Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Is Modern Art a Hoax?

page: 1
1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 28 2004 @ 09:30 AM
link   
Call me a Phillistine but I believe that modern art is nothing more than a conspiracy run by and for a cabal of lazy lefties, from the ones who pee in a jar and call it art, to the ones who condescend to interpret it for us. Those of us too busy earning a living and too busy enjoying great works of music, literature, and classical artwork to appreciate the genius involved in creating a messy bed are scorned by this soap free bunch while they partake of our free lunch.
Since nobody buys this crap, the only way this community can survive is by adopting a smug, culturally superior attitude and by sucking up all the free money it can from dimwitted governments and dilletantes. Yes art is supposed to challenge, make you think, infuriate, enrage etc. but that doesn't make make "piss Jesus" any more art than a soccer hooligan.
I respect the right of this community to carry on in their endeavors as long as they respect my right not to pay for it. I may not know art but I know when I'm being had.




posted on Feb, 28 2004 @ 10:02 AM
link   
Its not really the Modern Art that makes this the case. People like this have existed since society first started forming.

Look at your discription, I know many people who would also describe lawyers and poloticians the same way.




posted on Feb, 28 2004 @ 10:09 AM
link   
it depends on what type of madern art you are looking at.

nowi agree with you on the aspect of minimalism....big blank canvas, line down the middle, heres a million dollars.

but check out stuff by twombly and raushcenburg and basquiat.

warhol, pollock, kandinsky.

i cant even start to name more or ill go crazy!!!!!!!



posted on Feb, 28 2004 @ 02:01 PM
link   
Warhol sucked at the teat of celebrity society, not tax paying society and I can appreciate the irony in his work as well as the technical skills of those who actually did this work. Pollock I just don't get, but his work has value since the market says it does. As a Canadian, my tax dollars fund an entire industry of wannabe artistes who take my money (with scorn) and produce brilliance that I am too stupid to recognise.



posted on Feb, 28 2004 @ 02:08 PM
link   
I never understood it at all for years, then one day I was looking at a Picasso and actually saw what he meant to say. Thats the only time I ever did that. Since then, bugger all. And as for that half a cow in formaldehyde - what the feck is that all about ?



posted on Feb, 28 2004 @ 02:18 PM
link   
The problems with modern art:

What is modern art?
depends on who you talk to, I would say it started post WWII myself.

Masonic influence and others in art is it real?
since arts are mentioned in the Protocols of the elders of Zion one must realize that control over them is one of the main objectives of any group trying to control the world. Also, most wealthy and powerful peole are heavily envolved in the arts too.

Has academic influence in the arts helped?
NO! look at the state of the art world today. At one time an artist was a person with talent that made art, today an artist is somebody without talent that wants to create a diatribe about an issue and throws together a pile of crap to exhibit.

Is there good modern art?
yes of course there is but modern art by its very nature is not as accessible as art of other eras. In fact art that is good period should not be 100% immediately accessible by everyone.



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 02:32 AM
link   
Source

Modern Art is a general term, used for most of the artistic production from the late 19th Century till the end of the 20th. (Recent art production is more often called contemporary art). Modern art refers to a new approach to art where it was no longer important to literally represent a subject (through painting or sculpture) -- the invention of photography had made this function of art obsolete. Instead, artist started experimenting with new ways of seeing, with fresh ideas about the nature, materials and functions of art, often moving towards further abstraction.


I don't agree with you. Art is a form of expression that is supposed to make you think and challenge you. I think it's great artists try new ideas, new materials and new kinds of art. It's matter of taste, but I would rather like to have a Kadinsky, Nol and, New man, or Rot hko. I have some modern art in my house as well, but those are all cheap prints. I would rather have 10 prints than 1 real painting. More viewing pleasure, less money spent.



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 02:37 AM
link   
Art is anything, if the person who creates it calls it art then it is. Expression can be ouletted on many levels, artistically it is the same. People should have the freedom to experiment with new ideas and statements without being critisised. All the best artists had hard times. Van gogh couldn't even give his paintings away..



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 03:07 AM
link   
First off, as an artist myself, Worhol pisses me off. He would bring in a bunch of acid-freaked artists, have a virtual 'lifetime party' and make them paint stuff as 'interns' then sell it as his own. Yes, it's art, but it's not Andy's art. I do enjoy most of it, I just hate that Worhol gets the credit when he didn't even conceive most of it. Imagine if you were in a painting class and you did this Picasso-influenced self portrait, and the teacher says "put a line here and there. See? Creates a better balance." and then takes your painting and puts his/her name on it and sells it and you get nothing.

Alot of the art in the Renaisaince period was created out of helplessness. Remember that is when the black plague was claiming millions of people, and death was such an uncertainty. Oddly enough, when you have times like that people will spend their money on art. Why? Because they fear that they too will die soon and they don't want all their money to go to waste, so they spend it on making a more appeasing enviroment. Who wants to die in a lifeless shack? Instead, if they died, they would be surrounded by things that make them happy. They are surrounded by beauty. What a way to go, spending your last dying moments finding newfound meaning in your favorite piece of art! Talk about making peace with death.

As far as modern art goes, interpretive art kinda pisses me off, unless there is only one unmistakable way to look into it. I have seen a couple pieces that I do like, though.

Check stuff out by Jake and Dino Chapman (2 brothers that do alot of modern sculpture that border on the thin line of perverse)

[Edited on 29-2-2004 by Earthscum]



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 04:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Earthscum
First off, as an artist myself, Worhol pisses me off. He would bring in a bunch of acid-freaked artists, have a virtual 'lifetime party' and make them paint stuff as 'interns' then sell it as his own. Yes, it's art, but it's not Andy's art. I do enjoy most of it, I just hate that Worhol gets the credit when he didn't even conceive most of it. Imagine if you were in a painting class and you did this Picasso-influenced self portrait, and the teacher says "put a line here and there. See? Creates a better balance." and then takes your painting and puts his/her name on it and sells it and you get nothing.

Alot of the art in the Renaisaince period was created out of helplessness. Remember that is when the black plague was claiming millions of people, and death was such an uncertainty. Oddly enough, when you have times like that people will spend their money on art. Why? Because they fear that they too will die soon and they don't want all their money to go to waste, so they spend it on making a more appeasing enviroment. Who wants to die in a lifeless shack? Instead, if they died, they would be surrounded by things that make them happy. They are surrounded by beauty. What a way to go, spending your last dying moments finding newfound meaning in your favorite piece of art! Talk about making peace with death.

As far as modern art goes, interpretive art kinda pisses me off, unless there is only one unmistakable way to look into it. I have seen a couple pieces that I do like, though.

Check stuff out by Jake and Dino Chapman (2 brothers that do alot of modern sculpture that border on the thin line of perverse)

[Edited on 29-2-2004 by Earthscum]


Earthscum, if there was only one unmistakable way to
look at interpretive art, wouldn't that make it kinda
boring, not to mention, also defeat the whole purpose?
Have u checked out David Hockney? And what about
Dali, Edvard Munch and artists who seem to have gained
widespread kudos. But I do agree there is a LOT of cr*p out there




posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 04:58 AM
link   
Hey Scat, I saw a movie about Basquiat just last week.
It was called Basquiat (funny 'bout that) and it was a
great movie/bio. I can't remember who played the role
of Bas', but David Bowie played Andy Warhol



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 05:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by sanctum
Hey Scat, I saw a movie about Basquiat just last week.
It was called Basquiat (funny 'bout that) and it was a
great movie/bio. I can't remember who played the role
of Bas', but David Bowie played Andy Warhol


Yeh thats one of my favourite films. I think Jeffery Wright actually is[/is] Basquiat, great performances from Dennis Hopper, David Bowie, Gary Oldman, Courtney Love, Benichio Del toro....so good.



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 06:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by earthtone

Originally posted by sanctum
Hey Scat, I saw a movie about Basquiat just last week.
It was called Basquiat (funny 'bout that) and it was a
great movie/bio. I can't remember who played the role
of Bas', but David Bowie played Andy Warhol


Yeh thats one of my favourite films. I think Jeffery Wright actually is[/is] Basquiat, great performances from Dennis Hopper, David Bowie, Gary Oldman, Courtney Love, Benichio Del toro....so good.


Hi Earthtone, I just found this


www.cleanroom.co.uk...



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 07:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by sanctum

Hi Earthtone, I just found this


www.cleanroom.co.uk...


Nice one sanctum! Basquiat is my favourite artist, great link man.



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 07:56 AM
link   
1,000 points to the first member who can tell me the source of this commentary on modern art: "Obscurity is the refuge of the incompetent." For a time, I suplimented my normal income as a painter in pastels. I did a few comissioned works, won some medium-level awards, and gained a bit of attention. But my style was somewhat impressionistic and I was always frustrated by the general attitude of the "art elite" that I must be modern to be relevant. In the end, history has made it clear that the true artists are those who put their passion into their work, and create pieces for themselves.



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 07:58 AM
link   
hey, uno, im the first to criticize art that a two year old, but there is a certain subtlety to it. a two year old throws paint, but an artist paints it deliberatly, and that makes all the difference.
im not a big fan of some of it, but theres plenty thats fantastic



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 08:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
1,000 points to the first member who can tell me the source of this commentary on modern art:
"Obscurity is the refuge of the incompetent."

For a time, I suplimented my normal income as a painter in pastels. I did a few comissioned works, won some medium-level awards, and gained a bit of attention. But my style was somewhat impressionistic and I was always frustrated by the general attitude of the "art elite" that I must be modern to be relevant.

In the end, history has made it clear that the true artists are those who put their passion into their work, and create pieces for themselves.



I like that quote. It's Heinlein, isn't it? I think so. If not, give the 1k to someone else, but I'm fairly sure it's Heinlein.

As for the meaning, I can definitely agree with it, and sometimes, I fall victim to it myself.


for the quote.



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 08:03 AM
link   
Robert Hienlein Stranger in a strange land



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 08:05 AM
link   
Godman I was close Loki! Nearly beat you too it.



posted on Feb, 29 2004 @ 09:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by earthtone Robert Hienlein Stranger in a strange land
Close... but "who" said it?





new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join