It's like something the K-Foundation would have taken the piss out of. A bit of graffiti with the word 'Cunt' pasted on it. I suppose it must me "conceptual"- the biggest market for corporate art going.

Fine art is only as "bourgoise" as the artist these days. So long as there is capitalism there will be people in all walks of life that prostitute themselves for it. If rich people are willing to buy into some art pimps' pyramid scheme flogging utter crap on the basis of fake exclusivity, then fuck them.

It would however be interesting to see a movement to challenge how fine art is, cough, taught in art schools.

I think perhaps you should draw something a bit more like a manifesto up, as your post seems a bit vague even to someone who is from an art background.

I understand where you're coming from but i want to point out that most of the 'fine artists' you may be ridiculising were the 'radical artists' of their own time. That's often why they stand out - as breakers of past tradition. I don't think it's wrong to look at their work in context and admire their guts in a time when there was no dole to fall back on when the public ignored their efforts.
They were stepping out into the unknown in a way that many 'new' artists do not. Unwittingly, we retread old ground but, and this is important I reckon, the retread ground is new for THEM. And if art is about personal expression (of anything - politics, social stuff, relationships etc) then I think that's ok.
Looking at and trying to understand past artworks doesn't stop anyone from creating. In fact, it can inspire others to break with that past and forge their own way - like you do.

Presumably this is a joke or someone who hasn't really bothered to investigate the recent 20th Century history of the failure of radical art movements to destroy bourgeois society (despite some good attempts).

Yep you are. . . . . . ........ . . . ......

That's handy - it'll take me about 10 minutes to round up thirty-odd 14yr olds who like to right swearwords on walls to shock people. It's not big, it's not clever.

An artist who wanted to be truly radical, would create something that performed a useful function.

the failure of radical art? You must be kidding!

Much of the art of the twentieth century (including literature and televisual) has been about consciousness expansion, about breaking down the doors of perception (to quote Aldous Huxley)- which is a (if not the) crucial factor in emancipation. I mean hey, it worked for me!

Just because we haven't won, doesn't mean we lost. Art is the means for long-distance semantics, an idea-seeding tool. Just because you're better than me, doesn't mean I'm crazy.