Hole in the Wall!

by Art Fag City on August 13, 2008 · 10 comments Blurb

YouTube Preview Image

I can’t decide if this Japanese game show asking contestants to strike poses so that they fit through cut out spaces in a moving pink wall more closely resembles a people-sized Operation board game , or a live version of Tetris. There’s probably some performative Keith Haring inverse-sculpture reference to be made, but frankly, I think the show does better without the frame of art. Via SS (Metafilter)

{ 10 comments }

Hrag August 14, 2008 at 1:10 am

I love this show, I’ve always been a HUGE fan…does that make me a geek?

Hrag August 13, 2008 at 8:10 pm

I love this show, I’ve always been a HUGE fan…does that make me a geek?

Brian Sherwin @ Myartspace August 14, 2008 at 1:36 am

This made me think of that Cube movie… minus the blood. Its like a happy version of The Cube.

Brian Sherwin @ Myartspace August 14, 2008 at 1:36 am

This made me think of that Cube movie… minus the blood. Its like a happy version of The Cube.

Brian Sherwin @ Myartspace August 13, 2008 at 8:36 pm

This made me think of that Cube movie… minus the blood. Its like a happy version of The Cube.

Ethan August 14, 2008 at 5:09 pm

They’re making a U.S. version of this… I saw a promo for it on TV just the other day.

Ethan August 14, 2008 at 12:09 pm

They’re making a U.S. version of this… I saw a promo for it on TV just the other day.

SS August 14, 2008 at 6:02 pm

Yeah, the show is too good to need an art frame.

But…if you wanted one, you could do worse than Michael Fried’s “Art and Objecthood”:

“[T]hat the beholder is confronted by literalist work within a situation that he experiences as *his* means that there is an important sense in which the work exists for him *alone*, even if he is not actually alone with the work at the time. […] Someone has merely to enter a room in which a literalist work has been placed to *become* that beholder, that audience of one–almost as though the work in question has been *waiting for* him. And inasmuch as literalist work *depends on* the beholder, is *incomplete* without him, it *has* been waiting for him. And once he is in the room the work refuses, obstinately, to let him alone…”

SS August 14, 2008 at 6:02 pm

Yeah, the show is too good to need an art frame.

But…if you wanted one, you could do worse than Michael Fried’s “Art and Objecthood”:

“[T]hat the beholder is confronted by literalist work within a situation that he experiences as *his* means that there is an important sense in which the work exists for him *alone*, even if he is not actually alone with the work at the time. […] Someone has merely to enter a room in which a literalist work has been placed to *become* that beholder, that audience of one–almost as though the work in question has been *waiting for* him. And inasmuch as literalist work *depends on* the beholder, is *incomplete* without him, it *has* been waiting for him. And once he is in the room the work refuses, obstinately, to let him alone…”

SS August 14, 2008 at 1:02 pm

Yeah, the show is too good to need an art frame.

But…if you wanted one, you could do worse than Michael Fried’s “Art and Objecthood”:

“[T]hat the beholder is confronted by literalist work within a situation that he experiences as *his* means that there is an important sense in which the work exists for him *alone*, even if he is not actually alone with the work at the time. […] Someone has merely to enter a room in which a literalist work has been placed to *become* that beholder, that audience of one–almost as though the work in question has been *waiting for* him. And inasmuch as literalist work *depends on* the beholder, is *incomplete* without him, it *has* been waiting for him. And once he is in the room the work refuses, obstinately, to let him alone…”

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: