Scan barcode
romantiques's review
3.0
“pure chance interested me as a way of going against logical reality.”
read for class.
read for class.
blueyorkie's review against another edition
4.0
Marcel Duchamp never read Proust. He did not get to know Malraux. Just watched a Godard movie - Masculin / Féminin.
However, its concept of cinema as an artistic expression, I consider it, from the point of view, very interesting. Their eschatological view of death seemed to be a bit vague, in fact, like all opinions about spiritual salvation. He speaks of theatre, which is a hypothesis to explore, as indeed others of his interest.
There is a theme to explore in this book, firstly, and in particular:
The phenomenon "Dada" never interested me deeply. I consider the art of no interest. However, some artistic terms are of extreme importance. Like the ones, I mentioned earlier.
However, its concept of cinema as an artistic expression, I consider it, from the point of view, very interesting. Their eschatological view of death seemed to be a bit vague, in fact, like all opinions about spiritual salvation. He speaks of theatre, which is a hypothesis to explore, as indeed others of his interest.
There is a theme to explore in this book, firstly, and in particular:
The phenomenon "Dada" never interested me deeply. I consider the art of no interest. However, some artistic terms are of extreme importance. Like the ones, I mentioned earlier.
jimmylorunning's review against another edition
3.0
I didn't know much about Duchamp going in. This was just a long interview with him about various topics. I found him interesting when he talked about art in general, his own art, chess, movement, words, and ideas. I found him dull when he talked about what artists he knew in NYC and Paris and how a certain art show got put together or what this or that artwork sold for (although not his fault, he actually despised the art scene; the interviewer wouldn't stop asking questions about this stuff!)
va87's review
3.0
This interview, conducted the year before his death, finds Duchamp confident, bemused, and thoughtful; his precise and reserved wit occasionally pierces through the facts asked after and indifferently produced. There is also a cute moment when Duchamp mentions Robert Motherwell (editor of this edition and the "Documents of 20th Century Art" series) and how he makes his "money easily" -- in reply, footnote 13 reads: "? [Ed.]" But all that is mythical and uncontrollable about Duchamp's work is hard to find here, though the singularity of it does come through.
rgrove's review
4.0
An enjoyable and thought-provoking dialogue with the great experimental artist Marcel Duchamp. Sometimes he's just having silly fun with his comments, but even then he's never less than interesting. Those looking for deep philosophical explorations of modern art will have to look elsewhere.
More...