Art that people rave about that's actually shit.

[bubblesmcgrath]

If you can appreciate that, how can you dismiss abstraction?

It's called passion.
Rothko controls, condenses and encapsulates and stays at a distance.
Turner explodes, bursts out of the canvas, erupts and pulls you in.

 

[Dillinger4]

Most children could easily recreate a Rothko. Try that with a Turner.

They couldnt. That argument is rubbish.

If you wander through New York’s Museum of Modern Art, you’ll eventually come across Painting Number 2 by Franz Kline, a set of thick, unruly black lines on a white canvas. Elsewhere, you will find one ofMark Rothko’s many untitled works, consisting of various coloured rectangles. And in front of both paintings, you will inevitably find visitors saying, “A child could paint that.”

To which Angelina Hawley-Dolan and Ellen Winner replied: “Could they?”

To find out, Hawley-Dolan and Winner asked 32 art students and 40 psychology students to compare pairs of paintings. One piece of each pair was the work of a recognised artist, such as Kline, Rothko, Cy Twombly, Gillian Ayre, and more. The other came from the oeuvre of lesser-known painters, including preschool children, elephants, chimps, gorillas and monkeys. The paintings were matched according to colour, line quality, brushstroke and medium; the students had to say which they preferred and which was better.

Both groups of students preferred the professional pieces to the amateur ones, and judged them to be superior. Even the psychology students, who had no background in art education, felt the same way, although as you might expect, their preference for the professional works was slightly weaker.

Throughout the experiments, the students typically picked the professional pieces between 60% and 70% of the time. These aren’t overwhelming majorities, but they were statistically significant. On average, a child could not “paint that”, even if first glances might suggest otherwise. Nor are the qualities of the abstract art only visible to people steeped in the art world – even untrained people responded to the paintings in some way.

Hawley-Dolan and Winner also found that it didn’t matter if the students were duped into thinking that the paintings came from the wrong “artist”. The duo labelled the pairs of paintings on some of the tests (“artist”, “child”, “monkey” or “elephant”) and mislabelled them on others. Even with these tags, the students still preferred the actual professional painting. The labels only swayed the decisions of the psychology students – they were more likely to judge the professional paintings more positively if they were correctly labelled (but not more harshly if the labels were swapped).

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/n...rt-from-a-childs-or-chimps-work/#.VCCMf65FDbU

 

[FridgeMagnet]

I remember that the Mail did a sneery piece saying "half of these pictures are by famous abstract artists, half of them are by kindergarten children, can you tell the difference?" Even not knowing anything particularly about visual art at the time I got them all right. It wasn't hard.

 

[chilango]

They couldnt. That argument is rubbish. Here is some evidence:



http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/n...rt-from-a-childs-or-chimps-work/#.VCCMf65FDbU

...over the last decade or so I've taught literally hundreds and hundreds of children how to paint, including abstraction. I've yet to encounter one who can paint at Rothko's standard.

Fwiw I don't particularly like Rothko.

 

[Dillinger4]

...over the last decade or so I've taught literally hundreds and hundreds of children how to paint, including abstraction. I've yet to encounter one who can paint at Rothko's standard.

Fwiw I don't particularly like Rothko.

Me either really.

 

[bubblesmcgrath]

I got them all right. It wasn't hard.

I would certainly hope so...the test would be to ask some art students to replicate the paintings and then carry out the same experiment.

 

[sleaterkinney]

Most children could easily recreate a Rothko. Try that with a Turner.

Actually a lot of thought and work went into those, he didn't just slop on a bit of paint, and Turner did abstract art too.

 

[bubblesmcgrath]

...over the last decade or so I've taught literally hundreds and hundreds of children how to paint, including abstraction. I've yet to encounter one who can paint at Rothko's standard.

Fwiw I don't particularly like Rothko.

I doubt the children had access to the materials used by Rothko though.

 

[chilango]

I doubt the children had access to the materials used by Rothko though.

Oils, acrylics and canvases.

 

[Dr_Herbz]

Actually a lot of thought and work went into those, he didn't just slop on a bit of paint, and Turner did abstract art too.

Turner does things like this...

Rothko does this...

Regardless of how technically perfect he might have been, with layers, etc... it's still shite.

 

[bubblesmcgrath]

Oils, acrylics and canvases.

And did they know how to mix glazes?
Were they using linseed oils and glazes? I'm asking because generally in schools there is a time limitation and cost factor involved in the use of art materials and the duration on any one project if your classes are learning how to use oils and layer thin layers of oil paints with glazes etc then that's really great..

 

[sleaterkinney]

Turner does things like this...

Rothko does this...

Regardless of how technically perfect he might have been, with layers, etc... it's still shite.

Shite, why?. Can you appreciate any abstract art?

 

[chilango]

And did they know how to mix glazes?
Were they using linseed oils and glazes? I'm asking because generally in schools there is a time limitation and cost factor involved in the use of art materials and the duration on any one project if your classes are learning how to use oils and layer thin layers of oil paints with glazes etc then that's really great..

Not generally. That stuff was available for particularly keen older students though.

 

[bubblesmcgrath]

Not generally. That stuff was available for particularly keen older students though.

Pretty much like over here then.
Acrylics all the way
You just can't get the same depth with them though.
It's great when theybfinally get their hands on oils and start to understand how the great masters used layers of colour and glazes to build paintings.

 

[Dr_Herbz]

Shite, why?. Can you appreciate any abstract art?

Because regardless of how he achieved the end result, the end result is still 2 painted rectangles.
Yes, I can appreciate abstract art... here's one I prepared earlier.

 

[Fez909]

Right then you bag of cunts. I'm gonna paint a Rothko.

I have an unused canvas sat in my living room and some paints and an easel (kindly donated by two lovely Urbz) and I've been wondering wtf to paint for ages.

I haven't painted for about 15 years and I was never any good anyway.

But by the end of the week I'm gonna present my £75m painting. No bother

 

[Orang Utan]

Turner does things like this...

Rothko does this...

Regardless of how technically perfect he might have been, with layers, etc... it's still shite.

Explain why. Do not just proclaim it as shite.

 

[Orang Utan]

Because regardless of how he achieved the end result, the end result is still 2 painted rectangles.
Yes, I can appreciate abstract art... here's one I prepared earlier.

That's awful. It looks like a drunk man's misremembering of Mondrian with the wrong colours on Photoshop

 

[Pickman's model]

Actually a lot of thought and work went into those, he didn't just slop on a bit of paint, and Turner did abstract art too.

should have gone to specsavers

 

[Pickman's model]

That's awful. It looks like a drunk man's misremembering of Mondrian with the wrong colours on Photoshop

no it doesn't. it really doesn't.

 

[Dr_Herbz]

That's awful. It looks like a drunk man's misremembering of Mondrian with the wrong colours on Photoshop

Here.. have another with different colours.

No doubt it would be special of Rothko did it.

 

[Orang Utan]

Here.. have another with different colours.

No doubt it would be special of Rothko did it.

You have failed to make your case.

 

[sleaterkinney]

Because regardless of how he achieved the end result, the end result is still 2 painted rectangles.
Yes, I can appreciate abstract art... here's one I prepared earlier.

But the two painted rectangles are exercises in form and colour, as much as this is, I think you're looking for something which isn't there.

 

[Dillinger4]

.

 

[Orang Utan]

no it doesn't. it really doesn't.

And neither does a Rothko look like a child has done it. It's usually Pollock who gets that particular criticism. He is awesome too.

 

[Blagsta]

Turner does things like this...

But what's the point of that in the age of photography?

 

[Dr_Herbz]

You have failed to make your case.

Said the audiophile to the sceptic.

But what's the point of that in the age of photography?

What's the point in owning an oak table when a plastic one will do?

 

[Orang Utan]

I'm not an audiophile. What have audiophiles have to do with this?

 

[bubblesmcgrath]

Right then you bag of cunts. I'm gonna paint a Rothko.

Me too ...

 

[Blagsta]

Said the audiophile to the sceptic.



What's the point in owning an oak table when a plastic one will do?

Oak tables are not representations of something else.