Next Page >

Newest Comments:
2 hours ago
quote:
God I can't wait for this nonsense to fade into obscurity once more

The show, or the annoying poster? Because I still think the show is good, even if spamming fanart isn't.
4 hours ago
God I can't wait for this nonsense to fade into obscurity once more
10 hours ago
quote:
quote:
most art is good, my beef is if you have a guy who just dumped black paint over a canvas, and someone tries to explain to you its the most deep and meaningful thing on the planet. a black canvas can mean a billion things, but he insists it means ONE, and THAT is whats wrong with modern art. Artists make abstract shit for a specific purpose, which doesnt work, either make something that direct and to the point, or at least hints at its purpose, for a subject, or make something abstract and contemplative to provoke thought and reflection. modern artists do a half-assed job of trying to mix both of those into one and it comes off as "art" that anyone can make in 5 minutes, that REQUIRES a report written by the artist for even art critics and other artists to understand, which is BAD.

So what you're saying is that you don't like conceptual art?


He doesn't like conceptual art that could have 1 million different valid meanings.
Aug 18th, 2014
Wheres the fire-Emblem characters?
Aug 18th, 2014
Toiletbot confirmed.
Aug 17th, 2014
quote:
most art is good, my beef is if you have a guy who just dumped black paint over a canvas, and someone tries to explain to you its the most deep and meaningful thing on the planet. a black canvas can mean a billion things, but he insists it means ONE, and THAT is whats wrong with modern art. Artists make abstract shit for a specific purpose, which doesnt work, either make something that direct and to the point, or at least hints at its purpose, for a subject, or make something abstract and contemplative to provoke thought and reflection. modern artists do a half-assed job of trying to mix both of those into one and it comes off as "art" that anyone can make in 5 minutes, that REQUIRES a report written by the artist for even art critics and other artists to understand, which is BAD.

So what you're saying is that you don't like conceptual art?
Aug 17th, 2014
quote:
Here, the reason Duchamp used a psuedonym was because he was on the board for that gallery, and he wanted people to look at it in an unbiased way. He was, in a sense, testing them, because the gallery said that any artist could enter their work as long as they paid the fee. Of course, they rejected it, and Duchamp took it across the street to Stieglitz's 291. Duchamp made this as the ultimate rejection of defining art, of restricting it. The idea is that if you're asking 'what is art?', you're asking the wrong question. Stephen Hicks said it best:
"The artist is a not great creator—Duchamp went shopping at a plumbing store. The artwork is not a special object—it was mass-produced in a factory. The experience of art is not exciting and ennobling—at best it is puzzling and mostly leaves one with a sense of distaste. But over and above that, Duchamp did not select just any ready-made object to display. In selecting the urinal, his message was clear: Art is something you piss on."

Of course, back when this was made, nobody needed an essay to understand it--everybody could clearly see its meaning. Even today, people with developed eyes can see the meaning in art without needing to read about it. But I feel that people just dismiss modern art because they think it's too confusing, and never make an effort to understand it. And, imo, Impressionism through today is the most interesting period for art.

most art is good, my beef is if you have a guy who just dumped black paint over a canvas, and someone tries to explain to you its the most deep and meaningful thing on the planet. a black canvas can mean a billion things, but he insists it means ONE, and THAT is whats wrong with modern art. Artists make abstract shit for a specific purpose, which doesnt work, either make something that direct and to the point, or at least hints at its purpose, for a subject, or make something abstract and contemplative to provoke thought and reflection. modern artists do a half-assed job of trying to mix both of those into one and it comes off as "art" that anyone can make in 5 minutes, that REQUIRES a report written by the artist for even art critics and other artists to understand, which is BAD.
Aug 17th, 2014
go back to school you nerd
Aug 17th, 2014 [OP]
Here, the reason Duchamp used a psuedonym was because he was on the board for that gallery, and he wanted people to look at it in an unbiased way. He was, in a sense, testing them, because the gallery said that any artist could enter their work as long as they paid the fee. Of course, they rejected it, and Duchamp took it across the street to Stieglitz's 291. Duchamp made this as the ultimate rejection of defining art, of restricting it. The idea is that if you're asking 'what is art?', you're asking the wrong question. Stephen Hicks said it best:
"The artist is a not great creator—Duchamp went shopping at a plumbing store. The artwork is not a special object—it was mass-produced in a factory. The experience of art is not exciting and ennobling—at best it is puzzling and mostly leaves one with a sense of distaste. But over and above that, Duchamp did not select just any ready-made object to display. In selecting the urinal, his message was clear: Art is something you piss on."

Of course, back when this was made, nobody needed an essay to understand it--everybody could clearly see its meaning. Even today, people with developed eyes can see the meaning in art without needing to read about it. But I feel that people just dismiss modern art because they think it's too confusing, and never make an effort to understand it. And, imo, Impressionism through today is the most interesting period for art.
Aug 17th, 2014 [OP]
But that's the thing. Prior to Impressionism, art was treated almost as a science by the Academy. The Academy only respected hyper-realistic paintings with historical/religious subject matter, and made artists compete for their livelihoods, often condemning artists to give up art entirely because they couldn't cut it or abide by the Academy's statutes. Which, by the way, forbade academicians from publicly selling their art, or making artists look like "common peddlers"--artists had to survive off of commissions or private sales.

See, the Impressionists rejected the Academy in its entirety--Monet's Impression, soleil levant wasn't a historical painting, it was a landscape. It wasn't realistic, it was stylized. The Impressionists didn't even want to live off of commissions--they worked with dealers. So their triumph over the Academy opened the doors for the post-impressionists to make their mark--Van Gogh, Gauguin, Cezanne. Once this all made its way to America in 1913, which had been stagnant for the past 40 years, it literally caused riots, and that was when Americans got their negative impression of modern art, which still persists to this day.
loading more comments...