# data[].attributes.body
MTV VMA 2013

# data[].attributes.headline
Pair work: The Guggenheim Museum and Dismaland 

# data[].attributes.subject
Pair work: The Guggenheim Museum and Dismaland 

# data[].attributes.headline
YOUR TASK: Choose one debatable work of art from "Should art have limits ?" Part 1 AND an article from the portfolio. Justify your choices while explaining what makes these works of art controversial.

# data[].attributes.subject
YOUR TASK: Choose one debatable work of art from "Should art have limits ?" Part 1 AND an article from the portfolio. Justify your choices while explaining what makes these works of art controversial.

# data[].attributes.body
What makes an artwork questionable ?

# data[].attributes.headline
An Inside Look at New York's Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum

# data[].attributes.subject
An Inside Look at New York's Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
An Inside Look at New York's Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Guggenheim Museum Is Criticized for Pulling Animal Artworks Article

# data[].attributes.headline
Guggenheim Museum: The spiral that broke all the rules ( extra information)

# data[].attributes.subject
Guggenheim Museum: The spiral that broke all the rules ( extra information)

# data[].attributes.body
Your task: takes notes about what the playground denounces

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Dismaland: inside Banksy’s dystopian playground

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
he Amy Winehouse hologram tour has been postponed after running into difficulties. Good. While Winehouse's family consented to the show (to benefit her charitable foundation), Amy hasn't for obvious reasons. A mere seven years after her tragic death, isn't it grim and tasteless to send her hologram off on some naff tour?

Touring holograms are going to be big business. Already the late Roy Orbison has "toured", while Abba are considering hologram technology for a virtual experience. Promoters must be rubbing their hands at the possibility of doing tours without having to deal with unprofessional performers who are still alive. It's even argued that the technology could help performers such as Winehouse, who suffered from gruelling tour schedules - by allowing them to do just one gig and have their hologram appear at other venues. Is this some kind of joke?

Audiences put up with a lot at gigs - songs that sound microwaved, a view like staring down the wrong end of a telescope, and the slop of warm lager on your back as someone behind you has their first boogie in 20 years.

Punters put up with all this for the thrill of seeing someone perform live - not for a ghoulish sanitised projection, soullessly banging out the hits. It seems farcical to suggest a performer such as Winehouse, steeped in musical heritage, would have appreciated having her image superimposed over a backing tape. Hologram tours sound like the next generation of "jukebox musicals" - those West End shows based on artists' back catalogues. Jukebox musicals have their cultural place but, especially a mere seven years on, this tour would never have been something Winehouse would have chosen, alive or dead.

Barbara Ellen is an Observer columnist

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Amy Winehouse could belt out a tune - her naff hologram can't | Barbara Ellen

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
he Amy Winehouse hologram tour has been postponed after running into difficulties. Good. While Winehouse's family consented to the show (to benefit her charitable foundation), Amy hasn't for obvious reasons. A mere seven years after her tragic death, isn't it grim and tasteless to send her hologram off on some naff tour?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The art world is used to antics: Maurizio Cattelan sold a banana duct-taped to a wall, Robert Rauschenberg erased a de Kooning drawing, Ai Weiwei photographed himself smashing a two-thousand-year-old urn. Seconds after the painting "Girl with Balloon" sold at auction for $1.4 million, its creator, the street artist Banksy, shredded the piece via remote control. Earlier this year, in Chelsea, an aspiring artist in his mid-twenties walked into Taglialatella Galleries and purchased a Banksy screen print, titled "Morons (White)," for ninety-five thousand dollars, using funds that he had raised from investors. Then he set it on fire.

"Art is whatever you want it to be," the young man, who goes by the name Burnt Banksy, said, laughing. "Do I think I'm an artist? Yes and no. I don't think it's even remotely fair to compare me to someone like Banksy. I'm just trying to make a message." He was dressed all in black: sneakers, jeans, puffer jacket, and mask, which refused to stay put over his nose. "I'm trying to stay anonymous," he said. "Dude, we've received so much hate. Some people are very, very angry."

Before he torched the art work, Burnt Banksy had a photographer take a picture of it, then minted the photograph as an N.F.T. and uploaded it to an online auction platform. (An N.F.T., or "non-fungible token," is a certificate of authenticity and ownership attached to an asset, like a JPEG image or a viral YouTube video.) Everything went as planned, except that the art work wouldn't catch fire. Fifty thousand people watched live on Twitter as Burnt Banksy struggled to burn a Banksy.

"It was the worst thing in the world," he said. "It took, like, fifteen minutes for it to burn. Some of the comments on the video were, like, 'This kid's never burnt down the establishment before!' " (Another comment: "I hate my generation so much lol." )

"I'm, like, 'Fuck!' " he went on. "I probably should've put lighter fluid on it, but I didn't want to put lighter fluid on a Banksy. I didn't want to disrespect it." Eventually, the print went up in flames, and Burnt Banksy's début N.F.T. sold to an anonymous buyer for about three hundred and eighty thousand dollars, in cryptocurrency.

"We didn't see this as destroying the art work and creating a new one," he said. "Essentially, we were transferring it to the N.F.T. space." In recent weeks in the N.F.T. space, someone paid sixty-nine million dollars' worth of cryptocurrency for a digital mosaic by the artist Beeple; an Azealia Banks audio sex tape fetched around seventeen thousand; and a buyer spent just under three million for Jack Dorsey's first tweet.

For his next project-a decentralized auction house specializing in N.F.T.s-Burnt Banksy has raised about two million dollars from cryptocurrency venture capitalists in Hong Kong, mainland China, and Singapore. "It's a bitch to go through Sotheby's," he said. "You need to be famous." His auction house will allow anyone to buy or sell N.F.T.s online, without being vetted by snooty auction-house personnel. "I'm removing every barrier to entry to be an established artist."

He is also planning to open a pop-up gallery that showcases only N.F.T. art work. "It's called Not an Art Gallery, because a lot of people have told us that N.F.T.s aren't art," he said. "So, fine. There's art on the wall, but this isn't an art gallery."

He and a publicist were scouting locations the other day for Not an Art Gallery, and they checked out a gallery space across from the Whitney Museum. "I've been here before," he said. "I'm kind of a big art fan." A young gallerist dressed in white linen pants recognized Burnt Banksy and came over to chat, addressing him by his real name. The publicist groaned. "You're really outing his anonymity!" she said.

Burnt Banksy left and headed uptown, zigzagging between Ninth and Tenth Avenues, peering into empty showrooms and storefronts. "Half the walls are windows," he said of one. "I think this used to be a Sephora," he said about another. None were quite right.

It started to rain, and Burnt Banksy ducked into Taglialatella Galleries, where he'd bought the Banksy screen print. Someone asked a gallery assistant there what she thought of the stunt. She paused to clear her throat. "Obviously, we never want to encourage the destruction of very valuable and important art," she said. Then she said that Taglialatella was launching its own N.F.T. program.

The storm cleared, and Burnt Banksy went back outside, dreaming up his next N.F.T.: "I want to have a piece of art, a camera facing it, circling the Earth, in orbit for four years. Until it burns up. And whoever buys the N.F.T. gets access to view the art in space." He looked at the sky. "I mean, it's cool, right?" he said. "Let's go to the fucking moon!" ♦

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Burnt Banksy's Inflammatory N.F.T. Not-Art

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The art world is used to antics: Maurizio Cattelan sold a banana duct-taped to a wall, Robert Rauschenberg erased a de Kooning drawing, Ai Weiwei photographed himself smashing a two-thousand-year-old urn. Seconds after the painting "Girl with Balloon" sold at auction for $1.4 million, its creator, the street artist Banksy, shredded the piece via remote control.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Jeff Koons' " Rabbit," a 3-foot-tall stainless steel sculpture reminiscent of a silver balloon animal, is officially the world's most expensive work by a living artist.

"Rabbit," which sold at Christie's for $91.1 million this Wednesday, was one of six auction items drawn from the collection of S.I. Newhouse Jr., a magazine magnate who died in 2017 at age 89. The trove also included works by Paul Cézanne, Vincent van Gogh, Roy Lichtenstein, Andy Warhol and Lucian Freud.

Writing for The New York Times, economist Allison Schrager describes the sale as demonstrative of the state of the current art market. Thanks to the rise of billionaire art collectors who push the merely millionaires out of the race for the most exclusive items, the art world has lost a class of middle-tier collectors who would typically invest in on-the-rise or second-tier artists.

When these less affluent collectors see a Hockney painting sell for $90 million, Schrager writes, they "assume the $50,000 work they can afford is not worth buying, especially if they can't flip it for a quick profit at auction."

"Rabbit" was cast in an edition of three, plus one artist's proof. A Christie 's statement on the work provides an apt commentary on its place in the art world: "At once cute and imposing," evocative of fun and frivolity while remaining inscrutable, the sculpture simultaneously embodies and rejects postmodern aesthetics. It's alternately interpreted as a meaningless, lazy joke and a mirror for viewers, "reflecting us, incorporating us within the ever-shifting drama that plays out on its surface."

The winning bid-which far exceeded Christie's estimate of $50 to $70 million-was placed by art dealer Robert E. Mnuchin (father of Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin), who reportedly made the purchase on behalf of a client. The astronomical price tag just surpassed the $90.2 million record set by David Hockney's "Portrait of an Artist (Pool With Two Figures)" last November. Ironically, Hockney's short-lived record actually came at Koon's expense, skyrocketing past the polarizing artist's existing 2013 record of $58.4 million.

Given the speed with which Hockney's November 2018 record fell, it's likely a new record-breaker will soon dethrone Koons, too. Who knows? Perhaps it will be Hockney once more, and the two artists will simply trade the title back and forth in perpetuity. After all, stranger things-say, a 3-foot-tall balloon animal sculpture selling for $90 million-have happened.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Jeff Koons' 'Rabbit' Breaks the Auction Record for Most Expensive Work by Living Artist

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The stainless steel sculpture sold for $91.1 million, surpassing the $90.2 million record set by David Hockney last November

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
If ever a movie resonated with a news image it's this one, with the extraordinary shot of nurse Ieshia Evans at a protest in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, in 2016, where she faced down three cops in full riot gear while wearing a flimsy frock. She did this with all the floaty calmness of Botticelli's Venus. The Hate U Give is a fierce, dynamic movie with a terrific performance from Amandla Stenberg as Starr, a high-school student who becomes witness to a callous cop shooting, and her performance seems to be channelling some of the defiance and miraculous strength despite vulnerability in that famous picture.

The movie has been written for the screen by the late Audrey Wells, who died of cancer two weeks ago, adapted by her from the 2017 YA bestseller by Angie Thomas. The director is George Tillman Jr, who made Notorious in 2009, and the title itself is taken from Tupac's Thuglife, an acronym for The Hate U Give Little Infants Fucks Everyone. By the end of the movie, Starr suggests a radical change in attitude, and in fact a change to the third word of this title - the "U".

Starr is effectively living a double life. Her dad is a proud Black Panther who lives in a tough black neighbourhood, but he has now settled down to running a neighbourhood store profitable enough for him to send his daughter to a posh private school, away from bad influences. It is here that Starr has learned how to pass for white culturally: hardworking, nice Starr hangs out with the Insta princesses who appear to accept her with no reservations and she has a really nice white boyfriend. But she is always careful to suppress any threateningly "black" mannerisms, yet when she goes to parties in her own home turf, she has to avoid any "white" phrases.

It is at one of these that she runs into Khalil (Algee Smith), a boy she once knew when they were both kids, playing at Harry Potter - books of which her father semi-seriously disapproves because the Hogwarts house system encourages gang culture. Now Khalil is a tough-looking, handsome young man with expensive clothes, who appears to be still more than a little in love with Starr, and she is charmed by him. But then there are gunshots and they have to escape the party in Khalil's car - and stroppy, headstrong Khalil is pulled over by a jumpy young cop. It ends in catastrophic violence, and Starr finds that she has to testify under oath in front of a grand jury, meaning that she, Khalil and her whole community will be on trial. The crisis of loyalty means her whole "white/black" identity goes to pieces, along with friendship with people who "don't see race".

Interestingly, the phrase #blacklivesmatter is used in this movie by the white characters: the white school students who stage what Starr finds to be a well-meaning but jarringly inauthentic campus protest. This is a fashionable gesture in which they indulge before they realise that Starr, their own fellow student, is in fact involved. Meanwhile, the situation is still more complex: the gangbangers who are acquainted with her father don't want her to go public with her testimony in case it puts their criminality in the limelight. The film shows that they are themselves policing the situation with maximum brutality.

It is muscular and very watchable film, with a really strong starring performance from Stenberg. Perhaps it is flawed by a certain emotional grandstanding, and the fact that experiences of other black students at her expensive school (including her own brother) are passed over, and Starr is to all intents and purposes utterly alone in how she feels. Yet this may be a just approximation of how this is in real life. The Hate U Give has a fierce storytelling grip.
Topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Hate U Give review - a defiant challenge to divided America

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
If ever a movie resonated with a news image it's this one, with the extraordinary shot of nurse Ieshia Evans at a protest in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, in 2016, where she faced down three cops in full riot gear while wearing a flimsy frock. She did this with all the floaty calmness of Botticelli's Venus.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Christie's has shared a video which sees Jeff Koons explaining his iconic sculpture, Play-Doh. In the three-minute clip, the American artist detailed the making of his epic creation, which is one of the largest and most complex works from his Celebration series.

Koons began by discussing the beginning of the sculpture in 1994. He revealed that he initially intended for Play-Doh to be a polyethylene piece, but instead he ultimately decided to utilize aluminum to hold onto a super realism. To complement the aluminum, Koons made use of micro glass beads that reflect light onto the 27 separate, organic forms that are stacked on top of one another. At the end of the day, the goal was for the artwork to be believable as a mound of Play-Doh.

The 10-foot-tall Play-Doh sculpture debuted as a part of Koons' retrospective at the Whitney Museum of American Art in 2014. It is one of five versions inspired by the artist's son, Ludwig, who gave his father a similar creation.

You can learn more about Play-Doh from the artist himself by pressing play below.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Jeff Koons Explains His Iconic 'Play-Doh' Sculpture: "It's Not for Perfectionism"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Christie's has shared a video which sees Jeff Koons explaining his iconic sculpture, Play-Doh. In the three-minute clip, the American artist detailed the making of his epic creation, which is one of the largest and most complex works from his Celebration series. Koons began by discussing the beginning of the sculpture in 1994.