^^^^^^???????^^^^^^^^
First thought......."Space Invaders"?
Won't dispute "skill", "creative", "talent", admirable in their minimalism; And can't begin to speak to the code; I wonder if there aren't a dozen different ways to render each one, some more beautiful and elegant in their code than others?
But I chuckle at "Instantly convey some meaning to a viewer".........Had I not been told the purple blob (second column, fourth row) is intended to mean "
art", I don't think I would have gotten it. I guess it's a paint pallette? Some works of art are more successful than others, some emoji in the set more successful than others.
I'm still struggling to call it art, much less "permanent collection" worthy......(And if I didn't flap my gums, who would I get to argue with me)?
Recently heard an interview with a senior curator on the museum staff, discussing the addition of the emojis to the permanent collection at NY MoMA:
(Falsely referring to them as "these objects)......
"If you think about it; Let's face it, we can't live without emojis, so..........."
Seriously? I can't think of any single work of art ever created, that we simply couldn't live without. I think humanity would be diminished if the Sistine Chapel were never built; When the ceiling collapses some day, it will be a great loss; If the Mona Lisa were to burn up tomorrow, it would be a bummer. But the idea we couldn't
live without any of them, is just silly.
I'll even consider extending the definition of art to (for example) the Hoover dam and the Brooklyn bridge, and think about the real life benefits they have brought to tens of millions of people; But we could still
live without them.
That a woman in her position would say "we can't live without emojis" speaks volumes about the direction of the museum, and the highly questionable selection process, the thinking of the people at the top, IMHO.
Tell me, I can't live without emojis
