Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Art that people rave about that's actually shit.

Not sure I'd isolate visual art from other arts. ..
Visual art is everywhere..from the graphic art on a tin of soup to the design of a patterned rug etc. ....but then again maybe I'm looking for it.

It's just that one the whole it's not appreciated/ consumed anywhere near as much as modern music or film or writing. This is a pretty well-documented fact, although all of the arts disciplines have suffered in terms of not being taught as much in schools and therefore not respected/ understood/ appreciated. I feel like art is very tricky because although people like it, we aren't really given a lot of opportunities to understand it and think about it.

A friend of mine (she's an artist & so am I) were talking about two recent shows we put on...hers was of her own work and mine was of other people's and she went under cover to see what people said and mostly it was "I don't get it" and my experience of putting on lots of shows for the general public is that most people, for the most part don't have a sense of how to look at art really, or know how to talk about it and discern different features.

They know when they do like something, but often not why. I feel like with music, film, and literature, we're much more trained to analyze it and look at it critically and understand why it's good/ why we like it, etc, and much more comfortable doing so.

I am aware that things I say on this topic can come across as elitist/ whatever but I assure you, I don't mean it that way. Just that we need more appreciation, and less griping.
 
Last edited:
Schrodinger's Giraffe



15385615472_5eb1f956da_b.jpg
 
This thread has made me look at Rothko again...
I can see now how complex his paintings are, the layers upon layers of paint applied and knocked back or removed. They must have taken ages to make.
His edges are really interesting too as they barely exist.
 
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.

I saw an exhibit of paintings by an Australian artist. It consisted entirely of slides of the paintings, placed in plastic holders, and affixed to the wall with tacks. The artist admitted that he'd done that because the shipping costs of the real paintings were excessive.
 
Two of my favourite paintings, both by the same artist - Paul Nash

nash_newworld_large.jpg

"We are Building a New World"


Totes-Meer-by-Paul-Nash-008.jpg

"Totes Meer" (Dead Sea)

They're my favourite paintings because in my opinion they say more about the futility of war than ten thousand words can.
There is a display that shows a Paul Nash painting outside the staffroom at the school I work at. It's one of the reasons I chuck any communiqués from the armed forces about recruitment from schools straight in the bin.
 
I saw an exhibit of paintings by an Australian artist. It consisted entirely of slides of the paintings, placed in plastic holders, and affixed to the wall with tacks. The artist admitted that he'd done that because the shipping costs of the real paintings were excessive.

I remember seeing a painting by a friend of mine who happens to be an honorary RHA member now. At the time he was painting abstract work. I went to view an exhibition of his and noticed that one of the paintings was hung upside down. The painting was completely abstract and showed a large dark mass in the middle of colour
I said it to the gallery representative / manager who looked aghast snd declared "no..I'm sure it's hung properly". I restated that it was definitely hung upside down. A few days later the artist phoned me to thank me for spotting the mistake. After a few moments he said "how did you know? I didn't show it to anyone before the exhibition".
To which I replied "the drips were going up the canvas"
:D
True story :)
 
You'd need to see them in reality...and appreciate the context of each one..... :)
They're excellent paintings by a guy who is self taught.
:)

kavanagh-mark-rasher-1977-irel-poppies-2401474.jpg


kavanagh-mark-rasher-1977-irel-the-chess-players-2401471-500-500-2401471.jpg
 
Last edited:

See I would quite like that, were it not for the chair that is covering most of the woman's lower half. To me, it pulls attention in the picture in an undesirable way, away from the subjects. Because of that, it does not strike me as being great composition. I actually wonder if it's there as a cover up to something that went wrong, because it seems out of place and too prominent.
 
See I would quite like that, were it not for the chair that is covering most of the woman's lower half. To me, it pulls attention in the picture in an undesirable way, away from the subjects. Because of that, it does not strike me as being great composition. I actually wonder if it's there as a cover up to something that went wrong, because it seems out of place and too prominent.


It might be there because it was there...
;)

Here's another....it's called Reflections..
reflections.jpg
 
It might be there because it was there...
;)

We now have cameras for that, and if I saw a photo taken from that angle with a chair obscuring half of the subject, I would still call it bad composition. (Unless the entire point of the photo or painting was a comment about chair uniformity and placement in airport food courts).
 
We now have cameras for that, and if I saw a photo taken from that angle with a chair obscuring half of the subject, I would still call it bad composition.

See
..I kind of dont agree with over composing either photos or paintings.
But I respect ypur opinion :)
Thanks...:)
 
Sorry, I did edit that last sentence onto my post as you were replying. It's just not to my taste, I do quite like some of the other stuff you posted though :)

I like the fact a guy who was turned down by art colleges in Dublin, got to where he is now. He persisted in painting what he wanted to paint and his style is evolving rapidly.

2000112103.jpg

I Need A Drink.
 
We now have cameras for that, and if I saw a photo taken from that angle with a chair obscuring half of the subject, I would still call it bad composition. (Unless the entire point of the photo or painting was a comment about chair uniformity and placement in airport food courts).
'Wrongness' can be interesting though.. Vermeer's girl with pearl earing and girl with red hat paintings do not have eyebrows, neither does the Mona Lisa..
 
O RLY? Contradicting yourself again.


BTW those paintings are dreadful. Candidates for the Bad Art Museum.


Lol...
No.
I was echoing the views given earlier in the thread...in a tongue in cheek fashion..:D

And you are of course entitled to your opinion on art. :D:D but Mark Kavanagh aka Rashers has made his mark on the art world and is highly respected..despite your low opinion of the paintings displayed here :thumbs:
 
Back
Top Bottom