I love his stuff.
I used to beg him to let me work with him.
pfft...I have better things to do now.
I saw his work in Bizarre magazine (incidentally where I read about a number of new 'modern' artists in cluding Elizabeth McGrath, I mentioned earlier) and fell inlove with his stuff. Very clever and appeals to my *ahem* slightly twisted nature
I didn't know you were a photographer/artist?
Been to this many PJ shows: Reading 2006 London 2007 Manchester & London 2009 Dublin, Belfast, London, Nijmegen & Berlin 2010 Manchester 1 & Manchester 2 2012...
... and I still think Drive-By Truckers are better.
there is no *right*... but modern art=shit being someones opinion is now wrong?? hmmmmm ...
the examples of modern art that i gave ( and others) are shit... opinion it may be.. but my opinion is the right one
i didn't say your OPINION is wrong...but as i've read you post a few times in the past....then YOUR post should've clearly stated "modern art = shit imo" eh? you presented the statement as a 'fact' rather than simply your opinion. so no, i don't disgree with your right to hold such an opinion...,moe power to ya, i simply disagree with it. and yes, i agree with civ, your thread title, very misleading...b/c obviously, you did not mean to lump ALL modern art into that one broad category of shite. fair enough. that said, there IS plenty of shite art out there...altho i don't argue their right to call it 'art'....merely may disagree about it being 'good' art. all semantics in any case. we all react/enjoy/appreciate...whatever...for our own highly personla/subjective reasons. even the shite stuff, gets you to think, to question, to discuss....and that's all cool.
i didn't say your OPINION is wrong...but as i've read you post a few times in the past....then YOUR post should've clearly stated "modern art = shit imo" eh?
every post i make or anyone makes about a subjective topic is their opinion... i'm not going to say imo after every thread i start or thing i say.
"burnt bread tastes better" was a thread i did about last week sometime... should i edit it now... do you want me to add imo!!
i thought it was plainly obvious?
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
Indeed! I wanted to put some Mark Rothko down but he's already dismissed that style.
i *heart*
*heart*
*heart*
marc chagall ....and i dare anyone to say they, or their child ...paint as well as him, or come up with such imaginings on canvas. also, rotko, aint' your bag...fine...but to dismiss his work entirely as being easy or elementary, is to not even LOOK at one of his paintings in the real world. there Is such complexity in his colors.......
i really dislike the whole 'oh my kid could do that' scenario...b/c ya know what? maybe, maybe not. most...i would say not. and even if the 'technical skill' is easy enough to master to create it, the concepts of it, probably not so much. this is also why photography as art was dismissed for so long, and still gets some dismissal b/c "anyone can take a picture." :rolleyes: sure, many CAN take a picture, but many more can't 'make' one...nor come up with a decent composition, capture the light correctly, hell even get their horizon lines straight. it's not just about ability and so much more into thought and composure.
every post i make or anyone makes about a subjective topic is their opinion... i'm not going to say imo after every thread i start or thing i say.
"burnt bread tastes better" was a thread i did about last week sometime... should i edit it now... do you want me to add imo!!
i thought it was plainly obvious?
it is!
however, you HAVe in the past clearly stated (jokingly i am sure) that people SHOULD say, imo' with such statements. i'd go and look it up, but i can't be bothered. anyhoo....i DISagree with YOUR opinion...that is not the same as saying you are wrong for having it. THAT was my point all along.
it is!
however, you HAVe in the past clearly stated (jokingly i am sure) that people SHOULD say, imo' with such statements. i'd go and look it up, but i can't be bothered. anyhoo....i DISagree with YOUR opinion...that is not the same as saying you are wrong for having it. THAT was my point all along.
plainly obvious, no?
if the thread is entitled "modern art = shit" then its pretty clear what its going to be about.
now i'm sure you have said to people in the past about opening threads that are about something they dont like... i'd also look it up but cant be bothered...
and in this thread no-one has posted a pic of a modern art piece that is actually good... for every one you show me i can show 100 more that are shit.
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
painting of a slightly blurred sponge cake??... well. thats just shit
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
if the thread is entitled "modern art = shit" then its pretty clear what its going to be about.
now i'm sure you have said to people in the past about opening threads that are about something they dont like... i'd also look it up but cant be bothered... the "why all the depressed threads" springs to mind...
and in this thread no-one has posted a pic of a modern art piece that is actually good... for every one you show me i can show 100 more that are shit.
actually, i LOVE a great deal of modern art...so this topic IS of great interest to me. thus why i chose to post in it, participate in the debate on the topic.
and you've already said that. and i've disagreed. and there it is.
btw - i don't care if you can give me 100 to 1 odds of most modern art being shit...wouldn't even bother debating it. point is, to me and many others.......there is plenty of modern art that is fantastic.
so all the artists listed thus far...off the top of my head....
bottomline...i simply disagree with your assessment that modern art = shit. that's it. however, unlike you...i also don't *argue* the right to call it 'art' or not. again, it is so subjective....so all i will question is if i personally would consider something 'good' art, and yea....entirely different topic. for me, much of modern art IS good....GREAt art.....and sure, mixed in there, there is shite. however, i won't disiss it all b/c of some i do not appreciate.
and no i don't do links from work. firstly, can't be bothered....and secondly, i like to avoid any issues pulling up random links may cause my computer. yea, even some art sites are wonky.
The thing about art, modern, conceptual or otherwise, is that good art will force a reaction (good or bad), it will challenge you, it may even make you uncomfortable, but most importantly it will stay with you.
I ask my students to be open to the possibilities. They don't have to like it, but at a minimum acknowledge it in context and see what happens.
Also, there has to be something to this black square idea; we've been pondering it for nearly a century.
There's something stinky in this thread, and it's not my feet
Yeah, there's a lot of b***s*** being spread around.
I always though art, painting etc required some actual talent, some skill, appears it just requires a brass neck. Oh, and the ability to use long words to persuade people that they are so thick they can't appreciate how great your 'creations' are.
Don't even bother. Just paint a good picture or piss off.
Bob Ross never had to persuade anyone, he just went, "look at that, a painting of a tree, isn't it excellent?" And we all went, "Bob, yes that is excellent."
He was the man.
'We're learning songs for baby Jesus' birthday. His mum and dad were Merry and Joseph. He had a bed made of clay and the three kings bought him Gold, Frankenstein and Merv as presents.'
painting of a slightly blurred sponge cake??... well. thats just shit
well done.
so then, right there DIsproves your modern art = shit equation.
my work here is done.
btw - have you ever seen a rothko in person? it is entirely different viewing in person, and i highly recommend it. that said, even if you see it and hate it...still dismiss it...fair enough. agree to disagree is always cool with me.
heard of him and seen his stuff is 2 different things.
so i looked up his stuff.
were you going to become all pompous and mock me for not knowing who he was?
that would sum up art elitism to me in that one sentence.
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
so then, right there DIsproves your modern art = shit equation.
my work here is done.
btw - have you ever seen a rothko in person? it is entirely different viewing in person, and i highly recommend it. that said, even if you see it and hate it...still dismiss it...fair enough. agree to disagree is always cool with me.
i looked into the window of a bakers shop once when i was still drunk.
same thing... foggy sponge cakes.
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
heard of him and seen his stuff is 2 different things.
so i looked up his stuff.
were you going to become all pompous and mock me for not knowing who he was?
that would sum up art elitism to me in that one sentence.
this i think most can agree:
art elitism = shit
absolutely!
however, on the the other hand....vast, sweeping dismissal of forms of art simply b/c your kid might be able to do so :rolleyes:...imho...is also = shit.
There's something stinky in this thread, and it's not my feet
Yeah, there's a lot of b***s*** being spread around.
I always though art, painting etc required some actual talent, some skill, appears it just requires a brass neck. Oh, and the ability to use long words to persuade people that they are so thick they can't appreciate how great your 'creations' are.
Don't even bother. Just paint a good picture or piss off.
Bob Ross never had to persuade anyone, he just went, "look at that, a painting of a tree, isn't it excellent?" And we all went, "Bob, yes that is excellent."
He was the man.
And some of us thought it was one-trick-pony, seventies-kitsch inspired, cliched drivel.
But it was entertaining.
'We're learning songs for baby Jesus' birthday. His mum and dad were Merry and Joseph. He had a bed made of clay and the three kings bought him Gold, Frankenstein and Merv as presents.'
however, on the the other hand....vast, sweeping dismissal of forms of art simply b/c your kid might be able to do so :rolleyes:...imho...is also = shit.
i agree.. who said their kids could do it?
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
heard of him and seen his stuff is 2 different things.
so i looked up his stuff.
were you going to become all pompous and mock me for not knowing who he was?
No but I might've called you out on the fact that you waved your art/design qualifications in my face whilst saying you knew all about the artists I suggested you looked at last time, so I shouldn't bother suggesting them.
'We're learning songs for baby Jesus' birthday. His mum and dad were Merry and Joseph. He had a bed made of clay and the three kings bought him Gold, Frankenstein and Merv as presents.'
however, on the the other hand....vast, sweeping dismissal of forms of art simply b/c your kid might be able to do so :rolleyes:...imho...is also = shit.
was it you who said something about a work that look like a kid was given crayolas? dunno, again...not looking back. anyhoo, it wasn't actually a direct reference to this thread.....just a general dismissal of that mode of thought....imo of course.
what can i say, i actually enjoy most modern art VERY much...mostly for the thought process, and the emotions evoked. een with some of the shite. whereas old masters.....absolutely amazing technical skill, can marvel at their technique, compositions, etc....but overall, the subject isn't of great interest for a lot of it....lots of repetitive work b/c let's face it, MUCH of it is based on religion, etc. granted, it is fantastic when skill/technique ANd interesting thoughts/concepts are in one. however, even in the utter simplicity of much 'modern art'.....many, probably most, of the artists DO possess the technical skill, and choose to utilize it differently, if at all. look at the early work of picasso, the man most definitely could draw/paint, etc.
as much as i can love a painting such as vermeer's girl with a pearl earring...and i DO adore it, and am happy to say i got to see it in person last summer........i ALSO love immensely the work of marc chagall. i cannot recall the name of the painting off the top of my head, but one that is a painting of he and his wife, hand and hand...flaoting in an interior...all dream-like. gorgeous.
hereya go, i niked this from a post on the art wall:
I thought of adding more adjectives but those were my favourites.
'We're learning songs for baby Jesus' birthday. His mum and dad were Merry and Joseph. He had a bed made of clay and the three kings bought him Gold, Frankenstein and Merv as presents.'
the thing that amuses me is when people say artists like van gogh or monet aren't modern. in their time, they were considered *hugely* radical. something doesn't have to have plumbing sticking out of it or a vacuum in a plastic box to be construed as 'modern'
speaking of vacuums in boxes, jeff koons gives my soul a rash lol
beauty of art, it's subjective, open to everybody that chooses to view it and allow it to affect them. there is no right or wrong,
nobody can categorically say something is "shit", you can only express your own opinion on it. now koons, sure, i'll say he's shit....rothko isn't my cup of tea either, but that's my opinion
was it you who said something about a work that look like a kid was given crayolas? dunno, again...not looking back.
no i said it looked like someone gave Helen Keller a packet of Crayola and asked her to go wild... but thanks for the sweeping generalisation and atypical assumption
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
No but I might've called you out on the fact that you waved your art/design qualifications in my face whilst saying you knew all about the artists I suggested you looked at last time, so I shouldn't bother suggesting them.
you said "try these"
and then listed 4 world famous artists dude..
be like you starting a thread called "cars = shit" and then me going.. hey man.. try these Alfa Romeo, Porsche, Ferrari.... you'd just be like... yeah man i know what they are.
you implied i hadnt seen a picasso, or a klimt, or munch, or pollock.. etc... with the "try these" comment.
i've heard of Chigall.. can i recall all of his art from the recesses of my drug-addled brain... no.. hence why i looked his stuff up.
anyway... brown bear in a fucking suit on my first post = shit
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
Comments
I saw his work in Bizarre magazine (incidentally where I read about a number of new 'modern' artists in cluding Elizabeth McGrath, I mentioned earlier) and fell inlove with his stuff. Very clever and appeals to my *ahem* slightly twisted nature
I didn't know you were a photographer/artist?
... and I still think Drive-By Truckers are better.
i didn't say your OPINION is wrong...but as i've read you post a few times in the past....then YOUR post should've clearly stated "modern art = shit imo" eh? you presented the statement as a 'fact' rather than simply your opinion. so no, i don't disgree with your right to hold such an opinion...,moe power to ya, i simply disagree with it. and yes, i agree with civ, your thread title, very misleading...b/c obviously, you did not mean to lump ALL modern art into that one broad category of shite. fair enough.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
every post i make or anyone makes about a subjective topic is their opinion... i'm not going to say imo after every thread i start or thing i say.
"burnt bread tastes better" was a thread i did about last week sometime... should i edit it now... do you want me to add imo!!
i thought it was plainly obvious?
steady now amigo...
i *heart*
*heart*
*heart*
marc chagall
i really dislike the whole 'oh my kid could do that' scenario...b/c ya know what? maybe, maybe not. most...i would say not. and even if the 'technical skill' is easy enough to master to create it, the concepts of it, probably not so much. this is also why photography as art was dismissed for so long, and still gets some dismissal b/c "anyone can take a picture." :rolleyes: sure, many CAN take a picture, but many more can't 'make' one...nor come up with a decent composition, capture the light correctly, hell even get their horizon lines straight. it's not just about ability and so much more into thought and composure.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
it is!
however, you HAVe in the past clearly stated (jokingly i am sure) that people SHOULD say, imo' with such statements. i'd go and look it up, but i can't be bothered.
plainly obvious, no?
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
and, well done.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
The thing about art, modern, conceptual or otherwise, is that good art will force a reaction (good or bad), it will challenge you, it may even make you uncomfortable, but most importantly it will stay with you.
I ask my students to be open to the possibilities. They don't have to like it, but at a minimum acknowledge it in context and see what happens.
Also, there has to be something to this black square idea; we've been pondering it for nearly a century.
WOW I look at that black square and life just makes sense... :eek:
Thank you!!!!
"Its a secret to everybody."
bitches! haha
i have many thoughts on this, including a story about an art dance piece i did in art school (as a goof lol)....i'll share later.
just felt like calling you all bitches for now. that's all
if the thread is entitled "modern art = shit" then its pretty clear what its going to be about.
now i'm sure you have said to people in the past about opening threads that are about something they dont like... i'd also look it up but cant be bothered...
and in this thread no-one has posted a pic of a modern art piece that is actually good... for every one you show me i can show 100 more that are shit.
i just looked up his stuff
and its good.. i quite like it
Rothko stuff...
painting of a slightly blurred sponge cake??... well. thats just shit
actually, i LOVE a great deal of modern art...so this topic IS of great interest to me.
and you've already said that. and i've disagreed. and there it is.
btw - i don't care if you can give me 100 to 1 odds of most modern art being shit...wouldn't even bother debating it. point is, to me and many others.......there is plenty of modern art that is fantastic.
so all the artists listed thus far...off the top of my head....
matisse
modigliani
rothko
kandinsky
chagall
o'keeffe
van gogh
munch
klimt
picasso
miro
pollack
etc...and others....
all their work is shite?
ok then.
carry on.
bottomline...i simply disagree with your assessment that modern art = shit. that's it. however, unlike you...i also don't *argue* the right to call it 'art' or not. again, it is so subjective....so all i will question is if i personally would consider something 'good' art, and yea....entirely different topic. for me, much of modern art IS good....GREAt art.....and sure, mixed in there, there is shite. however, i won't disiss it all b/c of some i do not appreciate.
and no i don't do links from work. firstly, can't be bothered....and secondly, i like to avoid any issues pulling up random links may cause my computer. yea, even some art sites are wonky.
and i truly appreciate this post:
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
Yeah, there's a lot of b***s*** being spread around.
I always though art, painting etc required some actual talent, some skill, appears it just requires a brass neck. Oh, and the ability to use long words to persuade people that they are so thick they can't appreciate how great your 'creations' are.
Don't even bother. Just paint a good picture or piss off.
Bob Ross never had to persuade anyone, he just went, "look at that, a painting of a tree, isn't it excellent?" And we all went, "Bob, yes that is excellent."
He was the man.
Had you not heard of Chagall before?
- the great Sir Leo Harrison
well done.
so then, right there DIsproves your modern art = shit equation.
my work here is done.
btw - have you ever seen a rothko in person? it is entirely different viewing in person, and i highly recommend it.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
heard of him and seen his stuff is 2 different things.
so i looked up his stuff.
were you going to become all pompous and mock me for not knowing who he was?
that would sum up art elitism to me in that one sentence.
i looked into the window of a bakers shop once when i was still drunk.
same thing... foggy sponge cakes.
this i think most can agree:
art elitism = shit
absolutely!
however, on the the other hand....vast, sweeping dismissal of forms of art simply b/c your kid might be able to do so :rolleyes:...imho...is also = shit.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
And some of us thought it was one-trick-pony, seventies-kitsch inspired, cliched drivel.
But it was entertaining.
- the great Sir Leo Harrison
i agree.. who said their kids could do it?
No but I might've called you out on the fact that you waved your art/design qualifications in my face whilst saying you knew all about the artists I suggested you looked at last time, so I shouldn't bother suggesting them.
- the great Sir Leo Harrison
bingo!!
agreed.
those are pretty zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
was it you who said something about a work that look like a kid was given crayolas? dunno, again...not looking back.
what can i say, i actually enjoy most modern art VERY much...mostly for the thought process, and the emotions evoked. een with some of the shite. whereas old masters.....absolutely amazing technical skill, can marvel at their technique, compositions, etc....but overall, the subject isn't of great interest for a lot of it....lots of repetitive work b/c let's face it, MUCH of it is based on religion, etc. granted, it is fantastic when skill/technique ANd interesting thoughts/concepts are in one. however, even in the utter simplicity of much 'modern art'.....many, probably most, of the artists DO possess the technical skill, and choose to utilize it differently, if at all. look at the early work of picasso, the man most definitely could draw/paint, etc.
as much as i can love a painting such as vermeer's girl with a pearl earring...and i DO adore it, and am happy to say i got to see it in person last summer........i ALSO love immensely the work of marc chagall. i cannot recall the name of the painting off the top of my head, but one that is a painting of he and his wife, hand and hand...flaoting in an interior...all dream-like. gorgeous.
hereya go, i niked this from a post on the art wall:
upper left image...click on it...entitled birthday
love it.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
clever words......doth not make one clever
I thought of adding more adjectives but those were my favourites.
- the great Sir Leo Harrison
speaking of vacuums in boxes, jeff koons gives my soul a rash lol
beauty of art, it's subjective, open to everybody that chooses to view it and allow it to affect them. there is no right or wrong,
nobody can categorically say something is "shit", you can only express your own opinion on it. now koons, sure, i'll say he's shit....rothko isn't my cup of tea either, but that's my opinion
no i said it looked like someone gave Helen Keller a packet of Crayola and asked her to go wild... but thanks for the sweeping generalisation and atypical assumption
you said "try these"
and then listed 4 world famous artists dude..
be like you starting a thread called "cars = shit" and then me going.. hey man.. try these Alfa Romeo, Porsche, Ferrari.... you'd just be like... yeah man i know what they are.
you implied i hadnt seen a picasso, or a klimt, or munch, or pollock.. etc... with the "try these" comment.
i've heard of Chigall.. can i recall all of his art from the recesses of my drug-addled brain... no.. hence why i looked his stuff up.
anyway... brown bear in a fucking suit on my first post = shit