Art that people rave about that's actually shit.

[Blagsta]

Nah.
People liked his art and that's how his art became famous ..
Appreciation came before fame...
And why assume that people cant appreciate his art for art's sake ?
What a cynical view of art to take to say that Van Gogh is appreciated because he's famous. Maybe just maybe people still get a thrill out of his paintings.



I saw it first when I was five.
I liked it and knew nothing about it or the artist. It was a print

You're implying that a person needs to have information and knowledge to appreciate the art of Van Gogh ..and by extension any art by anyone.
That is bullshit.
Plenty people who will never read or hear a word about art or learn about an artist will enjoy and appreciate art.
What a narrow minded arsehole you are prickman.

You appear to think that you have a privileged cultural viewpoint, that you can approach art shorn completely of its cultural associations. You don't. You can't.

 

[bubblesmcgrath]

but answer came there none.

Go print your arse on a page and write a monologue about it.
Cos you're only loving the sound of your own voice.

You appear to think that you have a privileged cultural viewpoint, that you can approach art shorn completely of its cultural associations. You don't. You can't.

I think you've contradicted your first statement with your second.

 

[Pickman's model]

I saw it first when I was five.
I liked it and knew nothing about it or the artist. It was a print

You're implying that a person needs to have information and knowledge to appreciate the art of Van Gogh ..and by extension any art by anyone.
That is bullshit.
Plenty people who will never read or hear a word about art or learn about an artist will enjoy and appreciate art.
What a narrow minded arsehole you are prickman.

what was it you particularly liked about this print?

how will people who will never read or hear a word about art or learn about an artist enjoy or appreciate art?

oh - and people who piss about with usernames only make themselves look stupid, it's not like it's an adult thing to do.

 

[Pickman's model]

Go print your arse on a page and write a monologue about it.
Cos you're only loving the sound of your own voice.

i was enjoying the absence of yours, sweetling.

 

[chilango]

That's really not what is being said.

Rather that in the Western world in 2014 it's impossible for most people to spproach a Van Gogh from a starting position of a complete blank slate.

Nothing to do with needing knowledge to enjoy it.

 

[bubblesmcgrath]

You appear to think that you have a privileged cultural viewpoint, that you can approach art shorn completely of its cultural associations. You don't. You can't.

Tell me how did Van Goghs work become so loved?

 

[Blagsta]

I think you've contradicted your first statement with your second.

Explain?

 

[Pickman's model]

Tell me how did Van Goghs work become so loved?

random people saw prints of it and sought it out in later life.

 

[Blagsta]

Tell me how did Van Goghs work become so loved?

I don't know, nor is it relevant.

 

[Pickman's model]

I saw it first when I was five.
I liked it and knew nothing about it or the artist. It was a print

You're implying that a person needs to have information and knowledge to appreciate the art of Van Gogh ..and by extension any art by anyone.
That is bullshit.
Plenty people who will never read or hear a word about art or learn about an artist will enjoy and appreciate art.
What a narrow minded arsehole you are prickman.

i'd be grateful if you could point me to where imply what you say i imply. because it seems to me you didn't understand the point i was making.

 

[bubblesmcgrath]

That's really not what is being said.

Rather that in the Western world in 2014 it's impossible for most people to spproach a Van Gogh from a starting position of a complete blank slate.

Nothing to do with needing knowledge to enjoy it.

random people saw prints of it and sought it out in later life.

No.
His art became famous because it was liked by those who saw it.
Blank slate.
People liked it.
And people still do for the same reasons.
Despite your cynical view of humanity

 

[Pickman's model]

No.
His art became famous because it was liked by those who saw it.
Blank slate.
People liked it.
And people still do for the same reasons.
Despite your cynical view of humanity

there was no blank slate. no one has had a blank slate since lascaux was painted.

 

[Blagsta]

No.
His art became famous because it was liked by those who saw it.
Blank slate.
People liked it.
And people still do for the same reasons.
Despite your cynical view of humanity

You're doing it here - assuming that art exists in a social and historical vacuum.

 

[bubblesmcgrath]

I don't know, nor is it relevant.

Of course it's relevant.
You're saying that the only reason I and others like his work is because it's culturally instilled in us to do so.
So I ask again how do you think his art became so appreciated and loved..because when first his work began to be appreciated there was no cultural imposition of opinion.

 

[chilango]

Of course it's relevant.
You're saying that the only reason I and others like his work is because it's culturally instilled in us to do so.
So I ask again how do you think his art became so appreciated and loved..because when first his work began to be appreciated there was no cultural imposition of opinion.

You don't live then, and there, though. You live here and now.

 

[bubblesmcgrath]

That's really not what is being said.

Rather that in the Western world in 2014 it's impossible for most people to spproach a Van Gogh from a starting position of a complete blank slate.

Nothing to do with needing knowledge to enjoy it.

You're doing it here - assuming that art exists in a social and historical vacuum.

Your point was that art appreciation as it exists is culturally and historically influenced and that a viewer can't appreciate a Van Gogh without reference to that cultural and historical influence.
If the viewer is unaware of the artists fame and has no idea about cultural and historical influence then they are approaching the art with fresh eyes and mind. A child. A person with learning difficulties. Whoever. The fact is that you can't generalise and assume anything about their reaction and response. It's massively arrogant to assume that everyone in the world has been exposed to the same cultural and historical influences as you and it assumes that everyone has equal access to knowledge, experiences and education

 

[Blagsta]

Of course it's relevant.
You're saying that the only reason I and others like his work is because it's culturally instilled in us to do so.

No, that's not what has been argued.

So I ask again how do you think his art became so appreciated and loved..because when first his work began to be appreciated there was no cultural imposition of opinion.

We're discussing the situation now. Not then. But even then, there was no "blank slate". Van Gogh was part of a community of artists. He didn't exist in a social vacuum any more than you do.

 

[Blagsta]

Your point was that art appreciation as it exists is culturally and historically influenced and that a viewer can't appreciate a Van Gogh without reference to that cultural and historical influence.

Nearly. You don't have to appreciate Van Gogh. But you cannot view Van Gogh as an alien.

If the viewer is unaware of the artists fame and has no idea about cultural and historical influence then they are approaching the art with fresh eyes and mind. A child. A person with learning difficulties. Whoever. The fact is that you can't generalise and assume anything about their reaction and response. It's massively arrogant to assume that everyone in the world has been exposed to the same cultural and historical influences as you and it assumes that everyone has equal access to knowledge, experiences and education

But even that child or person with learning disabilities is only seeing that picture because it is a Van Gogh.

 

[bubblesmcgrath]

Nearly. You don't have to appreciate Van Gogh. But you cannot view Van Gogh as an alien.




But even that child or person with learning disabilities is only seeing that picture because it is a Van Gogh.

Straw man

 

[Blagsta]

Straw man

I suggest you go and look up what that means.

 

[Orang Utan]

EEEEEEEUUUUUUNNNNNGGGGHHHH

 

[Cpatain Rbubish]

It'll all be burnt when I seize power!

The only 'art' my benign (but vengeful and actually quite strict and unpredictable) dictatorship would allow is...

A. Pictures your kids make
B. Pictures you made as a kid
C. Selfies

 

[bubblesmcgrath]

But even that child or person with learning disabilities is only seeing that picture because it is a Van Gogh.

So what?
Tell them it's by Jack from down the road.

 

[Blagsta]

So what?
Tell them it's by Jack from down the road.

Fucking hell, are you really this thick?

 

[Pickman's model]

So what?
Tell them it's by Jack from down the road.

i suppose you've something of a rep for lying

 

[chilango]

Your point was that art appreciation as it exists is culturally and historically influenced and that a viewer can't appreciate a Van Gogh without reference to that cultural and historical influence.
If the viewer is unaware of the artists fame and has no idea about cultural and historical influence then they are approaching the art with fresh eyes and mind. A child. A person with learning difficulties. Whoever. The fact is that you can't generalise and assume anything about their reaction and response. It's massively arrogant to assume that everyone in the world has been exposed to the same cultural and historical influences as you and it assumes that everyone has equal access to knowledge, experiences and education

Children and "people with learning difficulties" don't live in a cultural vacuum either.

 

[Pickman's model]

Children and "people with learning difficulties" don't live in a cultural vacuum either.

they do if bubblesmcgrath's got anything to do with it

 

[bubblesmcgrath]

But even that child or person with learning disabilities is only seeing that picture because it is a Van Gogh.

Fucking hell, are you really this thick?

Lol...I was thinking the same about you.....you do keep coming out with shite ..

You're saying that they only get to see the picture because it's by van gogh.
Well his art and his name are pretty inseparable you know. But even if they didn't have a clue who he was and failed to notice his name they could still appreciate it.

i suppose you've something of a rep for lying

?

 

[Blagsta]

Lol...I was thinking the same about you.....you do keep coming out with shite ..

You're saying that they only get to see the picture because it's by van gogh.
Well his art and his name are pretty inseparable you know. But even if they didn't have a clue who he was and failed to notice his name they could still appreciate it.



?

I'm saying that totally unknown artists do not get that sort of cultural exposure. By definition.

 

[Orang Utan]

No one's saying you can't appreciate a Van Gogh. Just that his paintings don't exist in a cultural vacuum.