[BKBOI]

Change is hard to accept. On other note, I know that there are so many Dolk collectors who frequent this forum. Anyone bought a piece from this show? Please share with the community why you love the new works released by Dolk and why you think it deserves to be part of your Dolk collection.

[Daniel Silk]

Jun 15, 2016 14:05:37 GMT 1 Coach said:

Jun 15, 2016 13:59:45 GMT 1 daveart said:

when i read these threads critiquing artist selection of work for release or critiquing their new body of work i start to think 'what if the internet chat board system had been around in previous generations.' imagine your critique say of Warhol's camouflage series or duchamp's The Fountain. or closer in what were your thoughts on FAILE's pieces of FAILE - so many critiqued and said it was the end ..etc. the future is pretty hard to predict and its just so easy to have an opinion and type it out quickly. i get that .. i suppose i even encourage it.. just keep it civil - and here's my opinion. any artist working hard, putting themselves and their work out there for critique, and trying to be successful and relevant deserves at least your respect.

There is truth in this. When the impressionists first exhibited, critics and the wealthy turned up mostly to slate the work.

I agree.
Sadly some feel differently -

[smokinfish]

The email I got from the gallery:

The Limited edition is signed and numbered and each edition is a original artwork. The content is the same as the Standard Edition, but the cover of the book is in a matt black finish with a unique metallic lacquered aluminum scratched/keyed painting by Dolk on front. Edition of 75. Price: 20.000 NOK + shipping.

The Standard Edition is 500 NOK + shipping.

[mutatis]

What follows tends to suggest that they know it's steep:

"For those of you who are serious about purchasing the Limited Edition I can take reservation, but I want to have this in writing as soon as possible (just reply to this Email)."

[hakon]

Some pictures from Dolk's Rip Off:

[Coach]

I very much like the look of this work.

[FЯ]

Jun 18, 2016 20:53:26 GMT 1 Coach said:

I very much like the look of this work.

Really?

Looks a bit crap. Be honest.

I take it rip off is referring to the prices of the new book and art

[Deleted]

Jun 18, 2016 21:08:55 GMT 1 FЯ said:

Jun 18, 2016 20:53:26 GMT 1 Coach said:

I very much like the look of this work.

Really?

Looks a bit crap. Be honest.

I take it rip off is referring to the prices of thr new book and art

Interesting 

very interesting

got me thinking, who was the guy that slashed the canvas for the 4th dimension or whatever?

is it all about the look? ommmmmmmmmm

[batemanz]

Jun 18, 2016 21:08:55 GMT 1 FЯ said:

Jun 18, 2016 20:53:26 GMT 1 Coach said:

I very much like the look of this work.

Really?

Looks a bit crap. Be honest.

I take it rip off is referring to the prices of thr new book and art

Nothing here to flip FR move along.....

REVIEW and some pics : DOLK part two Rip Off:

howartyoutoday.com/2016/06/18/review-dolk-part-two-rip-off/

[generalist]

[Poster Bob]

The new Sandra Chevrier print will be out next week. Act like a cocky p*ick then.

Jun 18, 2016 21:08:55 GMT 1 FЯ said:

Jun 18, 2016 20:53:26 GMT 1 Coach said:

I very much like the look of this work.

Really?

Looks a bit crap. Be honest.

I take it rip off is referring to the prices of thr new book and art

[Coach]

Jun 18, 2016 21:08:55 GMT 1 FЯ said:

Jun 18, 2016 20:53:26 GMT 1 Coach said:

I very much like the look of this work.

Really?

Looks a bit crap. Be honest.

I take it rip off is referring to the prices of thr new book and art

Yes. But then I am fond of abstract art.
If you're not, you're not.
But it certainly doesn't look crap to me.
I'd like to see it in person.

[Daniel Silk]

Jun 18, 2016 21:59:32 GMT 1 Coach said:

Jun 18, 2016 21:08:55 GMT 1 FЯ said:

Really?

Looks a bit crap. Be honest.

I take it rip off is referring to the prices of thr new book and art

Yes. But then I am fond of abstract art.
If you're not, you're not.
But it certainly doesn't look crap to me.
I'd like to see it in person.

Yeah, it's very hard to judge work like that just from a few photos online. 
Really need to see that type of work close up and also within a space.

[Ottomatik]

Jun 18, 2016 21:08:55 GMT 1 FЯ said:

Jun 18, 2016 20:53:26 GMT 1 Coach said:

I very much like the look of this work.

Really?

Looks a bit crap. Be honest.

I take it rip off is referring to the prices of the new book and art

[smokinfish]

Jun 18, 2016 20:35:01 GMT 1 hakon said:

Some pictures from Dolk's Rip 

I really like this one. I'm willing to bet it's more impressive in person. The mirror like finish on that black is some really nice paint work.

[Ottomatik]

Jun 19, 2016 0:45:57 GMT 1 smokinfish said:

Jun 18, 2016 20:35:01 GMT 1 hakon said:

Some pictures from Dolk's Rip 

I really like this one. I'm willing to bet it's more impressive in person. The mirror like finish on that black is some really nice paint work.

I don't think that's 'paint work,' I think it's the type of paint.

[Sanscript]

Jun 18, 2016 21:59:32 GMT 1 Coach said:

Jun 18, 2016 21:08:55 GMT 1 FЯ said:

Really?

Looks a bit crap. Be honest.

I take it rip off is referring to the prices of thr new book and art

Yes. But then I am fond of abstract art.
If you're not, you're not.
But it certainly doesn't look crap to me.
I'd like to see it in person.

I think this is what art is about, it impacts on our lives.

This is also the fascination with abstract art, it has the power to cause emotional responses. When the famous Russian painter Kazimir Malevich painted and displayed his black square in 1915 (or maybe 1913), people went nuts. That black square was hugely controversial and changed the direction of art at that point in time.

We still see this today, when people vandalise the work of Barnett Newman - its an emotive response to an abstract shape. I have seen one of the large Newman pieces in NY, and I have to say that I just stopped and stared and felt like I was going to fall into it, I found myself getting closer and closer, wanting to touch it. It was all I could see. It's crazy that a red rectangle can entrap the viewer, or anger them to a point of violence.

Thats the trick that minimalist art plays on us.

Personally, I'm not sure if I like these Dolk works, but it has caused discussion. Maybe the discussion is the point, not the art itself?

[Deleted]

RIP DOLKS career.

[11]

Jun 15, 2016 14:39:26 GMT 1 Daniel Silk said:

Jun 15, 2016 14:05:37 GMT 1 Coach said:

There is truth in this. When the impressionists first exhibited, critics and the wealthy turned up mostly to slate the work.

I agree.
Sadly some feel differently -

thats nothing short of hilarious - I challenged you for pushing dirty hans and now you want to take it out of context and try and pretend it had different meaning

Lmbfao

[Daniel Silk]

Jun 19, 2016 11:14:24 GMT 1 11 said:

Jun 15, 2016 14:39:26 GMT 1 Daniel Silk said:

I agree.
Sadly some feel differently -

thats nothing short of hilarious - I challenged you for pushing dirty hans and now you want to take it out of context and try and pretend it had different meaning

Lmbfao

"Pushing dirty hans"? I just started a thread about that Artist.
So be clear what your trying to tell me? Coz when you use worlds like "level of quality control" it sounds like you feel like the forum should have some kind or censorship so people can't post about Artists that don't meet some kind of standards.

[11]

Jun 19, 2016 12:16:11 GMT 1 Daniel Silk said:

Jun 19, 2016 11:14:24 GMT 1 11 said:

thats nothing short of hilarious - I challenged you for pushing dirty hans and now you want to take it out of context and try and pretend it had different meaning

Lmbfao

"Pushing dirty hans"? I just started a thread about that Artist.
So be clear what your trying to tell me? Coz when you use worlds like "level of quality control" it sounds like you feel like the forum should have some kind or censorship so people can't post about Artists that don't meet some kind of standards.

Censorship? not at all. My argument was always founded on the basis that as the founder, and FG's in the position they were in, some care should be taken not to appear to back poor artists. Members can freely raise and post about what they wanted but my belief, and one i understood is held by many others, is that as a senior member that is looked up to by the community you have a duty to the newbies not to encourage them to buy into sub-standard work.....and why use my comment but not quote or tag me ?

As I recall, after posting Dirty Hans you then went on to ridicule JJ Adams who the former was based upon so all seems very contradictory. 

This was in the period when you had suspended replies on for sale threads and, even when FG's were trying to advise you to the contrary you chose to ignore that and started posting anything and everything you could find on Google that had a tag 'Urban Art'. It was at that point i raised the concern that Dirty Hans was represented by a gallery that you had previously banned and by presenting such artists you (intentionally or not) were validating their art and their associates. At the time it was a discussion but you chose to remove my Guardianship rather than discuss it any further. 

Perhaps I mis-read it entirely and you just wanted to set up artists so you could then ridicule them, which again was something I thought you yourself wanted to discourage?. 

[Daniel Silk]

Jun 19, 2016 13:15:38 GMT 1 11 said:

Jun 19, 2016 12:16:11 GMT 1 Daniel Silk said:

"Pushing dirty hans"? I just started a thread about that Artist.
So be clear what your trying to tell me? Coz when you use worlds like "level of quality control" it sounds like you feel like the forum should have some kind or censorship so people can't post about Artists that don't meet some kind of standards.

Censorship? not at all. My argument was always founded on the basis that as the founder, and FG's in the position they were in, some care should be taken not to appear to back poor artists. Members can freely raise and post about what they wanted but my belief, and one i understood is held by many others, is that as a senior member that is looked up to by the community you have a duty to the newbies not to encourage them to buy into sub-standard work.....and why use my comment but not quote or tag me ?

As I recall, after posting Dirty Hans you then went on to ridicule JJ Adams who the former was based upon so all seems very contradictory. 

This was in the period when you had suspended replies on for sale threads and, even when FG's were trying to advise you to the contrary you chose to ignore that and started posting anything and everything you could find on Google that had a tag 'Urban Art'. It was at that point i raised the concern that Dirty Hans was represented by a gallery that you had previously banned and by presenting such artists you (intentionally or not) were validating their art and their associates. At the time it was a discussion but you chose to remove my Guardianship rather than discuss it any further. 

Perhaps I mis-read it entirely and you just wanted to set up artists so you could then ridicule them, which again was something I thought you yourself wanted to discourage?. 

So when you talk about a "level of quality control" how in effect does that work? Can you put it together into some kind of rule or explain how its enforced and by who? 
When you say "poor artists" and "sub-standard work" in your mind how is that judged?

[Ruggs]

Both books are available here! artstore.no/index.php/showartists/manufacturer/dolk

[11]

Daniel Silk - are you really not able to decipher what is relevant, original or has genuine potential? Does derivative trite work from artists that just photoshop images based on other popular imagery, rightfully get an equal footing here. Is the UAA brand one of scathing attacks and ridicule as I always thought we were trying to get beyond that

As I said, members can post what they like and should do so to gauge opinion or advice but as a senior member you should be able to decipher between the two and offer some (objective) quality feeds. If you can't see that then there's noting I can say to make you see otherwise but I genuinely thought UAA was better than that

[Daniel Silk]

Jun 19, 2016 14:34:35 GMT 1 11 said:

Daniel Silk - are you really not able to decipher what is relevant, original or has genuine potential? Does derivative trite work from artists that just photoshop images based on other popular imagery, rightfully get an equal footing here. Is the UAA brand one of scathing attacks and ridicule as I always thought we were trying to get beyond that

As I said, members can post what they like and should do so to gauge opinion or advice but as a senior member you should be able to decipher between the two and offer some (objective) quality feeds. If you can't see that then there's noting I can say to make you see otherwise but I genuinely thought UAA was better than that

Sorry, but the (UAA) Urban Art Association doesn't have any kind of collective opinion or agenda on Artists or Galleries, and my posts are made by me in my real name Daniel Silk.

I prefer to run this as a forum with everyone equal in having the same freedoms to create threads and posts about whatever they like or don't like.

[phoj]

I really think you are deliberately trying to miss the point here Silky, and it shows.

[dreadnatty]

Jun 15, 2016 14:39:26 GMT 1 Daniel Silk said:

Jun 15, 2016 14:05:37 GMT 1 Coach said:

There is truth in this. When the impressionists first exhibited, critics and the wealthy turned up mostly to slate the work.

I agree.
Sadly some feel differently -

Why wouldnt you tag the member with the above screenshot? 

[Daniel Silk]

Jun 19, 2016 15:27:00 GMT 1 phoj said:

I really think you are deliberately trying to miss the point here Silky, and it shows.

I must be missing the point then sorry, can you explain it better to me please?

[Cornish Crayon]

Jun 18, 2016 21:57:43 GMT 1 Poster Bob said:

The new Sandra Chevrier print will be out next week. Act like a cocky p*ick then.

Jun 18, 2016 21:08:55 GMT 1 FЯ said:

Really?

Looks a bit crap. Be honest.

I take it rip off is referring to the prices of thr new book and art

Nah FR is done with Sandra now, he has milked it dry, in fact milked it so hard and fast, everybody on here has noticed, he will go into the next thing .......... In fact maybe Daniel silk should take note if FR hasn't latched onto Cartrain then surely Cartrain really is shit.

Just saying

[11]

Jun 19, 2016 15:25:12 GMT 1 Daniel Silk said:

Jun 19, 2016 14:34:35 GMT 1 11 said:

Daniel Silk - are you really not able to decipher what is relevant, original or has genuine potential? Does derivative trite work from artists that just photoshop images based on other popular imagery, rightfully get an equal footing here. Is the UAA brand one of scathing attacks and ridicule as I always thought we were trying to get beyond that

As I said, members can post what they like and should do so to gauge opinion or advice but as a senior member you should be able to decipher between the two and offer some (objective) quality feeds. If you can't see that then there's noting I can say to make you see otherwise but I genuinely thought UAA was better than that

Sorry, but the (UAA) Urban Art Association doesn't have any kind of collective opinion or agenda on Artists or Galleries, and my posts are made by me in my real name Daniel Silk.

I prefer to run this as a forum with everyone equal in having the same freedoms to create threads and posts about whatever they like or don't like.

I really wish that was true.... And shouldn't all guards be using their real names by now?