I must have missed something in this thread, it is already quite long.
Are you asserting that modern art belittles classical art because it contains less light, shadow, depth, and emotive colors?
1 Like
I just watched the video again. sigh
I once was a classically trained musician, and I also performed (and won) at many competitions. So I am going to use what I believe are transferable and anecdotes. I will also use my experience as a judge in BJCP events to add color.
Stating that a group of experts will make objective scoring decisions about the quality of work is insane. It just doesnât work that way. The first Gold I ever won, two judges gave me 99% and one gave me 60%. And they all were from high quality departments.
At BJCP events if a judge us more than, letâs just say a little bit off from the other judges, then that result is either tossed or altered. Even if the âoffâ nudge was correct.
Art, music, taste, etc. are inherently subjective. To argue otherwise doesnât hold up to scrutiny. I agree selling a rock for $10 million is silly, but arcimboldo is also silly. And if shock value is the issue, then may I submit The Anatomy Lesson of Nicolaes Tulp.
Tangent: after watching Exit Through the Gift Shop I wanted to punch Mr Brain Wash as well. But that doesnât condemn modern, postmodern, or contemporary art.
6 Likes
Modern art has brought pleasure in a similar way that nouvelle cuisine has. You break down the structure of a type of art, and reassemble it due to the properties it contains.
This does not negate Rembrandt, Vermeer, etc and their genius. But, again an analogy, the art world shouldnât belong to the person who made the first epic omelette.
I agree with this 100%
Andre Serrano and Damien Hurst are a touch annoying, but their art makes a point. We can all agree that their points are sometimes⌠Useless.
Damien Hirst is an odd one for me. Usually I dislike his stuff (such as the well known Mother and Child Divided), yet sometimes heâll do something really interesting like For the Love of God that I really enjoy. I think itâs because, to me at least, the former seems to be done solely to generate controversy and âmake people talkâ, but the latter also seems to be saying something about the manners in which we perceive the state of human death/ decay.
Funnily enough it was coming to terms with the fact I could like something from an artist I generally donât enjoy that made me realise that I donât hate all modern art, just the stuff I find to be pretenious wankery. Just like how I can find many 18th century landscapes to be really bloody dull even though theyâre technically well painted.
4 Likes
So much this. I can only enjoy a limited amount of wankery, and I donât need someone else to do it for me (wait, what!?)
4 Likes
One last thought. The part of the video where he asks his graduate students to describe how âgoodâ the pollack/apron is strongly reminded me of power imbalances and the need to please.
It is basically the same thing as Splunge.
4 Likes
Versus the appeal to the common man, that if Joe six-pack doesnât âget itâ that it has no âlegitimateâ worth to any. I know that something that doesnât appeal to me is of no objective worthlessness. Some things I donât âgetâ, and thatâs okay.
2 Likes
Actually, I rather suspect that wanting to punch him means that it was successful in its endeavours. Kind of like Martin Amisâ ouevre, talent beyond the pale, constructed deconstructively, programmed to be shit, undermining itself. I canât quite decide if itâs worthy of consideration but I know I dislike it intensely. And that pisses me off because I suspect itâs the point. Which also pisses me off. Fuck.
3 Likes
Beautiful, 10/10, would come again! And so popular.
Well this was a wonderful performance. I was particularly gratified by everyone pretending to be taken in by the initial comment. Bravo everyone, the author is truly dead.
Quite common sentiment around the world, I think.
Why would you go to the trouble of hiding a noisy camera? The guards are going to hear it. Use a regular modern quiet camera.
2 Likes
I know, I know, late to the party then posts too many but I just had the most overwhelming urge to post this:
1 Like
Image noise, you insensitive clod. 
3 Likes
Itâs in the other thread. By now both are so long and interwoven that I lost track of where I said what. Hereâs what I said for reference:
I know that if taken to its limit, my argument would become elitist. Iâm not trying to go to that extent; my problem with this video is that the guy takes his argument far too close to the limit. Itâs not like late Renaissance or classical art is the only possible pinnacle - there are infinite possible expressions of the principles of human aesthetics that donât necessarily conform to the biases of the European Renaissance. I often find that something a little more abstract is more appealing than something that tries to be a photorealistic rendering of the world.
But at the same time, Iâm not willing to accept just anything as art, merely because it has been signed by an artist. I do feel that doing so diminishes the enormous effort that ârealâ artists have put into their work, by comparison to things that seem no more than a lazy call for attention with no artistry - no mastery of a medium, no skill being applied - behind them.
I hope Iâm getting my point across? Itâs not even that I object to these things - itâs that I find the juxtaposition difficult to accept.
Let me then share this guy from Talagaon:
We call him Rudra Pashupati or Shiva, Lord of Cattle. But thatâs really a placeholder name. In fact, nobodyâs really sure what to make of him. Thereâs pretty much no similar piece anywhere in Indian art (source: Chitra Ramaswamy's Travelogue: Talagaon - One of Chhattisgarh's Many Treasure Troves)
Thatâs approximately where Iâm coming from tooâŚ
Iâve actually tried that. Not with a hidden camera, but some of those cave temples are bloody dark, and you really really donât want to shine too much light on them (theyâre pretty delicate on top of everything else). Doesnât work as well as you may think (or maybe we just need better fusion techniques).
But really, the biggest challenge at least for caves is capturing the entire composition - Iâve managed to personally do exactly one of about seven Ajanta frescoes as a stitch. The others are too close to pillars which obstruct any efforts at this kind of stitching.
Some dayâŚ
Why this dismissal of the common man? I agree, everything neednât appeal to everyone, but at some point, if everyone except those on the âinsideâ is saying âthis has no valueâ, maybe it really doesnâtâŚ
1 Like
-
Itâs not a dismissal of the common man, itâs explicitly a dismissal of the notion that the common manâs judgement is the only honest one unpolluted by ivory tower egghead book-learninâ. You may have heard the phrase âI donât know anything about art, but I know what I like.â In what other area are so many people comfortable asserting their ignorance yet compelled to voice their unsolicited âopinions?â
-
Somebody remind me what this rhetorical fallacy is called, itâs not quite No True Scotsman⌠You define the âinsidersâ as those who think this has value, and then say âEverybody except you insiders agrees this has no value!â
But this is not the case. âModern artâ does not exclusively appeal to those in âthe bizâ or âinsidersâ.
Rodin! Misspelled his name. Repeatedly. Facepalms self. Honesty is the best credibility I have.
1 Like
I answer you as though you just ask, though it seems the best way to get likes is repudiate
anyone elseâs viewpoint, tersely and feigning offense regardless.
I have yet to find one I find value in, thatâs why. I often amalgamate these kinds of works into
a category, as one work involving piss really pissed me off- Andres Serranoâs Piss Christ.
And I am completely without religion- thatâs not it. It just seems a waste to me. I get nothing
from it, other than an intention to anger people for the sake of it, without making a statement.
Even the name helps in that.
Show me a modern work involving piss I should give a piss about, and maybe I will change my
mind. Otherwise, I respectfully just disagree. If you find something in that, then great- that was
the point of my comment. Not liking something is not the same to me as dismissing something
as not art. There is such a thing as worthless art. Just because itâs art, doesnât mean I canât admit
so and still find it worthless art to me. I donât care for it. Thatâs all.
Or am I supposed to view all art as somehow worthy of praise? Thatâs as idiotic as the negation of
the status of something being art. Which was kind of my point.
Are people really that inspired by landscapes from the 1800âs in guilded frames?
The camera put them out of business.
I do have to say that a lot of âArtâ ends up being driven by elitism, fame, and Irony. None of which are filters for âGoodâ.
But technical skill is really only one aspect of art. It has casts out plenty of good and keeps in plenty of crap.
Anyway, this guy is a donk. His trick with his students just points to him be an asshat, not that pollacks works arenât moving or meaningful. I thought his apron makes a shitty painting.
1 Like
