Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Art that people rave about that's actually shit.

Sasaferrato said:
No. Nor do you have to understand the artists 'motivation' in order to appreciate the art. There is an awful lot of pretentious bollocks talked about art. If it has to be 'explained', then it is likely to be pretentious bollocks on the part of the artist, Hirst's sheep, Emin's bed, and Pollock's dribbles from the top of a stepladder, fall into that category.

I've spent a lot of time over the years looking at art, my all time favourite picture is this:

374.jpg


I love its serenity. I love it's composition and use of perspective and chiaroscuro. It hangs in the National Gallery, and is absolutely stunning. Just recently I heard on the radio why the Virgin is so often depicted in a blue robe, the pigment is lapis lazuli, very expensive, and therefore the highest honour the artist could bestow.

Van Gogh's 'Sunflowers' (of which I've seen four), sell for millions, yet they were something that he dashed off, to brighten up the house because a friend was due to visit. No more, no less.
Click to expand...
obviously people can see a picture like that and enjoy it. one one level. but as you suggest, without knowing something of the painting your enjoyment and understanding is limited. to take an example, hogarth's paintings are filled with little allusions, which if you see them without knowing of the context will entirely elude you. the same thing with, for example, pictures of st sebastian. sebastian one of the saints prayed to during times of plague, and the number of arrows perforating him gives you some idea of the background to the painting - lots of arrows = painted during a time of plague.
 
Cheesypoof said:
not with art - art is about feelings, Pickman. I didnt see any 'prejudices' there either...
Click to expand...
no, art is not about feelings unless you're a lovey-dovey hippy. art is about communication.

oh - and mine was a general comment about opinions, if you're going to hold one you may as well make it one worth holding.
 
Cheesypoof said:
Art is about feeling AND communication, but ultimately feeling. It shouldnt be over analysed, i dont think.
Click to expand...
i don't think anyone's talking about over-analysing it. i'm simply saying that if you approach a picture with no prior knowledge of it it should be no surprise that your understanding of it is at best partial and important elements may escape you. for example, hogarth's roast beef of auld england picture

the-roast-beef-of-old-england.jpg


is in fact a rather nasty little piece of work with its anti-french, anti-catholic and anti-scottish elements.

and in terms of abstract art i've already referred above to mondrian's theosophy, knowledge of which deepens an appreciation and allows an understanding of his famous rectangles. without that it's simply a nice pattern.
 
Anish Kapoor. His exhibition at the RA a few years ago was the most vacuous over-rated piece of crap I've ever been stupid enough to pay to see. The best thing in that show was actually placed in the courtyard - which anyone could see free. He's got nothing to say but because he says nothing in such a BIG FUCKING WAY he dupes people into thinikng he must be meaningful and important - like he clearly did the government who were seduced enough to let him build that hideous thing at the Olympics. Total charlatan.
 
Last edited:
Dr. Furface said:
Anish Kapoor. His exhibition at the RA a few years ago was the most vacuous over-rated piece of crap I've ever been stupid enough to pay to see. The best thing in that show was actually placed in the courtyard - which anyone could see free. He's got nothing to say but because he says nothing in such a BIG FUCKING WAY he dupes people into thinikng he must be meaningful and important - like he clearly did the government who were seduced enough to let him build that hideous thing at the Olympics. Total charlatan - and that's being complimentary.
Click to expand...
back in the 1980s i was told a story about an artist from the 1970s, whose name i forget. this man had started to make a name for himself and some big gallery had given him a load of money to do a piece for them. anyway, he blew the lot on wine and women or somesuch until he was down to the last £10 and a week to go. he was wandering round somewhere - let's assume it was newcastle - and saw in a junkshop window a big coil of rope. a 'bingo!' went off in his head and he bought it. it was tarry auld ship's rope and he cut it in half and laid out the pieces at the gallery and everyone was well impressed.
 
chilango said:
Once, many years ago, as a very bolshy art student, I'd gotten so sick of the art world and it's demands that I produced a piece of work that I refused to exhibit, I refused to document and my "justification" was written in Welsh (a language I knew my tutor didn't speak) and placed inside a sealed envelope that my tutor wasn't "allowed" to open.

Sadly, this gesture became the work.
Click to expand...

That says it all really, doesn't it. Your tutor should have been hanged with a rope made from his/her own entrails. :D

There is talent about. When I used to go up to parent's evening at my daughter's school, the art displayed along the corridor walls was amazing. There was one portrait that struck me so much, that I did look into trying to buy it. Sadly, it wasn't for sale.
 
Sasaferrato said:
That says it all really, doesn't it. Your tutor should have been hanged with a rope made from his/her own entrails. :D

There is talent about. When I used to go up to parent's evening at my daughter's school, the art displayed along the corridor walls was amazing. There was one portrait that struck me so much, that I did look into trying to buy it. Sadly, it wasn't for sale.
Click to expand...

Nah. My tutor was ace. I was being a dick.

...turned out being a dick was easily recuperated.
 
Pickman's model said:
obviously people can see a picture like that and enjoy it. one one level. but as you suggest, without knowing something of the painting your enjoyment and understanding is limited. to take an example, hogarth's paintings are filled with little allusions, which if you see them without knowing of the context will entirely elude you. the same thing with, for example, pictures of st sebastian. sebastian one of the saints prayed to during times of plague, and the number of arrows perforating him gives you some idea of the background to the painting - lots of arrows = painted during a time of plague.
Click to expand...

When I first saw that painting, it drew me from across the room. I didn't know who the artist was, didn't know anything about it. I was ten at the time. When I went back to the National Gallery, 20 years later, I was able to go straight to where it was, from memory. The next time I went, a couple of years after that, I went to the room, looked at the spot... it wasn't there. The curator saw me looking, smiled, and told me where it was. When I asked how he knew which picture I was looking for, he replied that he re-directed people to it on a daily basis. I bought a large print from the National Gallery shop,it hangs on my computer room wall. (Alongside my original 'Larry' cartoon, a gift from my daughter's partner. He is a cartoonist, and friend of 'Larry'.)
 
Pickman's model said:
back in the 1980s i was told a story about an artist from the 1970s, whose name i forget. this man had started to make a name for himself and some big gallery had given him a load of money to do a piece for them. anyway, he blew the lot on wine and women or somesuch until he was down to the last £10 and a week to go. he was wandering round somewhere - let's assume it was newcastle - and saw in a junkshop window a big coil of rope. a 'bingo!' went off in his head and he bought it. it was tarry auld ship's rope and he cut it in half and laid out the pieces at the gallery and everyone was well impressed.
Click to expand...

Have you ever seen Cellini's bronze 'Perseus with the head of Medusa'? One of the feet is deformed. What happened was that he was paid for the materials, and went on the piss with the money. When he finally had to cast it, he didn't have enough tin, so used all the pewter plates in the house to get the metal to melt. When he poured it, it cooled too rapidly, and didn't quite reach the toes. Quite a character, he produced the most exquisite work.

7174-050-4436EA0D.jpg
 
Pickman's model said:
i don't think anyone's talking about over-analysing it. i'm simply saying that if you approach a picture with no prior knowledge of it it should be no surprise that your understanding of it is at best partial and important elements may escape you. for example, hogarth's roast beef of auld england picture

the-roast-beef-of-old-england.jpg


is in fact a rather nasty little piece of work with its anti-french, anti-catholic and anti-scottish elements.

and in terms of abstract art i've already referred above to mondrian's theosophy, knowledge of which deepens an appreciation and allows an understanding of his famous rectangles. without that it's simply not even a nice pattern.
Click to expand...
Corrected it for you. :D
 
chilango said:
Here, have an abstract I painted this week (partly inspired by this thread):
Click to expand...

Liking the coffee cup stain :thumbs:
:D
Kidding...
;)

I'm half way through my homage to Rothko ... three hours into it and it's the most boring activity...:(

I'm just glad I decided to use acrylics instead of alkyds cos this will be over quicker.
9 layers of paint so far.
18 colours / tones
14 brushes
6 types of brush stroke

It looks shit.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

chemn
Geometric Art/ Mandala
Replies
22
Views
336
Sweet FA
Sweet FA
A
  • Poll
Is photorealistic art really "art"?
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
182
Views
5K
Dr. Furface
Dr. Furface
A
"The Hanging Committee:": thread for amusing tales about arts events.
Replies
6
Views
489
moochedit
moochedit
A
Art Fraud stories.
Replies
0
Views
239
Aladdin
A
Mumbles274
The 2023 Art Thread
5 6 7 8 9
Replies
247
Views
10K
JimW
JimW
Back
Top Bottom