- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 3/30/18 at 8:20 pm to DavidTheGnome
You have to educate yourself to start to understand modern art. Kincaid and the old masters you can enjoy without much effort. I like both..... Was looking at some Remington and Russell's today..... Was also looking at so. E Cindy Sherman, Jenny Holzer, Robert Mueck, Herbert Bayer and Donald Judd. Modern art requires the use of your brain and a knowledge of process rather than a visceral response.
Posted on 3/30/18 at 8:27 pm to Zappas Stache
quote:
You have to educate yourself to start to understand modern art.
Sometimes, but if you spend enough time around the community you start to realize what you’ve always suspected - they’re full of shite. Are there exceptions? Yeah definitely. But I’ve heard far to many artists spout nonsense over lazy works to buy into it. They sell you on a deeper truth rather than admitting "I made this because I felt like it and it doesn’t mean anything". And then lots of it is about the name rather than the painting which is absurd. And I’m convinced a lot of it is money laundering.
Posted on 3/30/18 at 8:34 pm to DavidTheGnome
I always liken modern art to expensive wines. When you take very expensive wine and put it into a boones farm bottle and give it to so called refined connoisseurs they will give it a boones farm review.
This post was edited on 3/30/18 at 8:43 pm
Posted on 3/30/18 at 8:35 pm to DavidTheGnome
This photograph sold for 4.3 million dollars. There is no rhyme or reason to it.
Posted on 3/30/18 at 8:37 pm to DavidTheGnome
5/10 because you got some replies.
Posted on 3/30/18 at 9:01 pm to DavidTheGnome
I stumbled on a modern art website and have been receiving their daily newsletter for several weeks.
[link=(newsletter@artnet.com)]Artnet[/link] is now the daily read if I want to be amused.
There are some insights, and lots of smug, and money thrown around .....money is cheap for some folks, apparently.
I do enjoy reading the auction results and seeing which pieces of art didn't meet their minimum reserve bid. (Sort of Barrett-Jackson for people with huge walls to cover.)
Two artists who have produced original oils we have bought: Jim Gray in east Tennessee.
Michael Stack in the southwestern US (skys above landscapes). Both record beauty.
[link=(newsletter@artnet.com)]Artnet[/link] is now the daily read if I want to be amused.
There are some insights, and lots of smug, and money thrown around .....money is cheap for some folks, apparently.
I do enjoy reading the auction results and seeing which pieces of art didn't meet their minimum reserve bid. (Sort of Barrett-Jackson for people with huge walls to cover.)
Two artists who have produced original oils we have bought: Jim Gray in east Tennessee.
Michael Stack in the southwestern US (skys above landscapes). Both record beauty.
Posted on 3/30/18 at 9:17 pm to DavidTheGnome
quote:
Art
Another institution that Cultural Marxists have tried to destroy.
Posted on 3/30/18 at 9:49 pm to stuntman
See, I could paint this...
And maybe get $10 for it at the local flea market.
Famed new artist ______ could paint this and get $5 million for it.
Todays art buyers aren't buying art. They're buying prestige in their quest for social status.
I couldn't agree more with the OP. Great art is discoverable, with perhaps minimal understanding about the medium. If you have to be educated about the artist and his politics, it's not art.
And maybe get $10 for it at the local flea market.
Famed new artist ______ could paint this and get $5 million for it.
Todays art buyers aren't buying art. They're buying prestige in their quest for social status.
I couldn't agree more with the OP. Great art is discoverable, with perhaps minimal understanding about the medium. If you have to be educated about the artist and his politics, it's not art.
Posted on 3/30/18 at 9:59 pm to DavidTheGnome
It's funny that the Basquiat painting is way better than the Kincaid one, by your own admission. If you don't like art, what's the difference? Abstract painters tend to have extensive classical training and refined skill. I don't like a blue square on a canvas, but modern portrait and landscape painters rarely have any depth to their work. Rembrandt was great. Basquiat was very good. Kincaid is arse.
Posted on 3/30/18 at 10:26 pm to DavidTheGnome
I like modern art (painting, sculpture, furniture, architecture, etc). I try to imagine what it was like to see these pieces at the time they were created. We look at them now and they may seem simple or easily replicated (“my kid could do that”), but at the time, there was nothing else like it. You don’t have to be the best, just the first. The pieces at places like The Guggenheim were game changers.
Posted on 3/30/18 at 10:28 pm to pjab
More of a mid-century modern guy myself.
Posted on 3/30/18 at 10:45 pm to pjab
My four year old could make something similar to that Jackson Pollack I posted on page 1. But not these:
I suppose art is not simply about skill. It doesn’t have to be difficult to be good. Music can be beautiful but simple. Just like a sloppy high school football game can be as entertaining as an NFL game. In the end, it’s subjective. With some modern art, I can enjoy the colors or patterns, but much of it is just junk, to me. If it’s easy to do, it still might be good art to someone, but it’s hard for me to respect it very much.
I suppose art is not simply about skill. It doesn’t have to be difficult to be good. Music can be beautiful but simple. Just like a sloppy high school football game can be as entertaining as an NFL game. In the end, it’s subjective. With some modern art, I can enjoy the colors or patterns, but much of it is just junk, to me. If it’s easy to do, it still might be good art to someone, but it’s hard for me to respect it very much.
Posted on 3/30/18 at 11:45 pm to biglego
C’mon, do David some justice. Napoleons Consecration is huge, you can’t just post a piece of it.
The execution may be “easy” compared to old masters, but the idea is not. Rothko and Pollack created things that were never done before. The boundary of what was possible was pushed out by guys like that. People remember the innovators.
The execution may be “easy” compared to old masters, but the idea is not. Rothko and Pollack created things that were never done before. The boundary of what was possible was pushed out by guys like that. People remember the innovators.
Posted on 3/30/18 at 11:48 pm to DavidTheGnome
I’ve always like this Basquiat piece called ‘amoco’.
The Kincaid piece you chose to feature is ghastly. Reminds me of some gay elf fantasy village. The spectacular flowers, the perfect sunset, the beach setting: if you hung that in a nursery home, no one would even notice it.
Posted on 3/31/18 at 12:19 am to pjab
quote:
Rothko and Pollack created things that were never done before. The boundary of what was possible was pushed out by guys like that. People remember the innovators.
Fair enough. But what if artists had never done those type of paintings because they are the scribbles of a toddler? They’re the first, but are they innovative in any meaningful sense?
Posted on 3/31/18 at 12:34 am to biglego
“ The job of the artist is to go to the edge and report back”- yo-yo ma
Posted on 3/31/18 at 12:37 am to Bison
That amoco piece is cool. The type of thing I’d hang in my garage.
Posted on 3/31/18 at 12:40 am to Bison
Modern art fosters fake intellectualism.
All you have to do is eat up the bullshite and you are "smart".
Ivy league degrees in certain disciplines are like that.
All you have to do is eat up the bullshite and you are "smart".
Ivy league degrees in certain disciplines are like that.
Posted on 3/31/18 at 12:46 am to DavidTheGnome
quote:
but if you spend enough time around the community you start to realize what you’ve always suspected - they’re full of shite.
Fair enough. Not all artist are worth a shite. Actually, very few are. But the bullshite terms you reference are akin to the ones that can paint t a beautiful sunset but have no other ambition except to paint something pretty. How many pretty pictures can we have? At some point, we have to move beyond Kincaid type stuff and explore other areas of expression. Not all modern art is good. Most us bullshite. But that realm is where creativity lies... Or lays..... Or exists. But art has pushed the boundaries of what is good for 150 years now. The best example is van Gough who no one liked when he was Alive but we all consider a genius now. Most of the expressionist were vilified when they were alive but are now heroes.
quote:
If you have to be educated about the artist and his politics, it's not art.
This is a sad statement. For as long as man has creted art, a basic background knowledge has been necessary to understand it.
This post was edited on 3/31/18 at 12:49 am
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News