Art that people rave about that's actually shit.

[Dr_Herbz]

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

Me too ...

I'm looking forward to seeing these

 

[bubblesmcgrath]

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.

Like...life....movement....space...light....texture....dimension...drama..passion..emotion....and all those wonderful things?

 

[N_igma]

What the fuck was I on last night? Lol

 

[discokermit]

Photography can be art, just as sculpture or painting can sometimes not be art.

it can be, by accident. photographers aren't artists though.

 

[weltweit]

To me, art is pretty much anything that is creative, so photography is art as is drawing painting sculpture embroidery etc etc

 

[sleaterkinney]

Like...life....movement....space...light....texture....dimension...drama..passion..emotion....and all those wonderful things?

If you're looking for movement in paintings like that you're looking for the wrong thing.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

Soapsuds and whitewash.

 

[bubblesmcgrath]

If you're looking for movement in paintings like that you're looking for the wrong thing.

It's art. I'm the observer. I can look for whatever I like
Actually there is some movement in the feathered edges of layers of paint so I'll give Rothko that.
But I still don't like most of his abstract field paintings...

 

[discokermit]

chess is the purest artform.

 

[Dr_Herbz]

Oak tables are not representations of something else.

They're both products. If I wanted an exact copy, for technical reasons, I'd want a photograph. If I wanted it for its artistic value, I'd want a painting.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

chess is the purest artform.

cheese is definitely purest artform

 

[discokermit]

cheese is definitely purest artform

cheese is on a par with photography.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

They laughed at Alex James.

 

[discokermit]

They laughed at Alex James.

we still do.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

I don't see why you wouldn't like Rothko. It's people who don't like the self-evidently staggeringly beautiful paintings of Rothko that need to explain themselves

The structure of an atom is beautiful. Looking up at the stars and seeing the scale of the universe and our place in it makes me gasp.

Rothkos paintings are blobs of colour on a canvas. Yawn.

 

[Orang Utan]

The structure of an atom is beautiful. Looking up at the stars and seeing the scale of the universe and our place in it makes me gasp.

Rothkos paintings are blobs of colour on a canvas. Yawn.

And literature is just words on a page. And music just a bunch of noises.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

And literature is just words on a page. And music just a bunch of noises.

To some, yes.

 

[Orang Utan]

To some, yes.

So you are as ignorant about art as others are ignorant about music and words

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

So you are as ignorant about art as others are ignorant about music and words

But they're not ignorant at all. If something doesn't connect with you then you're free to see it for what it ultimately is.

 

[Gromit]

thing is, van gogh was actually a genius. in my eyes anyway. Anyone who considers his work as 'shit' should cut out their eyeballs.

I own a Van Gogh. He was very good. He died poor and unappreciated as the people of the time considered him shit.

Once his story spread all of sudden everyone gets it. Get it in a very big way. Millions and millions of pounds in a big way.

I personally think his eye for art was even better than his own artist ability. His own personal art collection of other's works was /is quite astounding.

 

[Orang Utan]

But they're not ignorant at all. If something doesn't connect with you then you're free to see it for what it ultimately is.

It's fair to say something doesn't connect with you but not to dismiss those who do appreciate it differently.

 

[Orang Utan]

I own a Van Gogh. He was very good. He died poor and unappreciated as the people of the time considered him shit.

Once his story spread all of sudden everyone gets it. Get it in a very big way. Millions and millions of pounds in a big way.

I personally think his eye for art was even better than his own artist ability. His own personal art collection of other's works was /is quite astounding.

You own a Van Gogh? Mmmmmmmreallly?

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

It's fair to say something doesn't connect with you but not to dismiss those who do appreciate it differently.

I dunno. The art world does have a line in pretentious crap to justify that connection way beyond that usually found in music and literature. It's that that people tend to take the piss out of, quite reasonably IMO.

 

[Dillinger4]

When people use the word pretentious they are hardly ever talking about taste or aesthetic sensibility. It is a mask for a deep and profound ignorance and fear of what they dont understand. It says much more about you than your taste.

Music is never just a bunch of noises. Books are never just words on a page. Art is never just blobs of paint. Ever. What a tiny world you must live in.

 

[Blagsta]

They're both products. If I wanted an exact copy, for technical reasons, I'd want a photograph. If I wanted it for its artistic value, I'd want a painting.

So the Art is in the interpretation of reality?

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Music is never just a bunch of noises. Books are never just words on a page. Art is never just blobs of paint.

If it has no connection with you then that's exactly what they are.

What a tiny world you must live in.

Oh fuck off with that patronising crap. "Oh look at me with my deep understanding, you plebs just don't get it".

 

[bubblesmcgrath]

When people use the word pretentious they are hardly ever talking about taste or aesthetic sensibility. It is a mask for a deep and profound ignorance and fear of what they dont understand. It says much more about you than your taste.

Music is never just a bunch of noises. Books are never just words on a page. Art is never just blobs of paint. Ever. What a tiny world you must live in.

Yes...sometimes it's 9000 dead butterflies.

 

[Dr_Herbz]

When people use the word pretentious they are hardly ever talking about taste or aesthetic sensibility. It is a mask for a deep and profound ignorance and fear of what they dont understand. It says much more about you than your taste.

Music is never just a bunch of noises. Books are never just words on a page. Art is never just blobs of paint. Ever. What a tiny world you must live in.

Yes, you're so right.

Here... would you like to buy this masterpiece?

It's a depiction of my ongoing struggle to achieve your level of awesomeness.

So the Art is in the interpretation of reality?

Not necessarily. Art can be anything, including shite.

 

[chilango]

Here... would you like to buy this masterpiece?

.

It's not as good as Malevich's "White Square on white" though is it?

...and that's a serious point.

Two things can be very similar (in this case a white square on a white background) and yet something, something, elevates one way above/beyond the other. Sometimes this "something" is easily examined via tangible qualities such as material, media, scale, technique, context etc. Sometimes it's not.

 

[bubblesmcgrath]

"Something" crept into the "art world" in the last century. The artist suddenly became more important than the work.
A culture of personality evolved and it seems that now it is all about the name...it's all about the "artist"