Paul Minnaert Posted February 5, 2008 Posted February 5, 2008 the strangest thing are the handlebars, these were the sort I had on my first suzuki gs500 in 1979. Called "clip ons" these were the "real" sport items.
Guest ratchethack Posted February 5, 2008 Posted February 5, 2008 Fine, fine You've ever heard of Joseph Beuys? He'd sure had loved you. This bike's a masterpiece, thanks for you guys doing it the honours Hubert No, can't say I'd ever heard of Joseph Beuys, Hubert. But by all means, leave us never fail to give "a masterpiece" full honor and credit where due! Being ever curious about the vast range (and limitless depth) of peculiarities of human behavior, I looked Beuys up to see if he might've been the er, perpetrator of the "art" in question here. Hm. This gets curiouser and curiouser. I'd expected to find possibly a European peer in the illustrious category of the Teutel's here in the US (that is, the aforementioned -- and quite famous -- luminaries, Big Paulie, Little Paulie, and Mikey). Wot I found was that while well known as some sort of poste moderne avant garde artiste in his life, Joseph Beuys has been dead for over two decades. So it seems unlikely that he'd have been err, responsible for butchering the Guzzi. But then, after reading the man's bio, it seems he well could've been an inspiration -- even in death! I found the following simply fascinating! Ever-so-very cautious and sensitive of late, I have to be careful here. But I don't b'lieve the following could be remotely interpreted as a violation of the current Forum Probation. I offer it without political comment, only as additional information pertinent to the discussion at hand! It's from Josesph Beuys' bio found here: http://www.walkerart.org/archive/4/9C43FDAD069C47F36167.htm : . . .In 1979 he was one of 500 founding members of the Green Party. . . His charismatic presence, his urgent and public calls for reform of all kinds, and his unconventional artistic style (incorporating ritualized movement and sound, and materials such as fat, felt, earth, honey, blood, and even dead animals) gained him international notoriety during these decades, but it also cost him his job. . . . It seems that other than his penchant for hauling dirt, blood, fat, honey, and road kill into art museums to put on display for the apparent purpose of gaining himself international notoriety as the end of his otherwise relatively lackluster artistic career loomed large, another persistent characteristic of Beuys' art work was slathering objects with fat and wrapping them with felt. "Beuys often said that his interest in fat and felt as sculptural materials [arose from]" a practice that was performed on his own body after he was rescued from a wartime plane crash in the Crimea by nomadic Tartars. Must've made an unforgettable impression on the man (it sure would've made an impression on Yours Truly!) D'you suppose those wrapped pipes on the err, art object in question above are a tie-in with Beuys' trademark fat-felt wrap? Other than that (which, frankly, seems a bit of a stretch to me), I can't seem to find a connection between the man and the bike?!?! Enquiring minds. . . (well, you know).
Baldini Posted February 5, 2008 Posted February 5, 2008 I don't understand the reference to Beuys either, but, whatever you may think apparent in his work, he was a very influential artist &, in my view, an honest one. I find most contemporary conceptual art vacous, self-referential & without any real original thought, hardly developed at all from the work of Marcel Duchamp & others almost a century ago. I think Beuys was a rare exception. I find it hard to accept a willingness to, without invitation or reason, condemn the creative work of others. It is easy to scorn, but to make anything genuinely creative yourself is very difficult, & to present it in public is to make yourself vulnerable to ridicule. It is far easier never to risk it & to join in the laughter at the efforts of other, braver individuals. That bike reminds me of old hotrods, Romany wagons, & canal longboats, there's a lot of work in there, & original thinking. I've never seen anything quite like it. Good luck to the bloke. Let's see what you made??? We used to call those type bars "ace" bars ... maybe from Ace cafe, I dunno. KB
luhbo Posted February 5, 2008 Posted February 5, 2008 Of course Beuys had nothing to do with this bike. Beuys had the theory that every human being is an artist, able to creat art ad hoc. If not litterally using his own hands than at least with and in his mind, letting the things around him impress and force him to react on them. This little cutey obviously drove Ratchet to give his very best. Great, good and fast response, really. Hubert
luhbo Posted February 5, 2008 Posted February 5, 2008 the strangest thing are the handlebars, these were the sort I had on my first suzuki gs500 in 1979. Called "clip ons" these were the "real" sport items. Paul, no "Clip On", it's a classic, it's an almost original "Magura M-Lenker". Search the Dutch Zundapp or Sachs K50 scene, they still have them and pay really good prices for good ones. Hubert
Guest ratchethack Posted February 5, 2008 Posted February 5, 2008 I don't understand the reference to Beuys either, but, whatever you may think apparent in his work, he was a very influential artist &, in my view, an honest one. I find most contemporary conceptual art vacous, self-referential & without any real original thought, hardly developed at all from the work of Marcel Duchamp & others almost a century ago. I think Beuys was a rare exception. I find it hard to accept a willingness to, without invitation or reason, condemn the creative work of others. It is easy to scorn, but to make anything genuinely creative yourself is very difficult, & to present it in public is to make yourself vulnerable to ridicule. . . Hm. Keith, has it also become intolerable here to critique something one finds absurd in the extreme? "Marcel Duchamp"?!?! Are we continuing to drop names of famous artistes in reference to "bobbing" a motorcycle?! I've already learned something here. I do b'lieve I've exposed the Beuys-bobber connection that you've apparently missed yourself. Per my previous post, I see a natural parallel between an artiste who managed to get himself "fired" by way of instant International recognition in the art world (by careful design, no doubt!) for displaying fat, felt, dirt, honey, blood, and dead animals in an art gallery, and the destruction of a Guzzi by "bob job". It seems reasonable to believe it possible that a common mentality behind both may well exist, however darkly convoluted and twisted that link may be! "Bobbing" a motorcycle has always been a bit of unusually crude work with a hacksaw that happened for decades in a few minutes of dirty, sweaty, grunting frustration behind the old barn -- involving none of the usual barnyard animals and/or farmer's daughters. D'you b'lieve the old "barnyard bob job" to've been the birth of an important and significant poste moderne genre in the art world??!! I'm merely an unsophisticated barbarian, and a boorish, provincial rube, with an appalling lack of appreciation for fine art. Please do enlighten me further. If "bobbing" a motorcycle is an expression of the Beuys honest art genre, which embraces media such as dirt, fat, felt, honey, blood, and dead animals -- wot would be an example of "dishonest art"?? Now with regard to honesty in art, I have to say that in all honesty, as far as "vacous, self-referential & without any real original thought" goes, I find our "art exhibit" in question here to be every bit of exactly that. . . but then again, that's just me, and I obviously lack the requisite sophistication to comprehend. . . And "genuinely creative"?!?! Please. . . !! Variations on the "classic bobber" have been with us for 60 years now. They're as common as flies on the "classic barnyard dung heap". Now this is just me again, but taking a perfectly reasonable motorcycle from the late '60's or '70's era, a Guzzi, one that I've admired over all others of the era ever since, at that -- and completely destroying its original design intent as safe, comfortable, capable, sporting transportation, by doctoring it up to the point of unrideability, and completely re-fabricating it as an "art object" to resemble something from the '40's that some (myself included) would consider ridiculous to start with just seems a bit beyond absurd to me. But again as I said up front, "that's just me". I reckon you're entitled to your opinion as well as I am, Keith. I certainly don't find it the least bit (in your words) "hard to accept" your willingness to express your opinion -- "without invitation or reason". BAA, TJM, & YMMV
Baldini Posted February 5, 2008 Posted February 5, 2008 as I said, Ratchet - how about showing us something you made? KB
Guest ratchethack Posted February 5, 2008 Posted February 5, 2008 as I said, Ratchet - how about showing us something you made? KB Keith, has it lately become necessary to be an accomplished artiste in order to express an opinion on "art" -- and is it now a a prerequisite to provide evidence of "worthy credentials" in order to express that opinion -- on "art"?? I reckon a "bob job" on a Guzzi is in the eye of the beholder, ain't it? It's not quite like saying "Bollocks!" when someone makes an impossibly incorrect statement about engine function on the ol' Tech Forum, where we have the full spectrum of True Pro's, Near-Pro's, Wanna-be Pro's, Canardly-be Pro's, and plenty o' Cannever-be Pro's in attendance, is it?? Enquiring minds. . . (well, you know).
Baldini Posted February 7, 2008 Posted February 7, 2008 ..."Marcel Duchamp"?!?! Are we continuing to drop names of famous artistes in reference to "bobbing" a motorcycle?! I mention Duchamp in the context of your dismissal of Beuys, nothing to do with motorcycles. I make my living as an artist, it's something I know & care about, I'm not "dropping" names, only using a name as an example to make my point: that much contemporary "art" is not art at all, but vacous game playing, & whilst claiming to be shocking & original is in many cases simply a rehash of old ideas. From what I know of Beuys, he was honest in his intent, & not of that ilk. Our conversation so far seems riddled with misunderstandings - as it has nothing to do with Guzzis/technical, I propose we leave it there? KB
Guest ratchethack Posted February 7, 2008 Posted February 7, 2008 Our conversation so far seems riddled with misunderstandings - as it has nothing to do with Guzzis/technical, I propose we leave it there? Misunderstandings, indeed, Keith. Comparing and contrasting differing perspectives has always been a bit of a hobby with Yours Truly. I often find this Forum a rich vein of high-grade ore in this pursuit. While once encouraged in open discourse in many fields of higher learning and thought, I find that the very idea of open expression of one's point of view, and particularly many forms of analytical discussion themselves in recent years seem to frighten and even threaten an increasing number of people into the timidity and paralysis of self-imposed (and willing acceptance of externally imposed) repression. . . There are many places where orthodoxy shall not be challenged, you know. . . But I reckon understanding that we all have differing perspectives won't ever stop me from offering an "honest" critique of wotever I wish, for as long as I'm "allowed" -- my shamefully unsophisticated and barbaric lack of appreciation for wot many people seem to consider "masterpieces" of "honest" fine art notwithstanding, as demonstrated in the thread at hand. . . Discovering sources from which people have come to derive their inspiration is simply fascinating to Yours Truly. Joseph Beuys' "sculptures", after days or weeks of "ripening" of the fat, blood, and dead animal carcasses in the museums where they were displayed, must've been truly inspiring and motivational in their day. One easily imagines flies, maggots, and pools of putrid liquid seepage into the museum as very much an intended aspect of the "natural" artistic expression of the artiste. . . I reckon the powerful smell itself would've been considered "honest" by those possessing the correct "approved pedigree" of requisite artistic sophistication, but then wot do I know of poste moderne fine art?? I reckon I ain't either afraid (or confused) most o' the time about wot I'm lookin' at when I see it -- even when I can't smell it -- possibly moreso when it comes to Guzzi's. Just callin' 'em as I sees 'em, my friend.
macguzzi Posted February 7, 2008 Author Posted February 7, 2008 How has this post been hijacked clue is in title INTRESTING GUZZI less of the chopper shit thanks
luhbo Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 How has this post been hijacked clue is in title INTRESTING GUZZI less of the chopper shit thanks Good craftmanship on both bikes and a twin carburetor on both bikes, that's all. Hubert
Baldini Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 How has this post been hijacked clue is in title INTRESTING GUZZI less of the chopper shit thanks I'm interested in any modified Guzzi, whatever the style. Ratchethack, whilst I applaud your avowed quest to debunk prevailing orthodoxies, it seems to me that you hold firm in your own orthodoxy. It's not that you express your opinion, it's the manner of that expression; littered with sarcasm & condescension. It seems to me that any view that doesn't sit comfortably with your own understanding is worth only your contempt & derision. "...O wad some Power the giftie gie us To see oursels as ithers see us!..." KB
Admin Jaap Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 Oh boy, here we go... <_> Thread pre-emptively closed...
Recommended Posts