cRPG

Off Topic => General Off Topic => Topic started by: Falka on July 07, 2016, 11:43:54 am

Title: Art
Post by: Falka on July 07, 2016, 11:43:54 am
(click to show/hide)

This is worth 300 mln $? Really? Still better than this shit (only 180 mln):

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Vibe on July 07, 2016, 11:45:34 am
Battle of black in spanishes in a dark cave

visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Rhekimos on July 07, 2016, 04:13:14 pm
Great art or a green square on a canvas, judge it as you like. Some see a dark cave, others might think that even this uninteresting blob of green has a history. Some see it as a status symbol, others as commodities to be contained and traded in free-ports avoiding much of the legislation and taxes around the world.

They are valuable because they are wanted, for varied reasons. But much of that is something else than artistic value.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Leshma on July 07, 2016, 05:16:50 pm
That shit gets tossed around for millions of dollars. Something like this is priceless and only change location in events of world war or in case someone manage to steal it from the museum:

(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Asheram on July 07, 2016, 05:46:41 pm
Pencil drawing
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Title: FREE LOOMS!
Post by: Admerius on July 07, 2016, 11:17:27 pm
I like performance art!
I would love to have seen this:
The title of the CNN article is enough to read for all you TL;DR people
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/07/americas/art-basel-miami-beach-performance-art/ (http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/07/americas/art-basel-miami-beach-stabbing/)
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Ikarus on July 08, 2016, 02:01:27 am
Modern art is mostly either shit-fucking ugly (because artists put too much work into the meaning of their piece, but not enough into its beauty) or contains the most beloved, overused topic: penis+vagina+?=art
pretty much like this, that´s pretty much modern art for me nowadays
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgEnKk1e284#t=19s

if I want to see actual modern art, I go to this page. In my eyes, these are the masters of the new age, and they never fail to amaze me:
http://www.artstation.com

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Prpavi on July 09, 2016, 01:43:35 am
(click to show/hide)

This is worth 300 mln $? Really? Still better than this shit (only 180 mln):

(click to show/hide)

How can you just post a pic and a price and claim this is bs, there is a thing called context, that goes for people posting Malevich calling it bs.

If you don't understand and have no desire to educate yourself leave it knaves.




Title: Re: Art
Post by: Leshma on July 09, 2016, 02:26:29 am
20th century art movements are crap, no exception. Well maybe agitprop stuff, that is kinda hilarious from todays perspective. Just look at this:

visitors can't see pics , please register or login


 :lol:

Edit: Damn, I forgot Dali is modern painter. Well there's that, surrealism doesn't suck. But rest, especially cubism and its forms. Take it away, I don't want to look at that avantgarde shit.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Falka on July 09, 2016, 12:03:52 pm
How can you just post a pic and a price and claim this is bs, there is a thing called context, that goes for people posting Malevich calling it bs.

Quote
Famous examples of his Suprematist works include Black Square (1915)[15] and White On White (1918).

(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)

It's bullshit.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Kafein on July 09, 2016, 12:24:26 pm
"Art for Art's sake is an empty phrase. Art for the sake of truth, art for the sake of the good and the beautiful, that is the faith I am searching for."
-George Sand
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Gurgumul on July 09, 2016, 12:50:39 pm
Louis Wain is also pretty cool:
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Xant on July 09, 2016, 12:54:56 pm
How can you just post a pic and a price and claim this is bs, there is a thing called context, that goes for people posting Malevich calling it bs.

If you don't understand and have no desire to educate yourself leave it knaves.
So how about explaining how a black square gets better with context?
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Prpavi on July 09, 2016, 04:28:17 pm
So how about explaining how a black square gets better with context?

Get on Wiki, you're good at it.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Xant on July 09, 2016, 04:30:12 pm
Get on Wiki, you're good at it.
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.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Prpavi on July 09, 2016, 04:44:56 pm
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.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Falka on July 09, 2016, 04:52:38 pm
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".

Quote
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.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Xant on July 09, 2016, 04:58:36 pm
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.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Prpavi on July 09, 2016, 05:04:08 pm
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.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Xant on July 09, 2016, 05:19:53 pm
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.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Yeldur on July 09, 2016, 05:26:30 pm
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.

Title: Re: Art
Post by: Leshma on July 09, 2016, 05:32:59 pm
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.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Thomek on July 09, 2016, 05:39:29 pm
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)

(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.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Falka on July 09, 2016, 05:39:42 pm
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.

Title: Re: Art
Post by: Thomek on July 09, 2016, 05:48:52 pm
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.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Leshma on July 09, 2016, 06:05:18 pm
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)

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?

Quote
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)

Pure art...

Fast forward thirty years...

Quote
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.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Falka on July 09, 2016, 06:09:45 pm
(click to show/hide)

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  :wink:
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Kafein on July 09, 2016, 06:21:34 pm
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.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Xant on July 09, 2016, 06:27:10 pm
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)

(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
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Gurgumul on July 09, 2016, 06:29:02 pm
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.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Thomek on July 09, 2016, 06:29:16 pm
PS. "Dwarf" is not a president, he's more like a king of poland  :wink:

Lol you are right of course. Just de facto hi kinda is..

I also think this activist art was not directed at you, but at the system. You cannot deny it was successful in getting attention. Strange too, since naked jesus is not exactly controversial when it comes to the churches own crosses.. Arguably it does put focus on the hypocrisy of the church. What's wrong with a Penis? Is it also not a part of humanity? What god created? Even Jesus? See even this Banal piece gets depth with a second thought.

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.

You are right and I agree. As someone said earlier, context is important. The black square isn't important now, but it probably was once upon a time. Probably in an internal-art-world-what-is-art context. Necessary back in the day, valuable cuz historic context now. Like an ancient egyptian vase or whatever.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Xant on July 09, 2016, 06:30:49 pm
Lol you are right of course. Just de facto hi kinda is..

I also think this activist art was not directed at you, but at the system. You cannot deny it was successful in getting attention. Strange too, since naked jesus is not exactly controversial when it comes to the churches own crosses.. Arguably it does put focus on the hypocrisy of the church. What's wrong with a Penis? Is it also not a part of humanity? What god created? Even Jesus? See even this Banal piece gets depth with a second thought.

You are right and I agree. As someone said earlier, context is important. The black square isn't important now, but it probably was once upon a time. Probably in an internal-art-world-what-is-art context. Necessary back in the day, valuable cuz historic context now. Like an ancient egyptian vase or whatever.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationalization_(psychology)
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Thomek on July 09, 2016, 06:33:45 pm
You just proved you're an idiot (again).

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

I know the story, so what?

I guess you prefer ideologically defined art? Like this?

(click to show/hide)

That's you by the way. A simple Finnish potato farmer.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Leshma on July 09, 2016, 06:48:33 pm
You are right and I agree. As someone said earlier, context is important. The black square isn't important now, but it probably was once upon a time. Probably in an internal-art-world-what-is-art context. Necessary back in the day, valuable cuz historic context now. Like an ancient egyptian vase or whatever.

Doubt that black square ever had any deeper meaning that isn't entirely superficial, imposed by bunch of pretentious asses.

This shit has context attached to it:

(click to show/hide)

On the outside it is just a statue of boy and a girl. No big deal. Well, this shit freaked me out when it was placed in a courtyard of the building I was staying in Vienna. Couldn't sleep at night properly... later I found out it is a monument to jewish children who narrowly escaped Third Reich and were adopted overseas. It didn't stop being creepy after I found what it is. Being connected with such dark times gives it power. Few pricks being high on LSD declaring randomized droplets they shoot from their dicks to carry "strong emotional message" is nothing but bullshit.

Age of reason couldn't come any sooner...
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Xant on July 09, 2016, 07:04:15 pm
I know the story, so what?

I guess you prefer ideologically defined art? Like this?

(click to show/hide)

That's you by the way. A simple Finnish potato farmer.
Yes, that is infinitely better than a black square, or a white square on a bigger white square.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Thomek on July 09, 2016, 08:47:28 pm
Yes, that is infinitely better than a black square, or a white square on a bigger white square.

As I said, that's not meant for you. If you were interested, you could probably dig up the context it was made in, and the whole thing might make more sense. Perhaps it's a protest painting against censorship? Or a narrow definition of art? It is likely that this painting is functioning exactly as intended by provoking these thoughts in you. I'd say its pretty damn successful, leading us into this discussion.

But yeah fuck it, I don't understand, so it must be bullshit. Moon landing is a hoax etc.

Enjoy being the bigoted narrow minded potato peasant that you are. Enjoy your extremely limited human experience to the fullest!
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Xant on July 09, 2016, 08:52:30 pm
As I said, that's not meant for you. If you were interested, you could probably dig up the context it was made in, and the whole thing might make more sense. Perhaps it's a protest painting against censorship? Or a narrow definition of art?

But yeah fuck it, I don't understand, so it must be bullshit. Moon landing is a hoax etc.

But yeah, enjoy being the bigoted narrow minded potato peasant that you are. Enjoy your extremely limited human experience to the fullest!
There is no possible context that would make it better. Any "art" that I can also whip up in 60 seconds and Paint is not "art." "Narrow definition of art", lmfao, refer to the rationalization link up above.

I'm glad you've understood, at least, that you don't understand.

That means so much coming from a fat, stupid and ugly manlet like yourself. Unfortunately it's your human experience that is, and will always be, limited, thanks to the aforementioned physical and mental "qualities" you possess.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Thomek on July 09, 2016, 09:01:39 pm
I have zero problems with myself, but your eagerness to sink so low says a lot about you.

I have no problems understanding your very simple point of view. It is after all the point of view of an obnoxious child.

Which is okay. No one is forcing you to try harder than to glance at the world around you. No one is forcing you to try to understand. It is after all the easier position to take.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Falka on July 09, 2016, 09:21:03 pm
Thomek, you started calling him names in this thread, not the other way around, so...
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Thomek on July 09, 2016, 09:23:27 pm
No he started.

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationalization_(psychology)

Title: Re: Art
Post by: [ptx] on July 09, 2016, 09:32:41 pm
Read the first line of what he quoted in that post.

Obsessing over what others call art or not is stupid, though. If you don't like it, don't buy it, who cares? Let those that consider it art waste their time and money on it.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Leesin on July 09, 2016, 09:37:33 pm
Art in that sense is a joke, I could probably hold my baby daughter over a piece of paper, to piss, shit, dribble and maybe sick on it, then claim it as art and some fuck wit hipster tri gender hippy would probably buy it, then make claims of the meaning of it, when it meant nothing and is just baby shit splattered on paper.

Sure, people can call it art, or claim it means something to them, but it's fucking nonsense. Then again, a lot of shit that goes on nowadays is fucking nonsense so each to their own I guess.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Falka on July 09, 2016, 09:40:08 pm
No he started.
Omg not this bullshit. Ignorant Plebs not understanding art again. Xant you just proved you are a potato.

Anyway, you know how this "he started" sounds?   :wink:

Obsessing over what others call art or not is stupid, though. If you don't like it, don't buy it, who cares? Let those that consider it art waste their time and money on it.

From this point of view criticizing anything could be called stupid. "Don't like this movie/book/etc.? Don't watch it, who cares". And I wouldn't call it "obsessing". Just try to express my... displeasure?
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Thomek on July 09, 2016, 09:55:34 pm
lol ok I started.

But it's Xant, so all fair. :D
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Asheram on July 10, 2016, 01:28:28 am
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Falka on July 10, 2016, 01:49:06 am
Yes, it's great drawing, but cmon, don't act like 5 year old  because someone downvoted your post.

Why it's so hard to understand that this downvote button is for a reason and you don't need to explain why you pressed it. Noone asks me: "why did you upvote my post?".
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Asheram on July 10, 2016, 02:07:10 am
Yes, it's great drawing, but cmon, don't act like 5 year old  because someone downvoted your post.

Why it's so hard to understand that this downvote button is for a reason and you don't need to explain why you pressed it. Noone asks me: "why did you upvote my post?".
make me
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Xant on July 10, 2016, 04:02:05 am
I have zero problems with myself, but your eagerness to sink so low says a lot about you.

I have no problems understanding your very simple point of view. It is after all the point of view of an obnoxious child.

Which is okay. No one is forcing you to try harder than to glance at the world around you. No one is forcing you to try to understand. It is after all the easier position to take.
It's not low, it's just facts and the truth.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: darmaster on July 10, 2016, 03:32:51 pm
are memes art?
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Vibe on July 10, 2016, 05:14:26 pm
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)

(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.

visitors can't see pics , please register or login


and here my friends is how to blow a simple red rectangle WAY out of proportion
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Rhekimos on July 10, 2016, 05:33:50 pm
are memes art?

Only if someone used a minimum of a thousand hours in Ms-Paint to create it.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Xant on July 10, 2016, 05:54:20 pm
visitors can't see pics , please register or login


and here my friends is how to blow a simple red rectangle WAY out of proportion
No vibe you don't understand, if someone shits on a canvas and calls it modern art you're just a narrowminded pleb if you don't see the beauty and deep thoughtfulness of it. It probably depicts something like a deeply internalized fear of intimacy, you're just too stupid to get it.

It's like the best con ever, all the easily fooled retards will literally force meaning out of something that has no meaning, and then tip their fedoras as they smile smugly to themselves because they "get" something that the unwashed masses don't.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Thomek on July 10, 2016, 06:52:44 pm
No vibe you don't understand, if someone shits on a canvas and calls it modern art you're just a narrowminded pleb if you don't see the beauty and deep thoughtfulness of it. It probably depicts something like a deeply internalized fear of intimacy, you're just too stupid to get it.

It's like the best con ever, all the easily fooled retards will literally force meaning out of something that has no meaning, and then tip their fedoras as they smile smugly to themselves because they "get" something that the unwashed masses don't.

It's okay Xant. What's next, hating on those with university degrees? Everyone who understands and enjoy something you don't?

Everybody gets your point. And it's the perspective of a child. The art world dealt with all that around 100 years ago. It just looks incredibly ignorant championing such attitudes today.

You are simply displaying your ignorance like the peasant that you are. Like you think that humans have nothing worthy to show or experience other than classicist art or immediate beauty. Since you seem to have ambitions of coming across as an intelligent person, I suggest you start reading up.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Xant on July 10, 2016, 08:06:50 pm
It's okay Xant. What's next, hating on those with university degrees? Everyone who understands and enjoy something you don't?

Everybody gets your point. And it's the perspective of a child. The art world dealt with all that around 100 years ago. It just looks incredibly ignorant championing such attitudes today.

You are simply displaying your ignorance like the peasant that you are. Like you think that humans have nothing worthy to show or experience other than classicist art or immediate beauty. Since you seem to have ambitions of coming across as an intelligent person, I suggest you start reading up.
You can stop trying to hard, wow, university degree, amazing... oh wait, it's not the fucking 1800s anymore, retard. The majority of people in this thread telling you you're full of shit HAVE university degrees, which you'd realize if your IQ wasn't 70, and that's an optimistic estimate.

You can go enjoy eating some dog shit if you want, that's nothing away from me, as long as you don't try to sell it as some sort of a culinary experience (omfg, you're all so narrow minded, why won't you eat dog shit? perspective of a child!!!!). You realize -- well, on balance, probably not, since it's you -- that all of your arguments have literally, yes, literally, zero information value. All you can do is sling petty insults and affect an air of superiority, and I get it, I do, because what else are you going to do? There's no fucking substance in your dear "modern art" and so yeah, it's hard to defend it with actual arguments instead of "human experience :((." Also, ANYTHING, anything can be defended with the same non-arguments that you're putting forth - starting from "dog shit as a culinary experience" and ending at "yeah I burped and the meaning of life is in that burp - you don't agree?? CHILD!!!!!!!"
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Leshma on July 10, 2016, 08:07:52 pm
Intelligence leads to logical thinking. What you are saying isn't logical at all. You can't call him ignorant because he doesn't see beauty of red circle. It is other way around actually, claiming there is something but people don't get is rather ignorant view on things. When you say there is something other than red painted circle on canvas you are ignoring fact that there is nothing other than red pained circle on that very canvas. That is my friend, is ignorance.

Classical paintings with great detail thrived in age of enlightenment, when people started valuing reason and logic above everything else. Period when humanity invented so many things, just because they used their biggest advantage over other animals. Reason. Don't you think there is a connection between their focus on logic and reason and their penchant for beautiful work of art that actually takes time and commitment to detail?

Saying how things are does not fall under ignorance. Claiming that there is something that isn't, can be considered as example of ignorance.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Xant on July 10, 2016, 08:15:04 pm
Intelligence leads to logical thinking. What you are saying isn't logical at all. You can't call him ignorant because he doesn't see beauty of red circle. It is other way around actually, claiming there is something but people don't get is rather ignorant view on things. When you say there is something other than red painted circle on canvas you are ignoring fact that there is nothing other than red pained circle on that very canvas. That is my friend, is ignorance.

Classical paintings with great detail thrived in age of enlightenment, when people started valuing reason and logic above everything else. Period when humanity invented so many things, just because they used their biggest advantage over other animals. Reason. Don't you think there is a connection between their focus on logic and reason and their penchant for beautiful work of art that actually takes time and commitment to detail?

Saying how things are does not fall under ignorance. Claiming that there is something that isn't, can be considered as example of ignorance.
If someone pointed at empty air and said it's a modernistic piece of performance art Thomek would applaud loudly and proclaim he's never seen its equal, wow, the entire world represented in such a little space, amazing -- because he's intellectually dishonest and can't separate reality from fantasy, on top of not understanding how logic in general works... well, it's probably a combination of lack of intellectual capacity and intellectual dishonesty coming together in a spectacular combination of arrogant ignorance, but hey, no one's stupid on purpose.

What's the difference between the finger painting of a child and the masterpiece of a modern artist? The gullible people being conned. When there's no actual, real world difference between the two, the only possible conclusion can be that there is no difference between the two.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Falka on July 10, 2016, 08:16:21 pm
@Thomek
Andrzej Sapkowski has a saying: when readers say that your book ain't worth shit, it doesn't mean they're too stupid to understand it. It means your book ain't worth shit (traductor traditor, yes). So maybe, just maybe, it's not that easy like you suggest. Dunno how good is your grasp of polish language and literature, but maybe you've heard about Ferdydurke by Gombrowicz and his: "jak zachwyca, kiedy nie zachwyca".

PS. The fundamental cause of trouble in the world today is that the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Thomek on July 10, 2016, 10:31:35 pm
bla bla

I would say the exact opposite. Almost everything around you gets much more interesting and have layers of information the ignorant will not see. The ignorant sees a rock, to a geologist it might be signs that there's valuable minerals around, or not. When it comes to human made objects, it often gets way more interesting, since you can take into account human evolution and development as well.

If someone pointed at empty air and said it's a modernistic piece of performance art Thomek would applaud loudly and proclaim he's never seen its equal, wow, the entire world represented in such a little space, amazing -- because he's intellectually dishonest and can't separate reality from fantasy, on top of not understanding how logic in general works... well, it's probably a combination of lack of intellectual capacity and intellectual dishonesty coming together in a spectacular combination of arrogant ignorance, but hey, no one's stupid on purpose.

What's the difference between the finger painting of a child and the masterpiece of a modern artist? The gullible people being conned. When there's no actual, real world difference between the two, the only possible conclusion can be that there is no difference between the two.

So mr Logic. Tell me how music works? Tell me why people cry when they see the paintings of Munch? Can you logically explain me why you enjoy cRPG?
(click to show/hide)

Stuff like the above were things decried as "bad art" in his time. By people like you. What do you think? Is it powerful?

Is it worse than this, that obviously took much more _skill_ to make:

(click to show/hide)

Art is not a sport, where one can logically conclude that runner A runs 17ms faster than runner B. It is a matter of taste and knowledge, like many other things. If you say your general experience of modern art is bad, and that you don't understand, well, then to me that says something about you. That's all I'm expressing here.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Leshma on July 10, 2016, 11:49:25 pm
...

This is how you do when you want to shorten quote. Putting bla bla is a bit disrespectful and I'm not sure why you should do that to me when Xant is insulting you whole time.

Still don't understand what geology, rock formation and minerals have to do with square painted with red on white canvas. Maybe if there was something beneath it, some secret but in our case there is no such thing. Or there is, but we are so ignorant we're unable to see it? If you ask me, some serious straw grabbing going on in this thread from your side.

Quote
Can you logically explain me why you enjoy cRPG?

Two reasons. Fairly complex combat system allowing different outcome every time is what makes people want to learn it and play. Grind is what keeps them around for unnatural amount of hours spent on a game. chadz is responsible only for second part of equation.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Vibe on July 11, 2016, 12:05:22 am
Tell me why people cry when they see the paintings of Munch? Can you logically explain me why you enjoy cRPG?
(click to show/hide)

People cry to Braco, a spiritual leader who has a magical look. For convenience he even does it over Skype! No words, just a look man, extremely powerful stuff! GAZE OF MIRACLES

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBbLPnQ-CEw&t=7m0s 7:00

See this is something that is very hard to logically explain. I equate looking at a red square with being looked at by Braco. However on the other hand it's kinda easy to understand why someone would enjoy cRPG.

Title: Re: Art
Post by: Thomek on July 11, 2016, 12:27:54 am
This is how you do when you want to shorten quote. Putting bla bla is a bit disrespectful and I'm not sure why you should do that to me when Xant is insulting you whole time.

Still don't understand what geology, rock formation and minerals have to do with square painted with red on white canvas. Maybe if there was something beneath it, some secret but in our case there is no such thing. Or there is, but we are so ignorant we're unable to see it? If you ask me, some serious straw grabbing going on in this thread from your side.

Yeah it was perhaps a bit harsh. Collateral damage? :D

Anyway, back to the red Rothko painting. I've explained it before, but I'll explain it again in detail. Must have been around 2002-2003, I was in London, strolling around Tate Modern just because that's what you do when you come from a potato country like mine. (Finland and Norway are fairly similar in their remoteness.)

Unsuspecting, I turn a corner and I face this giant red painting. Never heard of Rothko, and to this day I'm quite ignorant when it comes to modern art. I'm stuck staring at it, not understanding why the fuck this simple red rectangle has such an emotional effect. I still don't get _why_ exactly, but I remember it clear as day.

In that sense, it was good art. More effective than any of the other works I saw. Can't remember any of the others at all, except from the giant sun that was hanging there. Perhaps it was the carefully blended colors, coupled with the extreme simplicity. Yes it might sound strange, but I can honestly say that for me, that day, it was the most powerful painting there. I'm not bullshitting!
It's insane, I know..

So I'm not going to go into why some people think Rothko, btw a favourite subject for plebian art criticism, is so important or whatever.  I frankly don't care. The reason I'm posting here, is simply to be a counterpoint to the most base views of art. And of course, riling up Xant in the process is always enjoyable.

People cry to Braco, a spiritual leader who has a magical look. For convenience he even does it over Skype! No words, just a look man, extremely powerful stuff! GAZE OF MIRACLES

lol that's some crazy shit. I do doubt those people are connoisseurs of modern art though. :D

About enjoying crpg, the logical explanation can only go that far. Do you enjoy moving the mouse to the left and right clicking really fast? Do you enjoy the competitive aspects? Why not just play chess? Or do you enjoy the imaginary tears on the other side of your digital sword? Do you enjoy dressing up? For a second imagining that your character is you? Why enjoy Playing in the first place? It's much more logical to work hard and make more money right? Or to study something? Is cRPG not art? I think it is. Quite bad, but effective :D
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Leshma on July 11, 2016, 01:57:29 am
I see you mentioned Munch. While I don't enjoy his paintings (because there is no joy in them), I can understand why his work became popular and valued in artistic circles. Certainly not because those painting are drawn brilliantly. But they have different sort of brilliance. His work is true example of expressionism (even tho it predates it and it considered part of another art movement). While people who painted coloured circles claimed they carry some secret, intimate message or badly drawn images "in a new way" from flamboyant Pablo Picasso can be stashed into shit and overrated categories (respectively), Munch work of art shows his mental state and leave no secrecy about his feelings. He was mentally troubled person, deeply depressed and every can see that on his paintings. There is no need for special powers to unlock gates of mystery "true" work of art holds. It is all pretty straightforward.

Put a kid in front of "Skrik" and child will tell you that man who draw it is sad and a bit scary person. You like to diss on children for some reason, while I do hold them being more honest and with clearer thought path than most adults. It is no accident that in "The Emperor's New Clothes" it is a child who has to tell everybody that Emperor, in fact, does not have any clothes.

Edit: Just to clear something. I'm not claiming Picasso is bad painter, he is in fact brilliant. But his famous work is mostly shit (cubism). His work that falls under Impressionism is phenomenal.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Yeldur on July 11, 2016, 02:40:53 am
I don't view a lot of modern "art" as art, but I'm not an artist, so I'll let the artists figure out whatever they think is art and I'll continue to dislike it, either way, the artist becomes a billionaire by slinging paint at a wall and then attaches a load of bullshit to say what it means.


"THIS BLACK STROKE OF PAINT REPRESENTS THE DEATH AND DESPAIR IN THE WORLD"

What is this shit, are we in English class again where we have to make up some bullshit reason as to why the curtains are black? COULD IT NOT JUST BE BECAUSE THE CURTAINS WERE MADE THAT WAY?!?!!$

no the curtains are blak becus it represent the sadnes in dis wumynz life xdddd


NOTHING IS RIGHT IN THE WORLD
KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME KILL ME
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Xant on July 11, 2016, 06:20:09 am
"THIS BLACK STROKE OF PAINT REPRESENTS THE DEATH AND DESPAIR IN THE WORLD"

What is this shit, are we in English class again where we have to make up some bullshit reason as to why the curtains are black? COULD IT NOT JUST BE BECAUSE THE CURTAINS WERE MADE THAT WAY?!?!!$

no the curtains are blak becus it represent the sadnes in dis wumynz life xdddd
That's a good analogy. "Literary analysis" in school is largely the same bullshit, you're trying hard to insert your own feelings into the artist's work and call it his original intention. Uhm, what is the meaning of the time of the day here? Does it represent the duality of Man? Or could it maybe be that the writer flipped a coin? Of course, still makes a hundred times more sense than trying to fit a red rectangle into the round hole of actual art.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Paul on July 11, 2016, 08:37:09 am
That's a good analogy. "Literary analysis" in school is largely the same bullshit, you're trying hard to insert your own feelings into the artist's work and call it his original intention. Uhm, what is the meaning of the time of the day here? Does it represent the duality of Man? Or could it maybe be that the writer flipped a coin? Of course, still makes a hundred times more sense than trying to fit a red rectangle into the round hole of actual art.

From my experience, that's bullshit. I was struggeling with it myself until I figured out that what teachers want is just the technical step-by-step approach of analysing a text. It's good enough for them. Can be done even without any empathic gift or bullshitting ability.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Angantyr on July 11, 2016, 09:39:27 am
I'm stuck staring at it, not understanding why the fuck this simple red rectangle has such an emotional effect. I still don't get _why_ exactly, but I remember it clear as day.
Red, like other colors, has a proven psychological effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_psychology
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Thomek on July 11, 2016, 12:08:25 pm
That's a good analogy. "Literary analysis" in school is largely the same bullshit, you're trying hard to insert your own feelings into the artist's work and call it his original intention. Uhm, what is the meaning of the time of the day here? Does it represent the duality of Man? Or could it maybe be that the writer flipped a coin? Of course, still makes a hundred times more sense than trying to fit a red rectangle into the round hole of actual art.

I do agree that lots of people walk around with this school experience, and it is largely pointless. Am I doing this right? Did I say something smart now? It's quite destructive sometimes, not only to experience art, but it also destroys reading for a lot of people. I have the same experience as Paul, I hated it. Only later did I understand that that approach was largely a dead road, actually inhibiting lots of experiences. 

Whenever art is trying to say something that cannot be easily put into words, that approach is murder. You are not in the gallery to try to logically understand everything. You are not there to say intelligent things and try to come across as cultured or smart. Lots of people walk around with a feeling of not belonging, and are afraid to say something that might come out as stupid. Lots of people see it as an ordeal that has to be avoided. I know this feeling very well myself. (Since I'm not an aristo, just middle class from potato country.) :D

If you find yourself on a gallery date, I recommend not saying a thing. Be open and like whatever you like. Hate whatever you hate. Maybe, just maybe, you will get a fresh thought, or a new emotion. Or understand something, your way. If you find yourself with someone trying to extract some kind of analysis from everything, you can pretty safely disregard it as bullshit. Perhaps even conclude that they have a forced and narrow understanding. I can attest that there ARE tons of intellectual dishonesty and posing, and bullshit, and capitalism, and taste-wars in the art world. I don't envy my friends in that field in the least.

Some art is just boring intellectual exercises, but most of it struggles to be something more as well. Some needs context of art history, or political situation to be understood. Personally I find this the most boring, since I don't have direct access to whatever zeitgeist was prevalent. I don't however, brush it off as stupid off the bat. I acknowledge that perhaps I simply don't have the tools for it, and perhaps no young people of today has them in full.

- About the red circle you keep messing about. Most famously it is used on the lucky strike packet, my former cigarette brand. It's designed by Raymond Loewy, someone even Xant would accept as a good artist. Apparently sales skyrocketed after the new design was introduced.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Leshma on July 11, 2016, 03:30:54 pm
Red, like other colors, has a proven psychological effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_psychology

You are missing the point bruh:

Quote
…only in expressing basic human emotions—tragedy, ecstasy, doom, and so on. And the fact that a lot of people break down and cry when confronted with my pictures shows that I can communicate those basic human emotions… The people who weep before my pictures are having the same religious experience I had when I painted them. And if you, as you say, are moved only by their color relationship, then you miss the point.

Dude was full of shit, jew who claimed university professors hate him because of his "race" so he dropped out and became one of the most important figures of American art legacy alongside the likes of Pollock. That is all the information smart man needs to make final conclusion.

Edit: Also Latvian...

Title: Re: Art
Post by: Overdriven on July 11, 2016, 04:26:16 pm
I went back to the Tate Modern a few weeks ago and whilst some of it is interesting, the only 'art' I could really appreciate there was the photography where they captured people and places in relation to a specific event. I could connect far more with that then splashing some random paint splodges on a canvas. Some of the performance art is even worse. I can't remember the artist but it was literally some naked girls walking in a field wearing silly, vaguely s&m outfits from the 70's.

Whilst some of that stuff is visually appealing I just can't buy into the deep bullshit that people try and read into it.

It's why I appreciate the National Gallery so much more. The technical skill is far superior and the detail in which many of the subjects are painted on these huge canvases is pretty incredible. Add to that it gives you a historical background on each piece, who/what the subject is and what they were trying to capture. Whether it be religious, military or famous historical figures. Without all the 'this painting represents blah blah blah' bullshit you get in the Tate.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Leshma on July 11, 2016, 04:51:32 pm
Modern art reminds me a lot of punk music. Sure, I do listen Ramones but Sex Pistols? Lol nope.

It's just that people sometimes feel the need for change, to try something new. Then that new direction is hyped beyond reason. At the same time style of old is ridiculed. But as history shows, that doesn't lasts forever and only few, who created true art are capable of withstanding test of time.

Bet punkers took a jab at Led Zeppelin every moment they could. But who listens to punk music today, only old farts who are trying to relive that part of their lives. Kids these days will rather listen to Stairway from Heaven than God Save the Queen.

It is still a bit early but I'm glad to see many young, educated people who see through deception of abstract expressionism.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Beauchamp on July 11, 2016, 07:36:33 pm
if you are an under educated asshole and want to learn something about visual arts, i totally recommend this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Story_of_Art

for me it is one of the best books ever
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Xant on July 11, 2016, 09:00:05 pm
under educated
undereducated*
Title: Re: Art
Post by: dagu807 on July 17, 2016, 02:04:10 pm
pls r8 my newest mspainting
it represents the evil patriarchy smashing independent womyn, with a hue of male dominance and bloodshed the male gender did throughout history, also cocks lol it also shows how our world is evil and i hate it for not being the utopia i imagine it to be k!!!!
really makes u think huhhhh??????????????????????????????
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Gurgumul on August 16, 2016, 09:05:54 pm
As an aspiring troll apprentice, I highly regard The Black Square as a piece of art. The author got groups of people to furiously argue about something insignificant, and that's the ultimate success at trollery.
Title: Re: Art
Post by: Admerius on August 22, 2016, 09:39:13 pm
visitors can't see pics , please register or login