modern art = shit

1…5681011…19

Comments

  • urbanhippie
    urbanhippie Posts: 3,007
    I know fuck all about art. I'm of the school of 'I like what I like' ;)

    Saying that though, I checked out most of the links and some of it is pretty good (Klimt, Jiro, Pollack) and some of it I don't like (Rothko (sorry :o))

    I would say that the point of art though is to get people talking, debating, even arguing. Job done ;):D
    A human being that was given to fly.

    Wembley 18/06/07

    If there was a reason, it was you.

    O2 Arena 18/09/09
  • harmless_little_f***
    harmless_little_f*** Posts: 8,005
    urbanhippie wrote:
    and some of it I don't like (Rothko (sorry :o))

    Oh no you di'nt.

    ;)
    '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 great Sir Leo Harrison
  • Rhinocerous Surprise
    Rhinocerous Surprise Posts: 4,423
    harmless_little_f*** wrote:
    We're all cynics, just depends what camp you fall into - Cynics often make the best critics, imo, even when they like modern art.

    Fair point - I just figured a cynic would be more likely to call bullshit on that kinda stuff. Maybe they'd just be more likely to call bullshit on bad art, no matter what period or style.
    Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
  • dunkman
    dunkman Posts: 19,646
    harmless_little_f*** wrote:
    Look, I didn't have any fucking idea of your massive art/design credentials, or what you already knew, when I posted some artists you might want to look at...

    So why did I do it?

    Because the title of this thread implied that you knew absolutely nothing about art. So I was trying to help a brother out... I apologise for sharing my enthusiasm for it.


    amigo.. can i just say that you're right.. i believed your "have you never heard of..." commentto be a dig and therefore a jibe at my lack of knowledge.. i was wrong :)

    i dont have any classic art background or anything like that.. my credentials are 3 years of art and design college... i'm not Brian Sewell... thank fuck :D

    now please leave me alone... i'm deep freezing a mouldy salmon and sticking a wee cardigan on it made out of play-doh... Turner prize here i come
    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.
  • Rhinocerous Surprise
    Rhinocerous Surprise Posts: 4,423
    dunkman wrote:
    amigo.. can i just say that you're right.. i believed your "have you never heard of..." commentto be a dig and therefore a jibe at my lack of knowledge.. i was wrong :)

    i dont have any classic art background or anything like that.. my credentials are 3 years of art and design college... i'm not Brian Sewell... thank fuck :D

    now please leave me alone... i'm deep freezing a mouldy salmon and sticking a wee cardigan on it made out of play-doh... Turner prize here i come

    If you make the wee cardigan actually LOOK like a wee cardigan, you're already miles ahead of most "conceptual artists".;)
    Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
  • Jeremy1012
    Jeremy1012 Posts: 7,170
    http://www.gerhard-richter.com/art/paintings/#abstracts

    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.
    "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"
  • dunkman
    dunkman Posts: 19,646
    Jeremy1012 wrote:
    Duncan, art doesn't have to be about defined images, much like music doesn't have to be 2 minute 50 pop songs. Ambient music, drone, that's still music. Melodies aren't the only characteristics of music, there's texture, rhythm, timbre. Visual art is the same. Just because you feel nothing for Rothko doesn't mean it's shit. To dismiss the many, many people who rate him very highly smacks a wee bit of arrogance, wouldn't you say?

    i never dismissed them Jeremiah.. i dismissed the piece... its a sponge cake painted by someone with cataracts.

    and me... arrogant??????

    why thank you :)

    p.s. i feel a new thread coming on... techno music = 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.
  • dunkman
    dunkman Posts: 19,646
    Jeremy1012 wrote:
    Really though, I think if you can't feel anything for these paintings then you need to reprogram your mind to be less conventionalist.


    and thats NOT arrogant!!! :D

    http://www.gerhard-richter.com/art/paintings/photo_paintings/detail.php?5545

    this one is the best Zebra walking past a small window i've ever seen... or is it a photo negative of a zebra walking past a small window.
    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.
  • Jeremy1012
    Jeremy1012 Posts: 7,170
    dunkman wrote:
    i never dismissed them Jeremiah.. i dismissed the piece... its a sponge cake painted by someone with cataracts.

    and me... arrogant??????

    why thank you :)

    p.s. i feel a new thread coming on... techno music = shit ;)
    All's I'm saying is, plenty of people think Rothko is amazing. What makes you right? Because you are saying you are right aren't you? What with the lack of "imo"s ;)

    and yes, techno is shit. no doubt. electronic music =/= techno.
    "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"
  • Zanne
    Zanne Posts: 899
    dunkman wrote:
    http://www.gerhard-richter.com/art/paintings/photo_paintings/detail.php?5545

    this one is the best Zebra walking past a small window i've ever seen... or is it a photo negative of a zebra walking past a small window.


    LOL! Now that's creative thinking.
    Just me
  • Urban Hiker
    Urban Hiker Posts: 1,312
    dunkman wrote:

    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.
  • failedpersephone
    failedpersephone Posts: 3,424
    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.
  • decides2dream
    decides2dream Posts: 14,977
    FinsburyParkCarrots wrote:
    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? :D




    :D
    Stay with me...
    Let's just breathe...


    I am myself like you somehow


  • lgt
    lgt Posts: 720
    decides2dream wrote:
    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! :)
  • Jeremy1012
    Jeremy1012 Posts: 7,170
    lgt wrote:
    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"
  • decides2dream
    decides2dream Posts: 14,977
    lgt wrote:
    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.......
    Stay with me...
    Let's just breathe...


    I am myself like you somehow


  • harmless_little_f***
    harmless_little_f*** Posts: 8,005
    Jeremy1012 wrote:
    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.'

    - the great Sir Leo Harrison
  • lgt
    lgt Posts: 720
    Jeremy1012 wrote:
    The really gloomy room? It's oppressive. But kinda cool.

    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!
  • lgt
    lgt Posts: 720
    decides2dream wrote:
    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! ;)
  • genie
    genie Posts: 2,222
    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....

Categories