Talk:Artist's Shit

Really bad article

This article is just terrible. For a start, canned shit is hardly a 'readymade'. Secondly, anyone who has ever changed a nappy will not be shocked by the work. Thirdly, it fits in with Manzoni's series of works on the limits of physicality, and could be seen as a direct opposite to his Artist's Breath. This piece, one of the very first multiples, looks like it might become as seminal a work from the second half of the twentieth century as Fountain was in the first. The article needs a lot of work.Franciselliott (talk) 08:27, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

-Hey I agree and rewrote some of it but I'm new and don't know what I'm doing quite yet- culled the info from a few articles-it would be nice to make this a good quality page. artworlder

File:Piero Manzoni Artist's shit.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Piero Manzoni Artist's shit.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests December 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 00:14, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

PIERO MANZONI

Do you this artist has expanded the definition of art? Art comes in many different forms, even life itself is art. Many people would think that this is in a sense vulgar, but in all honesty it defines modern art in a new way.

F. Litke  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.18.8.59 (talk) 21:44, 16 February 2014 (UTC) 

People had done turds in boxes labeled "art" before. But I saw "Artist's Shit" at Tate Modern in 2002 and it was HILARIOUS. Really, I was giggling uncontrollably for five minutes afterwards. You can read about the object, but seeing it there on the shelf? PERFECT - David Gerard (talk) 22:54, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

See Also Section (4chan's “This post is art”)

So David Gerard undid my edit, stating "pretty sure nobody looking for this will care about that". Linked this in the See also section: 4chan's “This post is art”

However I think it's highly related and hence should appear in that section for that reason. Both are kind of self-ironic critiques of degenerated, ridiculous, detached modern art (or at least its receptive-community etc). And AFAIK "Artist's Shit" isn't that popular either. So I think that it should be linked in that section even if it didn't cause a huge media-furore.

And if there are more such "artworks" one should link them there too or: create a list of them and link the list or: create a category for it. --Fixuture (talk) 12:41, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Hmm ... I might be wrong. Anyone else? - David Gerard (talk) 17:22, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Source for 16 June, 2015 Christie's record for MERDA D' ARTISTA purchase

http://www.christies.com/lotfinder/sculptures-statues-figures/piero-manzoni-merda-d-artista-5939872-details.aspx?from=salesummary&intObjectID=5939872&sid=712159be-f354-4403-9455-ee7b15908816

I have searched the actual record of the value since I can't just admit the information without any source. Luckily, I was able to find the result of 16 June, 2015 Christie's auction from the website by doing a simple googling. I have no knowledge about Wikipedia's referencing method, so I hope that somebody put the link to the reference section in a proper way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:8206:9F00:4492:776E:115D:308E (talk) 22:20, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Contents

In Merda d'artista n. 80 , in exhibition at the Museo del Novecento of Milan, the technique section of the little card simply says

Tin box and printed paper

Are we sure that the can is not empty? --Error (talk) 00:36, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

See Artist's Shit#Contents of the cans; they are not empty, but do not necessarily contain that which they purport. Neil S. Walker (talk) 08:32, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

2014 article with photos of an opened can: Opening the Can: Boîte ou­ver­te de Pie­ro Man­zo­ni. An interesting point in the article is the connection with the father of the artist being a meat canner.     ←   ZScarpia   00:58, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Contents

there aren't proof that states thet the fecis are actually in the cans --85.18.201.165 (talk) 01:06, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Piero Manzoni - Merda D'artista (1961) - panoramio.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:53, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

It's very hard to tell at that page what's been nominated for deletion and why. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:50, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

X-ray claims

The article claims "The cans are steel, and thus cannot be x-rayed or scanned to determine the contents" yet on the article about the USS Ling it states "X-rays showed that the submarine's five safes contained documents and metallic objects". The steel on a safe would obviously be considerably thicker, bringing this claim about the cans into question. The source about the cans just seems to be some dubious thesis. Thornfield Hall (talk) 08:37, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

That is correct. X-ray machines are routinely being used on tin can production lines to inspect both the contents and the correct sealing of the cans. 2001:16B8:A591:5B00:453A:9E20:FF2A:235A (talk) 22:27, 24 May 2024 (UTC)