Talk:Anti-stuckism

Is this actually a real movement, or is it just what those two people who jumped on Emin's Bed had written on them? I've never seen the term used in any other context than that, and if it has been, I don't think it deserves an article. --Camembert

What do you mean? If it has been used in contexts other than this (the "bed incident") it is less deserving of an article? Why? --Daniel C. Boyer 21:29 Dec 28, 2002 (UTC)

I should have said "hasn't" not "has" - that was my mistake, for which apologies. What I meant was: if it has not be used in contexts other than the bed incident, and if there is no identifiable movement called "anti-stuckism" then this is not deserving of an article. And indeed, there is no such movement. --Camembert

This is ideosyncratic crap. Google finds 28 hits on this page title with this article bein the top hit. I vote for deletion. --mav

This is hardly idiosyncratic. Besides the "bed incident" see also [1]; you should have searched for "anti-stuckist" too. --Daniel C. Boyer 21:10 Dec 28, 2002 (UTC)

And see [this website http://regan09.tripod.com/ART/id1.html]. --Daniel C. Boyer

Just because somebody describes something as "anti-stuckist" doesn't mean there is a movement called "anti-stuckism" - there isn't, nor is there anything like one. "Anti-stuckist" gets 16 hits, also with this article at the top, making a grand total of 44. Just to compare: "anti-banana" gets 553. --Camembert

I don't know where anyone got the idea -- which I have never maintained -- that anti-stuckism is a movement. Stop arguing against this straw man! It does not say in the article that anti-stuckism is a movement! Anti-stuckism is more of a tendency. Let me quote from the article: "Anti-stuckism is opposition to the art movement stuckism." This does not imply anti-stuckism is a movement. I never believed anti-stuckism was a movement. --Daniel C. Boyer 20:38 Dec 31, 2002 (UTC)

OK, so if it isn't a movement (a point we seem to agree on), then why is it worthy of an article? As far as I can see, all there is to say about it is that "anti-stuckism" means "against stuckism" (which is completely self-evident) and that one of the fellows who jumped on Emin's My Bed had it written on his back (an incident which had no implications or consequences beyond that isolated event, and therefore properly covered in articles on the fellow himself and Emin herself). And if that's right, then this is not an encyclopaedia article, and should be deleted. --Camembert

I am an anti-pantsist!!!! -- Tarquin, the Grand High Poobah of Verdishavia (a 5th world nation!)

LOL Mr Boyer also tried to get m:Pre-automatic dictatorship passed-off as a valid topic. --mav

Your opposition to having an article on the pre-automatic dictatorship hardly has anything to do with anti-stuckism. --Daniel C. Boyer 20:40 Dec 31, 2002 (UTC)

LOL! -- Zoe

The Google and Groups-Google search both show that the term is used by persons other than the creator of this page. Whether you or anyone else think it is important doesn't matter, it is factually verifiable information. I personally think the LOTR mythology doesn't matter much, but that doesn't mean I go around deleting the pages. We have a page about Stuckism, why not one about Anti-stuckism? Let the artists have fun. --Eloquence

A Guardian article notes, BTW:

The Battle of the Bed may have been all over in a few minutes but it will go down in art history as the defining moment of the new and previously unheard of Anti-Stuckist Movement.

--Eloquence 10:20 Jan 1, 2003 (UTC)

That article was written immediately following the bed incident, and no anti-stuckist movement has in fact emerged (in fact, the idea is rather a silly one, because the stuckists have never been prominent enough to be worth reacting against in an organised way). The Guardian was speculating, probably with toungue in cheek, about what may come to pass, but which actually has not. Now, it is indeed true that this phrase has been used (rarely) by people other than the author of this page, but that does not automatically mean it is a worthy encyclopaedia subject. As I said above, the phrase "anti-banana" is a good deal more common than this phrase; are we meant to have an article about that? I hope not.

It being "important" or not isn't the point - the point is that there is nothing at all to say about the subject apart from this one incident and the so-obvious-it-isn't-worth-stating "Anti-stuckism is opposition to the art movement stuckism.". An article about stuckism is, of course, fine - the movement exists, it has stated ideals, and particular artists can be associated with it. None of these things are true about "anti-stuckism".

Summing up: it isn't the job of an encyclopaedia to list every phrase that's ever been used by anybody. Everything here can be better given at stuckism. This article should be deleted, or made to redirect to there. --Camembert

OK, so here's my idea - let's make a section headed "Anti-stuckism" in the stuckism article and move the info here to there. I have nothing against anti-stuckists (I don't like stuckism myself), but giving it its own article rather suggests that anti-stuckism is something more organised and coherent than it actually is. So will anybody object if I move this info into stuckism and redirect this page to there? --Camembert

Moving the information to stuckism seems like a fair compromise to me. We could also add a disclaimer like "No recognizable artistic movement of anti-stuckism has emerged so far in response to this event." --Eloquence

I've moved the info across. I hope it's OK for everyone. --Camembert 00:37 Jan 2, 2003 (UTC)