we are talking about shit art... i.e. stuff we could all do if we could talk enough bollocks about it
great art = stuff we couldnt do as we're not that talented
I like when we take this approach to this thread.
Walking can be a real trip
***********************
"We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
***********************
Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
I love that this message board can be up in arms about art interpretations!
(had to say that first)
now - for Dunkman - I agree with your OPINION that those exampled peices of modern art (altho the photos were examples of conceptual art, as has already been said) were not very awe-inspiring for technique and subject matter.
I think that is the main difference - it isn't a question of TALENT so much as the ability to use TECHNIQUE. many POST modern (and Post Modern is what is being exampled the most) artist feel that to be chained to the Technique-driven art schools of thought inhibit their ability to showcase their EMOTIVE states. Art is Emotion, art induces emotion, art gives us the ability to feel our emotions...etc.,
Some are arguing or debating the concepts behind the "Great" modern artist of their time - Retrospect is a curious tool...Van Gogh was not held in great regard while he was alive...most of his work was considered badly fashioned impressionism. EXPRESSIONISM hadn't been recognized yet. however, the rest of the world caught up with what he was doing...his TALENT in being able to transfer the turmoil of his LIFE into a pitcher with sunflowers in it is remarkable. he "saw the way the tree bends" and through his art we can see it too.
Art is about sharing...emotion, experiences, thoughts, views, LIFE
art is life/death the eternal struggle...
Conceptual art is there to give the viewers pause...reevaluate their place in the here and now...conceptual art is never used as anything more than a "place saver" for the conceptual artist that they then transfer to the bystander. That being said, My opinion on most of modern Conceptual art is that it is utterly pretentious and devoid of meaning. Most C.Artists are trying to jar you - get infamous...whatever - without SAYING anything to you...and NO it isn't that they are leaving it up to you to pick and sift through their meanings...that is a cop-out...To lump all artists from the 1900's forward does a huge disservice to Art, Artists, and Viewers - It would be like comparing John Steinbeck to Jenna Jameson as literary writers...can't be done...
IF YOU WANT A PLATE OF MY BEEF SWELLINGTON, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY THE COVERCHARGE.
Haha, this thread makes me giggle. Trying to say the original statement 2 + 2 = 4 doesn't necessarily mean 2 + 2 = 4, but rather that perhaps 1 + 1 and maybe another half might = 4, and there was no intention to say the whole 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 equalled the whole of the 4, so we shouldn't take it as such? Even though the original statement was 2 + 2 = 4?
i *heart*
*heart*
*heart*
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.......
Saw his paintings for the first time at Tate Modern in a room specifically dedicated to Rothko as he wanted them to be exhibited when he donated those paintings. It really is an experience! LOVED IT!
Saw his paintings for the first time at Tate Modern in a room specifically dedicated to Rothko as he wanted them to be exhibited when he donated those paintings. It really is an experience! LOVED IT!
The really gloomy room? It's oppressive. But kinda cool.
"I remember one night at Muzdalifa with nothing but the sky overhead, I lay awake amid sleeping Muslim brothers and I learned that pilgrims from every land — every colour, and class, and rank; high officials and the beggar alike — all snored in the same language"
Saw his paintings for the first time at Tate Modern in a room specifically dedicated to Rothko as he wanted them to be exhibited when he donated those paintings. It really is an experience! LOVED IT!
EXACTLY!
was there last summer for the pj gig, and same feelings......like hallowed ground, beautiful and haunting.
funny too, i see comments about how we 'all could do it'...and i dare say, i doubt it. mixing those colors just so, the luminousity, the balance and contrast of colors, the mood evoked.....nah...i don't buy it. just b/c some say it often enough doesn't make it so.
there's a couple rothkos at MoMA as well, but the exhibition at the tate really is superb! someday i want to go to the church or chapel that he did work for in texas i think? i've heard it's pretty phenomenal.
The really gloomy room? It's oppressive. But kinda cool.
My favourite room in the Tate. That's how Rothkos should be seen.
'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.'
EXACTLY!
was there last summer for the pj gig, and same feelings......like hallowed ground, beautiful and haunting.
funny too, i see comments about how we 'all could do it'...and i dare say, i doubt it. mixing those colors just so, the luminousity, the balance and contrast of colors, the mood evoked.....nah...i don't buy it. just b/c some say it often enough doesn't make it so.
there's a couple rothkos at MoMA as well, but the exhibition at the tate really is superb! someday i want to go to the church or chapel that he did work for in texas i think? i've heard it's pretty phenomenal.
to each his/her own of course.......
Glad you could see it!
To be honest, I've never really heard much of him beforehand but those paintings really got me into his art and he's one of my fave painters.
And yup, I totally agree... the blend of colours, contrast, sfumato.. I'd like to think I could!
i used to go and watch fine art a lot when i was young, then i moved on to watching modern art and i must say for few years i was of the same opinion, however i've changed my mind after watching modern paintings/sculptures and exhibitions. Modern art has fresh ideas, different styles, its vibrant and sometimes challenging. Few paintings that i've seen cannot compare to dozens of old fashioned stale style of paintings, because they are so much better!
i used to go and watch fine art a lot when i was young, then i moved on to watching modern art and i must say for few years i was of the same opinion, however i've changed my mind after watching modern paintings/sculptures and exhibitions. Modern art has fresh ideas, different styles, its vibrant and sometimes challenging. Few paintings that i've seen cannot compare to dozens of old fashioned stale style of paintings, because they are so much better!
but hey each to their own i suppose....
i like your last line.. your sig not so much but your last line
I'm not stopping people looking at it, watching or even doing it.. but my opinion is that the examples i have given so far are utter shit... its my opinion.
people like different music... i might think its crap or others think my music is crap.. i dont care.. its their opinion.
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.
EXACTLY!
was there last summer for the pj gig, and same feelings......like hallowed ground, beautiful and haunting.
funny too, i see comments about how we 'all could do it'...and i dare say, i doubt it. mixing those colors just so, the luminousity, the balance and contrast of colors, the mood evoked.....nah...i don't buy it. just b/c some say it often enough doesn't make it so.
there's a couple rothkos at MoMA as well, but the exhibition at the tate really is superb! someday i want to go to the church or chapel that he did work for in texas i think? i've heard it's pretty phenomenal.
to each his/her own of course.......
i could paint the misty sponge cake... i could.
i could also sellotape a squirrel to a anvil and then write the words "perambulate? moi?" on the side of that anvil... some daft fucker with more money than genitalia will buy i if i talk enough existeniallist crap about it.
tomorrow i'll be carving a lung made out of clarified butter
start bidding please
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.
Walking can be a real trip
***********************
"We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
***********************
Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
It's not about whether or not you would have the technical ability to paint the 'misty sponge cake' if you were given the colours and a brush. A million guitarists can play the guitar solo to stairway to heaven, some technically better than Page himself. They didn't write it though. Art isn't about who can do something, it's about who did.
"I remember one night at Muzdalifa with nothing but the sky overhead, I lay awake amid sleeping Muslim brothers and I learned that pilgrims from every land — every colour, and class, and rank; high officials and the beggar alike — all snored in the same language"
i like your last line.. your sig not so much ; ) but your last line : )
I'm not stopping people looking at it, watching or even doing it.. but my opinion is that the examples i have given so far are utter shit... its my opinion.
people like different music... i might think its crap or others think my music is crap.. i dont care.. its their opinion.
exactly who knows maybe one day you'll change your mind too
as for my signature, i really do miss him.....i know it's stupid, to miss someone you've never known, to miss someone who wouldn't miss you back
It's not about whether or not you would have the technical ability to paint the 'misty sponge cake' if you were given the colours and a brush. A million guitarists can play the guitar solo to stairway to heaven, some technically better than Page himself. They didn't write it though. Art isn't about who can do something, it's about who did.
thank you.
and at this point, or while ago really ...this has all become a circular convo - imo of course....so it's all down to "you spin me round like a record round round, baby"........:D
and lgt - so am I!
a true highlight for certain!
it had been 15+ years since i was lst in london...and great to experience that!
Check out the abstracts. They are clearly "modern" art and to some people would seem to be just random colours and shapes. Really though, I think if you can't feel anything for these paintings then you need to reprogram your mind to be less conventionalist.
By and large Jamie, I'd call it the 'emporers new clothes' but hey, if you like the iron bars....;)
By and large Jamie, I'd call it the 'emporers new clothes' but hey, if you like the iron bars....;)
Well I'd never heard of him until I walked past one of those in the Tate one day and was like "whoa, this is incredible" so it's not really a case of the emperor's new clothes at all I hadn't been told he was awesome or anything and trust me, I was approaching a lot of stuff in there with cynicism that day. A lot of that sort of stuff IS bullshit but a lot is true art that gets dismissed by people as pseudo-intellectual crap because it doesn't look like the Mona Lisa. The Richter paintings are much more impressive and complex in person. I spent about 20 minutes looking at the two in the Tate and I know bugger all about art from a critical perspective but they did something for me.
Just my thoughts
"I remember one night at Muzdalifa with nothing but the sky overhead, I lay awake amid sleeping Muslim brothers and I learned that pilgrims from every land — every colour, and class, and rank; high officials and the beggar alike — all snored in the same language"
So you would be more impressed if I played someone else's guitar solo that you liked or copied your favourite painting very well than if I did something original and different?
I respectfully call bullshit on yours
"I remember one night at Muzdalifa with nothing but the sky overhead, I lay awake amid sleeping Muslim brothers and I learned that pilgrims from every land — every colour, and class, and rank; high officials and the beggar alike — all snored in the same language"
So you would be more impressed if I played someone else's guitar solo that you liked or copied your favourite painting very well than if I did something original and different?
I respectfully call bullshit on yours
i'd be impressed if you did something original and different that took an equal amount of skill and talent as the old masters.
And yes i would be greatly impressed if you could play stairway with the skill and talent of a Jimmy Page, but it wouldnt be art.
I would be far less impressed if you played 5 notes at random in a unique way and called it a masterpiece on par with Stairway to Heaven. thats not art either.
i'd be impressed if you did something original and different that took an equal amount of skill and talent as the old masters.
And yes i would be greatly impressed if you could play stairway with the skill and talent of a Jimmy Page, but it wouldnt be art.
I would be far less impressed if you played 5 notes at random in a unique way and called it a masterpiece on par with Stairway to Heaven.
Our understanding of talent is subjective though and skill is unnecessary in creating art. That was my point. I think Gerhard Richter, the artist I posted a link to earlier, is a far more talented artist than some person who paints photorealistic pictures of sunsets etc. If I want to see a photorealistic image I will look at a photo. What people who dismiss modern art don't seem to realise is that unconventional or less technically stunning does not necessarily equal inferior. There are many sides to art. Richter's abstract paintings affect me more than a painting by Monet for example. Just because they don't do the same to someone else, like Jamie or Dunk, doesn't mean that his work is bad.
I am not saying that some of the modern art posted in this thread isn't shit. of course with a broadening of art it becomes harder to sort the bad from the good but since when was art supposed to be easy? I like being challenged. I don't want to watch American Pie when I can watch Persona. I don't want to listen to Rod Stewart when I can listen to Tom Waits. Some people hate Waits' style and would much rather hear sweetened versions of his songs by Rod Stewart but that doesn't make Waits bad.
"I remember one night at Muzdalifa with nothing but the sky overhead, I lay awake amid sleeping Muslim brothers and I learned that pilgrims from every land — every colour, and class, and rank; high officials and the beggar alike — all snored in the same language"
Our understanding of talent is subjective though and skill is unnecessary in creating art. That was my point. I think Gerhard Richter, the artist I posted a link to earlier, is a far more talented artist than some person who paints photorealistic pictures of sunsets etc. If I want to see a photorealistic image I will look at a photo. What people who dismiss modern art don't seem to realise is that unconventional or less technically stunning does not necessarily equal inferior. There are many sides to art. Richter's abstract paintings affect me more than a painting by Monet for example. Just because they don't do the same to someone else, like Jamie or Dunk, doesn't mean that his work is bad.
I am not saying that some of the modern art posted in this thread isn't shit. of course with a broadening of art it becomes harder to sort the bad from the good but since when was art supposed to be easy? I like being challenged. I don't want to watch American Pie when I can watch Persona. I don't want to listen to Rod Stewart when I can listen to Tom Waits. Some people hate Waits' style and would much rather hear sweetened versions of his songs by Rod Stewart but that doesn't make Waits bad.
I don't believe that skill is unnecessary in creating art. A poet or writer needs special skill with language, a musician needs skill with an instrument. why does a visual artist get off easy? why should I value an unskilled artist's work? One must have skill to convey an idea or emotion to someone visually (and not by using a stupid placard!)
i agree that photorealism is a huge waste of time, but thats not what the great ones go for either. I love the impressionists. they often blended technical skill and creativity masterfully. But much of the art since sucks because the art establishment has completely rejected any degree of quality, and many in fact go out of their way to discourage technical ability and consider the ideas of art pre-19th century to be inferior. they threw out hundreds of years of artistry. anyone can be an artist now.
Can we post more links to what we (we being the poster of the link and anybody who agrees with said poster) consider to be shitty art, before this gets moved over to The Moving Train.
Place your tongue in your cheek or bite it if you have to, but please have some fun. :rolleyes:;)
Walking can be a real trip
***********************
"We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
***********************
Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
eh most art just ends up as decoration for someone's bathroom anyway.
Where art and shit become one.
Walking can be a real trip
***********************
"We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
***********************
Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
I don't believe that skill is unnecessary in creating art. A poet or writer needs special skill with language, a musician needs skill with an instrument. why does a visual artist get off easy? why should I value an unskilled artist's work? One must have skill to convey an idea or emotion to someone visually (and not by using a stupid placard!)
i agree that photorealism is a huge waste of time, but thats not what the great ones go for either. I love the impressionists. they often blended technical skill and creativity masterfully. But much of the art since sucks because the art establishment has completely rejected any degree of quality, and many in fact go out of their way to discourage technical ability and consider the ideas of art pre-19th century to be inferior. they threw out hundreds of years of artistry. anyone can be an artist now.
Well do you like punk? The punk aesthetic says that anyone can be a musician if they're angry and disillusioned enough..
Have you heard the Moldy Peaches/ Kimya Dawson? Not a lot of technical ability there but I'll bet my knackered legs that it's good music, and art.
'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.'
Saw his paintings for the first time at Tate Modern in a room specifically dedicated to Rothko as he wanted them to be exhibited when he donated those paintings. It really is an experience! LOVED IT!
I love how absolutely subversive Rothko was. Originally those painting were made to be installed in the restaurant of the Four Seasons in NYC.
As powerful as those painting are, I can't even imagine eating in their midsts.
Can we post more links to what we (we being the poster of the link and anybody who agrees with said poster) consider to be shitty art, before this gets moved over to The Moving Train.
Place your tongue in your cheek or bite it if you have to, but please have some fun.
White mixed with yellow ochre #86/Student
Acrylic on canvas
Bananas are yellow.
i actually like some of those.... #29, with the metallic acyrillic is kina cool!
I also thought some were pretty damn good. Hell, I'd hang them in my bathroom or wear them on a t-shirt.
That number 21 is hilarious to me 'cause there is something very much like it in the special exhibits section of the Seattle Art Museum. I think I wanted to tell that painting to 'Fuck Off' when I saw it.
Walking can be a real trip
***********************
"We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
***********************
Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
Comments
I like when we take this approach to this thread.
***********************
"We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
***********************
Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
(had to say that first)
now - for Dunkman - I agree with your OPINION that those exampled peices of modern art (altho the photos were examples of conceptual art, as has already been said) were not very awe-inspiring for technique and subject matter.
I think that is the main difference - it isn't a question of TALENT so much as the ability to use TECHNIQUE. many POST modern (and Post Modern is what is being exampled the most) artist feel that to be chained to the Technique-driven art schools of thought inhibit their ability to showcase their EMOTIVE states. Art is Emotion, art induces emotion, art gives us the ability to feel our emotions...etc.,
Some are arguing or debating the concepts behind the "Great" modern artist of their time - Retrospect is a curious tool...Van Gogh was not held in great regard while he was alive...most of his work was considered badly fashioned impressionism. EXPRESSIONISM hadn't been recognized yet. however, the rest of the world caught up with what he was doing...his TALENT in being able to transfer the turmoil of his LIFE into a pitcher with sunflowers in it is remarkable. he "saw the way the tree bends" and through his art we can see it too.
Art is about sharing...emotion, experiences, thoughts, views, LIFE
art is life/death the eternal struggle...
Conceptual art is there to give the viewers pause...reevaluate their place in the here and now...conceptual art is never used as anything more than a "place saver" for the conceptual artist that they then transfer to the bystander. That being said, My opinion on most of modern Conceptual art is that it is utterly pretentious and devoid of meaning. Most C.Artists are trying to jar you - get infamous...whatever - without SAYING anything to you...and NO it isn't that they are leaving it up to you to pick and sift through their meanings...that is a cop-out...To lump all artists from the 1900's forward does a huge disservice to Art, Artists, and Viewers - It would be like comparing John Steinbeck to Jenna Jameson as literary writers...can't be done...
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
Saw his paintings for the first time at Tate Modern in a room specifically dedicated to Rothko as he wanted them to be exhibited when he donated those paintings. It really is an experience! LOVED IT!
EXACTLY!
was there last summer for the pj gig, and same feelings......like hallowed ground, beautiful and haunting.
funny too, i see comments about how we 'all could do it'...and i dare say, i doubt it. mixing those colors just so, the luminousity, the balance and contrast of colors, the mood evoked.....nah...i don't buy it. just b/c some say it often enough doesn't make it so.
there's a couple rothkos at MoMA as well, but the exhibition at the tate really is superb! someday i want to go to the church or chapel that he did work for in texas i think? i've heard it's pretty phenomenal.
to each his/her own of course.......
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
My favourite room in the Tate. That's how Rothkos should be seen.
- the great Sir Leo Harrison
Indeed. The room is gloomy or darkly lit. His paintings GLOW.
Of course, it's all subjective. Some like it, some hate it, whatever. That's life and the more varied, the less boring!
Glad you could see it!
To be honest, I've never really heard much of him beforehand but those paintings really got me into his art and he's one of my fave painters.
And yup, I totally agree... the blend of colours, contrast, sfumato.. I'd like to think I could!
but hey each to their own i suppose....
i like your last line.. your sig not so much
I'm not stopping people looking at it, watching or even doing it.. but my opinion is that the examples i have given so far are utter shit... its my opinion.
people like different music... i might think its crap or others think my music is crap.. i dont care.. its their opinion.
i could paint the misty sponge cake... i could.
i could also sellotape a squirrel to a anvil and then write the words "perambulate? moi?" on the side of that anvil... some daft fucker with more money than genitalia will buy i if i talk enough existeniallist crap about it.
tomorrow i'll be carving a lung made out of clarified butter
start bidding please
http://lincart.com/artists/album03
***********************
"We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
***********************
Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
exactly
as for my signature, i really do miss him.....i know it's stupid, to miss someone you've never known, to miss someone who wouldn't miss you back
thank you.
and at this point, or while ago really
and lgt - so am I!
a true highlight for certain!
it had been 15+ years since i was lst in london...and great to experience that!
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
By and large Jamie, I'd call it the 'emporers new clothes' but hey, if you like the iron bars....;)
i respectfully call bullshit on that viewpoint
but whatev. like what you like.
Just my thoughts
I respectfully call bullshit on yours
i'd be impressed if you did something original and different that took an equal amount of skill and talent as the old masters.
And yes i would be greatly impressed if you could play stairway with the skill and talent of a Jimmy Page, but it wouldnt be art.
I would be far less impressed if you played 5 notes at random in a unique way and called it a masterpiece on par with Stairway to Heaven. thats not art either.
I am not saying that some of the modern art posted in this thread isn't shit. of course with a broadening of art it becomes harder to sort the bad from the good but since when was art supposed to be easy? I like being challenged. I don't want to watch American Pie when I can watch Persona. I don't want to listen to Rod Stewart when I can listen to Tom Waits. Some people hate Waits' style and would much rather hear sweetened versions of his songs by Rod Stewart but that doesn't make Waits bad.
I don't believe that skill is unnecessary in creating art. A poet or writer needs special skill with language, a musician needs skill with an instrument. why does a visual artist get off easy? why should I value an unskilled artist's work? One must have skill to convey an idea or emotion to someone visually (and not by using a stupid placard!)
i agree that photorealism is a huge waste of time, but thats not what the great ones go for either. I love the impressionists. they often blended technical skill and creativity masterfully. But much of the art since sucks because the art establishment has completely rejected any degree of quality, and many in fact go out of their way to discourage technical ability and consider the ideas of art pre-19th century to be inferior. they threw out hundreds of years of artistry. anyone can be an artist now.
Place your tongue in your cheek or bite it if you have to, but please have some fun.
http://theworstartaward2006.wordpress.com/
***********************
"We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
***********************
Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
Where art and shit become one.
***********************
"We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
***********************
Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
Well do you like punk? The punk aesthetic says that anyone can be a musician if they're angry and disillusioned enough..
Have you heard the Moldy Peaches/ Kimya Dawson? Not a lot of technical ability there but I'll bet my knackered legs that it's good music, and art.
- the great Sir Leo Harrison
As powerful as those painting are, I can't even imagine eating in their midsts.
Oh and for the Gerhard Richter fans, take a look at some of his other work. He is one of the few contemporary painters who moves effortlessly between purely abstractand figural (rendered) work. Some of his canvases are stunning in their precision.
lol!! some of those are soooo funny!
my favorite is #21
White mixed with yellow ochre #86/Student
Acrylic on canvas
Bananas are yellow.
i actually like some of those.... #29, with the metallic acyrillic is kina cool!
I also thought some were pretty damn good. Hell, I'd hang them in my bathroom or wear them on a t-shirt.
That number 21 is hilarious to me 'cause there is something very much like it in the special exhibits section of the Seattle Art Museum. I think I wanted to tell that painting to 'Fuck Off' when I saw it.
***********************
"We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
***********************
Prepare for tending to your garden, America.