Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Art that people rave about that's actually shit.

chilango said:
I look down on people who celebrate ignorance.

There's plenty wrong with the art world.

More than I suspect you realise.

But as long you can't be arsed to even try and understand it, the easier for them to carry on.

Focus on the shit and the puke, it's easier than addressing the manufacturing of tastes, the engineering of culture etc etc

C'mon. You're being totally played here.

As for me. I don't play along with it. I've little to do with the art world anymore. But at least I understand why.
Click to expand...
Too many assumptions...
 
chilango said:
I look down on people who celebrate ignorance
Click to expand...

You assume people are ignorant?
What an arrogant liberty to take..
I've spent 25 years in art....and have exhibited on three continents. Your lecturing is boring.

chilango said:
There's plenty wrong with the art world.
More than I suspect you realise.
Click to expand...

Then why are you defending it?

chilango said:
But as long you can't be arsed to even try and understand it, the easier for them to carry on.
Click to expand...

Which "Them" do you mean? The wealthy backers of modern art galleries who promote particular styles above others?

chilango said:
Focus on the shit and the puke, it's easier than addressing the manufacturing of tastes, the engineering of culture etc etc.
Click to expand...

Don't you see that the managers of the art world actively promote a set of styles as a means to engineering culture and society? You do realise that the art world as in the world of modernism embodied by the likes of Hirst and others is also being "managed". Just as the CIA controlled the rise to fame of Pollock and Rothko.
Do you really think the art world is free?

And you have the gall to assumed that views expressed here were by "ignorant" people.?
 
bubblesmcgrath said:
You assume people are ignorant?
What an arrogant liberty to take..
I've spent 25 years in art....and have exhibited on three continents. Your lecturing is boring.



Then why are you defending it?



Which "Them" do you mean? The wealthy backers of modern art galleries who promote particular styles above others?



Don't you see that the managers of the art world actively promote a set of styles as a means to engineering culture and society? You do realise that the art world as in the world of modernism embodied by the likes of Hirst and others is also being "managed". Just as the CIA controlled the rise to fame of Pollock and Rothko.
Do you really think the art world is free?

And you have the gall to assumed that views expressed here were by "ignorant" people.?
Click to expand...

More serious posts like this and less "look at this it's shit" and we might get somewhere.
 
chilango said:
More serious posts like this and less "look at this it's shit" and we might get somewhere.
Click to expand...

I'm not interested in separating this art from the art world. It's part of the mess. We need to be reminded that we have signed into this controlled environment. And examining it is part of that process.

To be honest I doubt we will get anywhere....even with all the discussions and arguments. .. We are not in control and never will be. But we should have some control over our thoughts and this is why this thread was started. It was an attempt to provoke people....to get people thinking ...questioning...arguing...

I think if you read through it again you'll see that it has done that.
 
The most interesting/serious point of discussion was when we were talking about why it's not possible to look at Van Gogh free from the weight of culture.

That argument is at the crux of all that has followed IMO.

That our tastes are shaped, not in a crude propagandistic sense, but in a more all pervading way.

I would've hoped we could have looked at both Abstract and Conceptual Art in term as of cultural capital and how the production/accumulation of this augments economic capital.

Whether we like a work is kinda irrelevant (except in terms of figuring out what has shaped that liking - where does that "taste" come from, and why).

Whether a work is "Good" is also kinda irrelevant (except - again - in terms of figuring out how this judgement is made, by who, and why). Because works that are "good" play just as much a part in perpetuating this as those that aren't. More so in fact.

We're all part of this, with our tastes, our preferences ,our place in the class system. But it's not a secret, not a conspiracy, we can recognise all this, examine all this and and demystify it somewhat.

If we want to.
 
So, to start, how - and why - do you think Conceptual Art functions as "high Art", as an elite form of cultural capital? Why not (say) photorealistic painting?
 
I don't need to recommence teasing the art world out and I'm sure anyone with a brain can decide for themselves what is going on. :)

Dr_Herbz said:
Philistines, aren't they!!!!

Do you want to buy a pixel? :D
Click to expand...

I'm upping my offer of €7.50 and a bag of Walkers Salt and Vinegar Squares ...
:)
 
Dr_Herbz said:
Free to good home!!!

This pixel has been sat on an old monitor in my garage for 16 years, so I plugged in the monitor and set the pixel free.

I did have to encapsulate the pixel to prevent it from escaping.

15263201928_3af4b67b0d_o.png



If you feel you could give this pixel a good home, please contact me.
Click to expand...

Have you still got this DrHerbz?
It's really quite a brilliant idea.
Much more interesting than a blank piece of paper. ..

I think the debate about good art depends on whether you're someone who just accepts what an "expert" tells you (like there can ever really be such a being when art appreciation is subjective)
Or
You're someone who questions the world around you and asks why a balloon of piss is suddenly a "well thought out artwork".
Why is it that brilliant landscape art is excluded from "modern art" galleries?
Why shouldn't it be included?
Why is it that a row of red bricks is viewed as a "significant art" when it is replicated on a daily basis by bricklayers...and I'm aware someome will say "but that's the point....it's removed from there and positioned in a gallery so that's what makes is art..it's a commentary on the working man"..or some other shit.
Where has transcending the banality of the mundane gone? Why are imaginations so boringly predictable?
An empty room with a light going on and off. Sure... I could come up with lots of deep meaningful thoughts on that and I could interpret it in many different ways but it's essentially a boring form of art that leaves this viewer feeling cheated out of £8 and bored to boot.
Why is "ordinary" suddenly art?
Why is it that the Tate modern seems to refuse to show art that is photorealistic or digital ....even impressionistic? Why is it excluding contemporary landscape and portrait artists who paint in particular styles?

Russia, or rather the Kremlin, has banned the use of profanity in all art since July this year.
I'm predicting a massive increase in the use of certain words in art in the west...they'll be dawbed all over art...some unknown artist (not a yellowist) will decide to scrawl these profane words on a Russian art work or two held in a western museum of art. It will all be boringly predictable and the art world will shudder.
Sigh..........

Back to the shit art now...it's more fun than debating the Taste of Tate .:)

a98781_worst-art_9-photo.jpg

Photo of the Rhein entitled Rhein II
By Andreas Gursky which sold for $4.3 million. Yes.. yes..I see it. ... the parallel lines.... the structure.... the form...so minimalist.......the emotion...it's Rothko in a photo....the romantic landscape...man communes with nature...in full living colour.... all three metres of it...banal canal...

:rolleyes:
 
bubblesmcgrath said:
Should have looked a bit deeper then..and seen that there was a lot more going on ...

You saw the surface but ignored the depth.

Oh well.
Click to expand...

too bad there never was any depth, though. you can keep repeating the same thing over and over, doesn't change the fact that you're not coming across as anything more than an art troll, and you haven't for the whole thread :D
 
bubblesmcgrath said:
I doubt history is not repeating itself and there is definitely a "glass ceiling" for certain styles but not others.
Take Digital Art.
The most modern artist's medium.
Yet it's just not getting "air time" in certain galleries.
Why?
Click to expand...

Photography had much the same problem when it was a new medium. It takes a while for new ideas to be accepted, however much the art world proclaims to be accepting of innovation.
 
bubblesmcgrath said:
And people are unquestioningly guided by "art critics", gallery directors and greed.
Click to expand...

I'd never trust a gallery director's opinion over my own.

I've seen the level of collusion that occurs in that circle. Among other things, I've seen directors giving shows to their friends in exchange for a job later or a director buying work from a gallery in exchange for a job later. The art world has its share of "old boy networking."

On the flip side, I've also seen directors devote their entire lives to building a collection just for the pure love of it.
 
Yuwipi Woman said:
Photography had much the same problem when it was a new medium. It takes a while for new ideas to be accepted, however much the art world proclaims to be accepting of innovation.
Click to expand...

Digital art is not new. The art world refuses to accept it because the art world is controlled by people who refuse to align with something they think is beneath art. They have a limited view of "Art" . They have forfeited the connection that existed between art and science for the idea of "conceptualism" which is devoted to the cult of personality and excludes anything which they deem to be non personal.
 
Last edited:
Rutita1 said:
Do I detect a romance blossoming here? I see and smell all levels of passion! :hmm: :D
Click to expand...

:confused: not a chance in hell. sorry, bubbles.
why do people always say stuff like this?
there's emotionally charged, passionate arguing, then there's people whose opinions and persona you find so unappealing you wish you never came across them. nothing sexy about that feeling. :(
 
Last edited:
Miss Caphat said:
:confused: not a chance in hell. sorry, bubbles.
why do people always say stuff like this?
there's emotionally charged, passionate arguing, then there's people whose opinions you find so unappealing you wish you never came across them. nothing sexy about that feeling. :(
Click to expand...


Jeez
You thought she was on about you?
 
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
486
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