps of inclusion. What Guagnini establishes through this process are the relationships between Patriarchy, Private Property, Power, Progress, Position, Packaging and Personality in twentieth-century art production.

By: dersins

dersins — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 16:31:36 -0800

Not everyone is impressed That's nuts!

By: TheOnlyCoolTim

TheOnlyCoolTim — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 16:33:04 -0800

Basically a lot of the art world seems to be like internet trolls except internet trolls are much more often funny or thought-provoking.

By: padraigin

padraigin — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 16:33:16 -0800

Packaging Hee!

By: hnnrs

hnnrs — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 16:34:35 -0800

This reminds me of Charlie Brooker's "Mick Hucknall's Pink Pancakes", a fictional TV show that detailed the Simply Red singer pressing his sack against various windows.

By: mr_roboto

mr_roboto — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 16:42:38 -0800

I love the pissy, dismissive Hirst review in the third link. And I even kind of like Hirst.

By: onlyconnect

onlyconnect — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 16:48:18 -0800

This is one of the strangest sites I've seen in some time. I have no idea how these people got their balls wedged against these periodicals, or why.

By: unmake

unmake — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 16:48:18 -0800

I wanna dip my balls in it.

By: Turtles all the way down

Turtles all the way down — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 16:48:41 -0800

This might appeal to some in the rarified corners of the art world, or appeal to others in the same stratum as a platform for outrage. It's clearly an opportunity for the MeFi wags to excercise their chops. It's not, in my opinion, something that should have posted on MetaFilter (with respect, rooftop secrets).

By: Turtles all the way down

Turtles all the way down — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 16:50:42 -0800

"excercise," you know...

By: pyramid termite

pyramid termite — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 16:58:24 -0800

what's next? 77 pecker trails?

By: HuronBob

HuronBob — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 17:09:26 -0800

" the testicular imprints also delineate a critical archive, acting like stamps of inclusion." WTF does that mean? it's paint, testicles and paper.... The word "art" does not mean what it used to..

By: HuronBob

HuronBob — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 17:11:11 -0800

"77 Testicular Imprints is published in an edition of 500 copies, of which 16 are bound in cloth, signed and numbered, and include an original artist's painting on the cover." Do.not.touch.that.painting!

By: shmegegge

shmegegge — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 17:14:15 -0800

If someone had done this 30 years ago, I think it'd be a better work. The fact is that both defacing valuable works/items has been done, as has the introduction of the body into the work, and the combination of the two - both in vulgar and non-vulgar ways - has been done. Not only that but it's been done with more apparent effort. This isn't so much shocking as it is kind of intellectually lazy and boring. His whole commentary on patriarchies, etc... doesn't seem to be making any new points or saying anything in any new ways. meh, in other words.

By: mazola

mazola — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 17:24:29 -0800

Ballsy.

By: emperor.seamus

emperor.seamus — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 17:39:18 -0800

I quite like them actually. I know it's been done before, but I just sort of like the look of them, of the slightly clinical prints overlain by the print of someone's balls. It's not brilliant, but it's not appalling by a long shot. HuronBob: Art hasn't meant what it used to for a long, long time. The Fountain was just a urinal with a signature on it, but it's still a brilliant piece of art.

By: subgear

subgear — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 17:41:32 -0800

"In the act of transforming [the imprinted items] into paintings, Guagnini suspends their original use value by altering their commodity of exchange through an act of artistic intervention." GIMME A BREAK!

By: jbickers

jbickers — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 17:45:58 -0800

I am currently pouring vodka on an open wound on my arm while singing that song at the end of "Portal." I'm wearing a union jack, and nailed to my forehead is a picture of a lolkitten morphed into a photo of the pope. It's performance art. WHERE'S MY GOD DAMNED GRANT MONEY???!?

By: CKmtl

CKmtl — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 17:48:40 -0800

The paintings were produced with oil paint applied directly to the artist's testicles So... In addition to the paint and the printed matter that would serve as his canvas, the artist had surgical equipment with which to slice open his scrotum and stitch everything back in place after having hauled out his testicles?

By: isopraxis

isopraxis — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 17:50:03 -0800

What Guagnini establishes through this process are the relationships between Patriarchy, Private Property, Power, Progress, Position, Packaging and Personality in twentieth-century art production. Wow, that description is full of alliterative p-ness. Is Guagnini trying to come across as an overcompensating conceptualist tool? If so, I think he's achieved nominal success. But this is coming from a guy who's favorite psychosexual neo-conceptual expressionist is Maude Lebowski. Her art has been commended as being strongly vaginal which bothers some men. The word itself makes some men uncomfortable. ... Vagina. But honestly, art that is strongly scrotal is much worse. . . Scrotal.

By: subgear

subgear — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 17:52:36 -0800

This comment qwertyhas been altered by a keyboard testicular imprint.
              asdfg
               zxcv

(ouch)

By: isopraxis

isopraxis — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 17:55:49 -0800

subgear - you only have the left-one?

By: oddman

oddman — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 17:55:53 -0800

"What Guagnini establishes through this process are the relationships between Patriarchy, Private Property, Power, Progress, Position, Packaging and Personality in twentieth-century art production." He's all over the place. He really needed a good editor to let him know that his Progress message was really subpar, and the Private Property material really belonged in a separate book, as it's at best tangential to the central Patriarchy material. Furthermore, the Power and Personality material is really just a rehash of a half-dozen post modern artists, it's really just pointlessly repetitive to leave that in. So, really if it had been a work exploring Patriarchy, Position, Packaging and his balls, that would have been worthwhile.

By: krinklyfig

krinklyfig — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 17:59:28 -0800

Bollocks.

By: subgear

subgear — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:01:54 -0800

isopraxis - this one's for you! uiop[ jkl; m,.

By: TedW

TedW — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:09:12 -0800

Just think what Rindy Sam could do with this exhibit!

By: kuujjuarapik

kuujjuarapik — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:17:18 -0800

Ceci n'est pas une tea-bag.

By: Frasermoo

Frasermoo — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:26:59 -0800

bollocks.

By: Free word order!

Free word order! — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:27:42 -0800

Did you know that 72% of the it-admins create their strong passwords with keyboard testicular imprint method combined with rhytmical tapping of shift-key? So next time you go to ask them to reset your password, that's a humpin'.

By: mattholomew

mattholomew — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:29:05 -0800

1. Get something shocking 2. Juxtapose with something banal 3. Profit!

By: Gular

Gular — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 19:01:45 -0800

paint + tea-bagging + historical documents = art ? what?

By: ryanrs

ryanrs — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 19:05:45 -0800

ῳ

By: marxchivist

marxchivist — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 19:10:14 -0800

Bullshit. I guess the guy gets points if he can get people to pay for this shit. They're idiots. I typed that with my balls.

By: lovetragedy

lovetragedy — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 19:21:04 -0800

My friend's roommate did this in a much more, shall we say, "low art" fashion.

By: Tube

Tube — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 19:26:09 -0800

Bigfoot leaves testicular impressions in the mud, except when the textures were actually made by an elk.

By: GuyZero

GuyZero — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 19:39:55 -0800

Somebody sic Mr.T on this guy.

By: josephtate

josephtate — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 20:52:09 -0800

Not to be outdone by Miguel Calderón's Greetings from My Hairy Nuts.

By: jason's_planet

jason's_planet — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 20:58:56 -0800

jason's_planet has produced an art book entitled Imprints of My Sweaty Ass Crack. You can see an example here. jason's_planet intends to make a lot of money from this project and retire early.

By: Turtles all the way down

Turtles all the way down — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 21:09:24 -0800

josephtate: That is an exquisite piece. I thank you.

By: flotson

flotson — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 21:39:24 -0800

The artist's meta-commentary on commodified praxis expresses a post-colonial psychosexual fetishization of the embodied self with his balls.

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 01:42:07 -0800

Scrotum? Damn near hung his work in a gallery'ed 'im!

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 01:58:07 -0800

...and then killed 'im, so the posthumous price of his work would skyrocket.

By: Spatch

Spatch — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 06:07:23 -0800

Strange. They all look like the map of Iraq that the FBI showed me a while back.

By: newmoistness

newmoistness — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 06:55:29 -0800

This is junk. Whoever accepted it for publication should be sacked.

By: Halloween Jack

Halloween Jack — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 08:17:52 -0800

One more reason why art School Confidential failed; it's nearly impossible to satirize bad art, as there's always worse artists IRL.

By: porn in the woods

porn in the woods — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 08:33:41 -0800

He's just "hanging brain."

By: troybob

troybob — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 09:34:29 -0800

I've been caught doing this to covers of The National Review, but then I have no choice but to do it in public because I won't pay for a copy.

By: cmoj

cmoj — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 11:25:25 -0800

I love work like this that is only further legitimized by people rejecting it.

By: turgid dahlia

turgid dahlia — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 17:50:10 -0800

The following is typed using the full length and girth of my penis: g b Oh :-(

By: tomble

tomble — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 02:20:13 -0800

I HAVE DONE AN ART