“Many people have raised the problem of art history – do we wait until it pays attention after the fact to the art being made now and points it out as having been significant? If we write it now, how do we (especially when, in my case anyway, academic funding bodies don’t recognize what you do as art history and resent your implication that their field has missed something because it is stuck in old ways of prioritizing authorship or media-specific analysis)? These are difficult questions with no easy answers, but they are up to us to solve…”—Sarah Cook, Re: Claire’s Bishop’s digital divide piece in Art Forum.
“Dear Virginia. If you only knew the yearning to get into the mountains that fills me these days! Music is wonderful — but the musical world is bunk! So much petty doings — so much pose and insincerity and distorted values … I find myself looking back on the Golden Days in Yosemite with supreme envy. I think I came closer to really living then than at any other time of my life, because I was closer to elemental things. I love you immensely at this moment — and will be so glad to see you again. I am coming to Yosemite sometime in the Spring — or bust! - Ansel”—Ansel Adams to Virgina Best, 18 months after breaking off their engagement.
"…the tragedy of outer space backgrounds is that, although they are magnificent, they don’t fit with any concrete idea. They never did. Scientific texts, personal home pages, cinema programs, pathfinder image galleries, it’s always wrong. Even the starships don’t look authentic because it’s wrong to hang pictures in the sky and there are no letters in outer space. Even if there were letters in outer space it would be impossible to read them. The dot over an "i" could be a star or a % sign and as for meteors…they’re just too easy to confuse."
"Naturally, this tape is also concerned with the problem of guilt and innocence. An object must be blamed for not proceeding further, and also for proceeding further. ‘An unambiguously CORRECT result of experiments exists; this is obtained when it works, when this construction collapses. Then again, there is a BEAUTIFUL which ranks above the CORRECT; this is obtained when it’s a close shave or the construction collapses the way we want it to – slowly and intricately, that is, a beautiful collapse. The aesthetic layer on top of a function is like the butter on a sandwich – rather thin and smooth. The wrong result is obtained when things get going of their own accord, and the wrong result is obtained when they don’t get going at all. The CORRECT range (which in terms of moral theology might also be called GOOD) is, in our view, incredibly narrow. Similarly, GOOD and EVIL are often very close, for example when the candle on the swing sets fire to the detonating fuse. Because they are nice and childish, the candle and the swing tend towards the good, whereas the detonating fuse is evil because you don’t need it for harmless things. On the other hand, every object in our installation is good if it functions, because it then liberates its successor, gives it the chance of development. Not destructive in that sense.’” Fischli/Weiss
Quote from the 1960 catalogue of the Cambridge Group (Scroope Group), New Vision Center Gallery, London:
“Remember that Cambridge grew from isolated monastaries into a womb for fertilizing egg-heads, poets, topmen, researchers, architects, and that the original spirit of these instititions still prevails, despite nearby test-tube signs of tomorrow. The average speed is that of the bicycle, the general atmosphere that of sleepy provincialism … so the artist turns towards the tinsel and jazz of urban activity, with its exploding gestures, galactic streams of commuters, jukeboxes, mass-media, and pin-tables. By establishing a relationship with these phenomena, the artists place themselves on the mainland. (Islands are for uncommunicating introspectives.)”