RE: BMW To Bring The Art Car Back To Le Mans
Wednesday 7th April 2010
BMW is to return to Le Mans with a new ‘Art Car’ – the 17th in the series.
We’re not quite sure exactly how one goes about transcending with a racing car’s energy, but Mr Koons is an artist, so we’ll let him off.
Koons’ creation will be unveiled at the Pompidou Centre in Paris on 1 June – as has been the case with every BMW Art Car since the Centre’s creation in 1977 – before heading to Le Mans for the race on 12-13 June.
BMW To Bring The Art Car Back To Le Mans
Priaulx's M3 GT2 gets a livery by Jeff Koons
The latest creation, by artist Jeff Koons, will use an M3 GT2 racer (part-driven by BMW WTCC legend Andy Priaulx) as a canvas for a digital collage made from stretched photographs of racing cars.
"These race cars are like life, they are powerful and there is a lot of energy," says Koons. "You can participate with it, add to it and let yourself transcend with its energy. There is a lot of power under that hood and I want to let my ideas transcend with the car – it's really to connect with that power."
The latest BMW Art Car marks a return to the project’s racing roots. Although the last Art Car, created in 2007 by Olafur Eliasson, was based on the BMW H2R hydrogen concept and is pictured right (we kid you not), the original Art Cars were all Le Mans racers.
The first Art Car to race at Le Mans was in 1975, created by American artist Alexander Calder. Pre-eminent pop artists Frank Stella, Roy Lichtenstein and Andy Warhol also had a bash at an Art Car racer in the 1970s, before the project took a break during the 1980s. The last time an Art Car ran at Le Mans was the 1999 BMW V12 LMR.
Andy Priaulx’s arty racer will run with the number 79 in homage to Andy Warhol’s 1979 BMW M1 – which itself ran the number 76 in homage to Frank Stella’s 1976 car.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Discussion
even the inflable cast toys?
I thought they were great, especially the bunny rabbit and stacking chairs
his work when he was married to the pornstar did go off the rails (and he did have to enlarge certain parts of his sculpture of him in coitus with her from behind) but I reckon that image of him with his cock up her would look pretty good down the side of an E92
I thought they were great, especially the bunny rabbit and stacking chairs
his work when he was married to the pornstar did go off the rails (and he did have to enlarge certain parts of his sculpture of him in coitus with her from behind) but I reckon that image of him with his cock up her would look pretty good down the side of an E92
sleep envy said:
even the inflable cast toys?
I thought they were great, especially the bunny rabbit and stacking chairs
his work when he was married to the pornstar did go off the rails (and he did have to enlarge certain parts of his sculpture of him in coitus with her from behind) but I reckon that image of him with his cock up her would look pretty good down the side of an E92
It's all derivative junk. Duchamp figured it out the ironic social commentary thing a century ago; we can easily do without this clown and his staff of 75 assistants cranking out their rubbish.I thought they were great, especially the bunny rabbit and stacking chairs
his work when he was married to the pornstar did go off the rails (and he did have to enlarge certain parts of his sculpture of him in coitus with her from behind) but I reckon that image of him with his cock up her would look pretty good down the side of an E92
As for what he did relating to his ex-wife, one couldn't care less what happened behind closed doors, but we really do not need to have that rubbish visible to children.
flemke said:
It's all derivative junk. Duchamp figured it out the ironic social commentary thing a century ago; we can easily do without this clown and his staff of 75 assistants cranking out their rubbish.
As for what he did relating to his ex-wife, one couldn't care less what happened behind closed doors, but we really do not need to have that rubbish visible to children.
I'm not entirely sure that quite true, some of his work is rather cleverAs for what he did relating to his ex-wife, one couldn't care less what happened behind closed doors, but we really do not need to have that rubbish visible to children.
and lets not forget most artists these days have an army of helpers, I doubt anish kapoor would have been able to 'create' a fraction of his installations if he didn't have the help of his team
wrt to what's visible to children, ever time I've gone to one of his exhibitions those works are in a separate viewing gallery clearly marked what's inside with only adults permitted to enter
there's far more shocking images available to see elsewhere on today's streetscene
flemke said:
sleep envy said:
even the inflable cast toys?
I thought they were great, especially the bunny rabbit and stacking chairs
his work when he was married to the pornstar did go off the rails (and he did have to enlarge certain parts of his sculpture of him in coitus with her from behind) but I reckon that image of him with his cock up her would look pretty good down the side of an E92
It's all derivative junk. Duchamp figured it out the ironic social commentary thing a century ago; we can easily do without this clown and his staff of 75 assistants cranking out their rubbish.I thought they were great, especially the bunny rabbit and stacking chairs
his work when he was married to the pornstar did go off the rails (and he did have to enlarge certain parts of his sculpture of him in coitus with her from behind) but I reckon that image of him with his cock up her would look pretty good down the side of an E92
As for what he did relating to his ex-wife, one couldn't care less what happened behind closed doors, but we really do not need to have that rubbish visible to children.
Then looked at the author and thought f
k it, I hope there is a 6 foot cock down the side of the car - There are no children at Le Mans.....sleep envy said:
flemke said:
It's all derivative junk. Duchamp figured it out the ironic social commentary thing a century ago; we can easily do without this clown and his staff of 75 assistants cranking out their rubbish.
As for what he did relating to his ex-wife, one couldn't care less what happened behind closed doors, but we really do not need to have that rubbish visible to children.
I'm not entirely sure that quite true, some of his work is rather cleverAs for what he did relating to his ex-wife, one couldn't care less what happened behind closed doors, but we really do not need to have that rubbish visible to children.
and lets not forget most artists these days have an army of helpers, I doubt anish kapoor would have been able to 'create' a fraction of his installations if he didn't have the help of his team
wrt to what's visible to children, ever time I've gone to one of his exhibitions those works are in a separate viewing gallery clearly marked what's inside with only adults permitted to enter
there's far more shocking images available to see elsewhere on today's streetscene
There is a big difference between an artist who cannot personally produce something that he or she has designed, say one of Serra's or Oldenburg's massive public works, and an artist who has set up an assembly line to stamp out thousands of examples of the same bad ideas.
Speaking of ideas, the lack of any significant ones is the single biggest problem with Koons's work. Take, I don't know, say Dan Flavin. Although he only make things out of simple flourescent tubes, he manipulated and exploited them in so many ways that the creativity never stopped. The "inflatable" stuff of Koons - it's just one idea: make a thing in shiny metal that looks like an everyday inflatable toy. That's it. Nothing about colour or proportion, no visual dynamics, no exploration, just "shiny metal posing as inflatable toy".
Is that idea enough for one sculpture, or maybe a few? Sure. For an artist of substance, that idea might deserve a few weeks' time. Not several years, and tons of exhibitions.
As for children's vulnerability, if you're in a museum bookshop, and your child is innocently looking through some sculpture books sitting on a table, she just might be attracted to the one with what looks to be a shiny toy on the cover, eh?
flemke said:
I'd love to get into this conversation, but am pressed for time for next few days
no problem, pick it up when you have more time he's hardly created thousands of them and having looked at a good few I'd say the challenge is making them look like something they aren't or making the material work the way in which he wants it to - they are, as a piece of work, very impressive especially when they cut through another object or are stacked like the monkey chair
besides which, they're only bad ideas seing as you don't like them
as for churning out tonnes of the same idea what do you think of rothko or gilbert and george? they're hardly moved away from their central plank, in fact G&G never did - they're still graphic artists and have been for the last 50 years. I'm guessing you don't like the images with certain things poking out of their mouths
tbh I can't remember any children hanging round the book shop of any gallery I've ever been to, especially looking through books - even still it's the parent's responsibility to protect their child from such stuff (pretty much like using a PC). I assume you don't have children as it's a weak argument and getting away from the Koons stuff so I'll leave this bit here
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff