View Single Post
Old 05.01.2007, 05:45 PM   #38
!@#$%!
invito al cielo
 
!@#$%!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: mars attacks
Posts: 42,486
!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunbury
I rarely even buy magazines anymore, instead I go to the thousands of art blogs on the internet. But if you still want a magazine, personally I would recommend Artforum and Modern Painters.

I think the magazine itself will be obsolete by 2010.

But thats besides the point, personally I've decided that artists themselves are boring/narcissistic walking pieces of shit (except Andy Pandy) and that you shouldnt waste your time reading about them/listening to them talk about their inspirations and their "work".

I purposely leave the building I work in during my lunch break and sit outside the medicine building, this way I avoid the tormented and increase my chances in picking up a future plastic surgeon.

The stock market and silicone tits,
thats what I want to talk about, not semiotics and some cunts recent show.

ew, semiotics. that's so 1970's. and still as crappy as ever.

thanks there-- i agree with you in great part on artists, but actors are even worse, and film people... well, let's not go there. i prefer scientists all around; besides they are the only ones who read literature for pleasure.

but thanks for the recommendations-- i'll pick up artforum. they have a website anyway, recent headlines there were dead fatcats/collectors.

i like magazines though-- they are glossy, and print in high resolution, and the internet won't.
!@#$%! is offline   |QUOTE AND REPLY|