Art that people rave about that's actually shit.

[fractionMan]

My house is made out of 100s of copies of equivalent 8

 

[fractionMan]

Most artists produce more than one piece, hence the interest in their output as a whole and the story it tells collectively. Inevitably this means examining the artist themselves. Unfortunately this sometimes, but not always, bleeds over into a cult of personality rather than appreciation of work.

 

[Orang Utan]

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


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

That's not what he's saying and he's spot on. Fucking hell I'm a total art ignoramus, but you and herbz are talking absolute shit on this thread.

 

[Dillinger4]

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


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

It all has a connection to me because I am human.

If you feel inferior it proves my point: its all about you and your feelings and nothing to do with taste.

 

[Dr_Herbz]

My latest masterpiece.

 

[sim667]

Has anyone mentioned grayson perry's pots yet? Truly shit.

I like his newer stuff though.

And tracy emin

 

[Dillinger4]

Still not got a valid argument eh, Dr_Herbz? Just stick with your rubbish arguments, you might even convince yourself eventually.

 

[cesare]

"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"

The increasing status of artists was a Renaissance thing though?

 

[Dr_Herbz]

I call this one 'Solitude'

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

It all has a connection to me because I am human.

Oh ffs. So that makes people who don't get a particular piece, well, what exactly?

If you feel inferior it proves my point: its all about you and your feelings and nothing to do with taste.

I don't feel inferior to anybody, what the fuck are you on about?

 

[Blagsta]

Not necessarily. Art can be anything, including shite.

I'm trying to understand the value you attach to the turner painting over a photograph. Both are technical skills, both are interpretations of reality. So why value the turner and not a photograph?

 

[Dr_Herbz]

Still not got a valid argument eh, Dr_Herbz? Just stick with your rubbish arguments, you might even convince yourself eventually.

Your belief that you're somehow superior to people who don't buy into this bullshit is the only argument necessary.

 

[Dr_Herbz]

I'm trying to understand the value you attach to the turner painting over a photograph. Both are technical skills, both are interpretations of reality. So why value the turner and not a photograph?

Where did I say I don't value photographs?

I appreciate good photography, just as much as I appreciate good paintings. Unfortunately, good photography is as rare as good paintings.

 

[Dillinger4]

Your belief that you're somehow superior to people who don't buy into this bullshit is the only argument necessary.

All about you and your feelings. Nothing to do with art.

 

[purenarcotic]

Tracy Emin. What a load of rubbish.

 

[Pickman's model]

"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"

which was never true about eg michaelangelo, caravaggio, donatello, holbein, fuseli, etc etc ad nauseam.

do you know anything about art history or are you simply a poseur?

 

[Dr_Herbz]

I call this one 'Into the light' It symbolises my battle against dark things.

I don't expect everyone to 'get' it but the enlightened ones will.

 

[Blagsta]

Your belief that you're somehow superior to people who don't buy into this bullshit is the only argument necessary.

Your attitude is the same though - its "bullshit" and you're superior for seeing through the bullshit.

 

[Blagsta]

Where did I say I don't value photographs?

I appreciate good photography, just as much as I appreciate good paintings. Unfortunately, good photography is as rare as good paintings.

I asked you why have a realistic painting (in reference to a Turner you posted) when you can have a photo.

 

[Dr_Herbz]

Your attitude is the same though - its "bullshit" and you're superior for seeing through the bullshit.

Yes, it's the rest of the world who know nothing. The chosen few are the only people who can understand and appreciate a white square on a white background.

I asked you why have a realistic painting (in reference to a Turner you posted) when you can have a photo.

It isn't a realistic painting. it's an artist's impression.
Find me a photo as good as that painting and I might change my mind.

 

[cesare]

Surely one can have an artist's impression of the intangible as well as the tangible?

 

[Dr_Herbz]

Surely one can have an artist's impression of the intangible as well as the tangible?

I'm sure it probably happens as often as not. Getting a photograph of it wouldn't be very easy.

 

[Gromit]

Surely one can have an artist's impression of the intangible as well as the tangible?

-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-
Intangible, Outtangible, Shakeitallaboutangible.
..--..--..--..--..
​

I call the above piece the OkayKokey.

Imagine it stencilled on a life sized Womble.

What am I bid?

 

[Pickman's model]

I call this one 'Into the light' It symbolises my battle against dark things.

I don't expect everyone to 'get' it but the enlightened ones will.

i call this one 'Into the light' because it symbolises my battle against dark things.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Again?

Yes, again.
Insulting and belittling people who don't share your views and tastes.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Mark Rothko –White Center (Yellow, Pink and Lavender on Rose)
$71 million..in 2007..

Reminds me of Bassetts liquorice allsorts....

I've looked at loads of books of Rothko's paintings, and they've always left me cold. I've seen a single Rothko at a genre exhibition back in the '80s, and while it didn't take my breath away, it was certainly fascinating in terms of how the colours are blended into each other, and the impasto. Up close it had a lot more depth than any of the photographic reproductions.

 

[ViolentPanda]

It's exactly like that... people pretending to see something that isn't there.

Or perhaps people perceive the same thing differently, independent of any argument about the "value" of the piece of art being looked at?

 

[ViolentPanda]

it took me years to work out that i just don't get painting on the whole. show me a decent photograph, print, sculpture or sketch and i'll see the point. painting (in general) leaves me cold.

I'm very much of the same opinion. I was brought up art-wise on looking at books of Old Masters and other "painterly" artists, and it wasn't until I was exposed to Impressionist, Symbolist and Surrealist painting that I actually stirred myself to go to exhibitions (I'm also a fan of Henri Rousseau, so sue me!). I still don't think (personal taste-wise) that I've ever seen a painting that has stirred me the way Michael Ayrton's minotaur sculptures do; Tim Page's war photojournalism does ; John Craxton or Roy Pelling's lithographs do.

 

[ViolentPanda]

The usual bollocks that comes out in these threads aside: I really don't like Dali. I had an art teacher who sniffily said "a lot of people like Dali when they're younger" which I thought was patronising at the time but I can see what he meant now; it's all rather shallow. (On the other hand, Miro is amazing - the Miro museum in Barcelona really had a huge effect on me.)

I'm not a Gilbert and George fan. They strike me, like a few other people, as sort of performance art in their entirety including all of their works, rather than making individual pieces of good art. On that note, not a huge Warhol fan either, though I like some.

TBF though, G & G have never made any bones about being engaged in a decades-long "performance". It's part of their schtick.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Here.. have another with different colours.

No doubt it would be special of Rothko did it.

Nope, people would still look at it and say "this bloke obviously has some severe repressive issues about the German flag, which he keeps almost but not quite reproducing".