Art

[Prpavi]

w e w lad

We'll take that as a "there is no possible way I can get out of this hole that I dug." Thanks for playing.

I know it's a hard read, don't beat yourself too much kiddo.

[Falka]

So how about explaining how a black square gets better with context?

Get on Wiki, you're good at it.

Since I'm always keen to learn sth new, I did. There's a whole paragraph dedicated to "Historical context".

A plurality of art historians, curators, and critics refer to Black Square as one of the seminal works of modern art, and of abstract art in the Western painterly tradition generally.

Malevich declared the square a work of Suprematism, a movement which he proclaimed but which is associated almost exclusively with the work Malevich and his apprentice Lissitzky today. The movement did have a handful of supporters amongst the Russian avant garde but it was dwarfed by its sibling constructivism whose manifesto harmonized better with the ideological sentiments of the revolutionary communist government during the early days of Soviet Union. Suprematism may be understood as a transitional phase in the evolution of Russian art, bridging the evolutionary gap between futurism and constructivism.

The larger and more universal leap forward represented by the painting, however, is the break between representational painting and abstract painting—a complex transition with which Black Square has become identified and for which it has become one of the key shorthands, touchstones or symbols.[6]

Still bullshit.

[Xant]

I know it's a hard read, don't beat yourself too much kiddo.

You're trying too hard son, you've already admitted defeat by claiming something and then being unable to explain.

[Prpavi]

You're trying too hard son, you've already admitted defeat by claiming something and then being unable to explain.

Why should I bother since you have articles about it written on the web, waste of time. If you still don't get it, you don't get it, not my problem.

[Xant]

Why should I bother since you have articles about it written on the web, waste of time. If you still don't get it, you don't get it, not my problem.

No one but pretentious "art connoisseurs" "get it" because there's nothing to get. The emperor has no clothes.

[Yeldur]

every1 knows the best art is in anime which i watch while practicing with my £90000 nippon steel katana blade which can cut through the fabric of time itself.

[Leshma]

It's avantgarde, rebelling against stale waters of neoclassicism. Those who can't draw for shit embraced that opportunity. Americans finally got their chance to make history with the likes of Pollock and Warhol. Yes, it is bullshit.

That argument set aside, if I was rich fuck who could afford to spend millions on paintings would probably get myself few Alma-Tadema's. They go for anywhere between couple of millions to 30 or so for his most expensive work.

[Thomek]

Omg not this bullshit. Ignorant Plebs not understanding art again. Xant you just proved you are a potato.

First of all, pricing of art. Like absolutely everything else, price is governed by what people are willing to pay for it. Criticise the buyers, not the price itself.

Also, a lot of the so called boring modern art, is worth a lot simply because its the first time someone did it! In the history of human expression, those works represent the earliest attempts to create something new. That is why they are important in art history.

Now, I'd be the first to admit there's also a lot of bullshit in the art world, so I'm not defending every aspect of it. I think that economic speculation and the more academic parts often do loose touch with reality.

- In essence though, modern art is connected to the possibilities of the human experience, which is filled with strange, unexplained things like music, how a seemingly plain Rothko painting can have emotional power. I remember I saw one of his paintings in London probably 10 years ago. I had no idea who he was. It was simply a huge painting in an imposible deep blood red color. My heart started beating out of nowhere. I have no idea why, but it had a direct emotional effect. Just a big red rectangle. Must have been something like this: 

(click to show/hide)

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

(by the way, a picture on your screen doesn't do it justice.)

To this day I dunno why it was so effective. Must have been something deeply human? My mood that day? Fear? Some deep instinctual programming surfacing?

I guess my point is, if you are interested in the human experience, the human condition, experiencing in your life, thoughts and emotions not readily served everyday, it's worth it to not just be dismissive, but rather open. All art is not for everyone, but there might be something there for you too.

What I can't stand though, are narrow minded people who's eyes are only open to the most limited ideas of "Beauty" and skill, trying to impose their views on people who's souls, eyes, ideas and emotions are open to what humanity can express.

[Falka]

If it takes no talent and no effort to create, then it's not an art.

visitors can't see pics , please register or login


"Art".

Also, a lot of the so called boring modern art, is worth a lot simply because its the first time someone did it!

Oh, so because Nieznalska was the first one to make this crucified dick, it's an art? Good to know.

[Thomek]

If it takes no talent and no effort to create, then it's not an art.

Why not? I know from experience, the quality of your work have little to do with the effort you inserted. I've made around 20 short films, some of them having been an absolute nightmare to make, returning shit. Others have been made with lightness and little effort and turned out much much better.

In the end, the idea is what matters the most. Ideas are not necessarily connected to effort. Einstein looked out the window of his house and saw someone working on the roof and thought, what if they fell down? Would they know they were falling if they couldn't see the exterior world?  Hence the theory of relativity was born.

About that art piece:
In the context of modern Poland, VatiPol as some people like to call it. I'd say that's a perfect example of activist art, serving to undress the peadophile hypocrisy of religious Poland. I lived here for 8 years, I've seen young people going half mad doing exorcisms, a fellow student driven to near suicide because his religion and culture clashes with his suppressed homosexuality, as well a priest being extremely eager to go swimming with another friend. As president you have a single, cat loving, most probably gay dwarf. Please. This is exactly the fuck you that this part of Polish culture needs. It's not smart, it's not pretty, it's not original, but it is effective and gets the message across.

[Leshma]

It's expressionism, not art. Make a difference. Lawrence Alma-Tadema was painting pretty pictures with great detail, they almost look as they've come to life:

(click to show/hide)

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

However, they lacked expression. They were just moments frozen in time, looking beautiful as you were there. Around the time of his death, expressionist movement emerged. Do you know who they first took a jab at?

By the time of his death, his artistic day had gone, and the avant garde held the man and his work in the utmost contempt; he was described in the 1920s as the worst painter of all time! Paintings for which Tadema had been paid large sums of money, sold at derisory prices, and in extreme cases were impossible to give-away. He still had some adherents, and some uses. Cecil B DeMille, Film Producer of Hollywood Epics, used Tadema’s paintings as an aid to the design of scenery for his films. The overall situation though was dire.

Picasso famous work:

(click to show/hide)

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Pure art...

Fast forward thirty years...

In the late 1960s the revival of interest in Victorian painting gained impetus, and a number of well attended exhibitions were held. But in the case of Alma-Tadema there was one single bizarre incident which acted as a catalyst in his posthumous artistic reformation. Alan Funt, host of the American version of the television show Candid Camera had accumulated a collection of Alma-Tadema pictures. The unfortunate Funt was robbed by his accountant, who subsequently committed suicide. In memorable words I heard him use in a radio interview, Funt said that he realised he had every accoutrement of a wealthy man except money. He was thus forced to sell his collection, at Sotheby’s in London in November 1973. From this sale the interest in Alma-Tadema was re-awakened. In 1960 the Newman Gallery firstly tried to sell, then give away, without success, one of his most celebrated works ‘The Finding of Moses,’ of 1904. The initial purchaser had paid £5250 for it on it’s completion! When the same picture was auctioned at Christies in New York in May 1995, it sold for £1.75 million.

More than eighty years after his death Lawrence Alma-Tadema was back in vogue.

From cheap, horrible art to being sold for millions. It isn't going to stop here. In the future, there will be again time when imbeciles will be put to their place, new enlightenment period. When that comes, garbage art will be considered for what it is and beautiful, hard work by talented painters will hold most value. As it should. Maybe even they start appreciating Borges, although that requires alien race and not bunch of drunken idiots who consider themselves to be ultimate authority over art and literature.

[Falka]

(click to show/hide)

Why not? I know from experience, the quality of your work have little to do with the effort you inserted. I've made around 20 short films, some of them having been an absolute nightmare to make, returning shit. Others have been made with lightness and little effort and turned out much much better.

In the end, the idea is what matters the most. Ideas are not necessarily connected to effort. Einstein looked out the window of his house and saw someone working on the roof and thought, what if they fell down? Would they know they were falling if they couldn't see the exterior world?  Hence the theory of relativity was born.

You missed the first part of my post; "If it takes no talent".

This is exactly the fuck you that this part of Polish culture needs. It's not smart, it's not pretty, it's not original, but it is effective and gets the message across.

Nope, it doesn't. I mean, I'm an atheist, think very negatively about influence of religion and church on life in Poland and really couldn't care less about religious symbols. But this "piece of art" didn't help one bit in this matter. And it's still not an art.

PS. "Dwarf" is not a president, he's more like a king of poland 

[Kafein]

People tend to get mad a lot about the word "art". It doesn't carry much meaning. Most of the art I consume is for entertainment or historic curiosity, I have no use for a dick on a cross or a painted black square. But it doesn't bother me that people call these things art. The word used to refer to precise things, but that stopped being the case almost a century ago.

[Xant]

Omg not this bullshit. Ignorant Plebs not understanding art again. Xant you just proved you are a potato.

First of all, pricing of art. Like absolutely everything else, price is governed by what people are willing to pay for it. Criticise the buyers, not the price itself.

Also, a lot of the so called boring modern art, is worth a lot simply because its the first time someone did it! In the history of human expression, those works represent the earliest attempts to create something new. That is why they are important in art history.

Now, I'd be the first to admit there's also a lot of bullshit in the art world, so I'm not defending every aspect of it. I think that economic speculation and the more academic parts often do loose touch with reality.

- In essence though, modern art is connected to the possibilities of the human experience, which is filled with strange, unexplained things like music, how a seemingly plain Rothko painting can have emotional power. I remember I saw one of his paintings in London probably 10 years ago. I had no idea who he was. It was simply a huge painting in an imposible deep blood red color. My heart started beating out of nowhere. I have no idea why, but it had a direct emotional effect. Just a big red rectangle. Must have been something like this: 

(click to show/hide)

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

(by the way, a picture on your screen doesn't do it justice.)

To this day I dunno why it was so effective. Must have been something deeply human? My mood that day? Fear? Some deep instinctual programming surfacing?

I guess my point is, if you are interested in the human experience, the human condition, experiencing in your life, thoughts and emotions not readily served everyday, it's worth it to not just be dismissive, but rather open. All art is not for everyone, but there might be something there for you too.

What I can't stand though, are narrow minded people who's eyes are only open to the most limited ideas of "Beauty" and skill, trying to impose their views on people who's souls, eyes, ideas and emotions are open to what humanity can express.

You just proved you're an idiot (again).

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/modern-art-was-cia-weapon-1578808.html

[Gurgumul]

The square had to do with their artistic and political situation - stuff that nobody really cared about except for some chosen group of "artists". It was a response to some meaningless art bullshit that only the "best" of artists noticed. In other words, the Black Square is an artistic meme. It's utter shit, but people want to pay $$$ for it because it used to mean something.