[QUOTE=carcarcargo;31553953]But what about the stuffs that's literally just a bin bag full of paper, surely that cannot constitute as art,[/QUOTE]
why not?
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;31553953] hell I could do that in about 5 minutes[/QUOTE]
so?
you can argue that it's [i]bad[/i] art, but just because you don't like it doesn't mean you get to say it's [i]not[/i] art.
[editline]5th August 2011[/editline]
use of the term "art" isn't supposed to confer quality. being called "art" isn't something that a work has to earn, because that relies on there being an objective basis for judging quality
[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;31554109]why not?
so?
you can argue that it's [i]bad[/i] art, but just because you don't like it doesn't mean you get to say it's [i]not[/i] art.[/QUOTE]
Bad art would be an under statement. What irritates me the most about it is the fact that the people who make it are held to high acclaim despite them being shite at creating art.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;31554156]Bad art would be an under statement. [/QUOTE]
super-bad art then or w/e. that's beside the point
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;31554156]What irritates me the most about it is the fact that the people who make it are held to high acclaim despite them [b]creating art that I don't like.[/b][/QUOTE]
other people may like things that you don't like. welcome to everything ever in the history of the world. just because you dislike something that someone else likes doesn't mean it's ok to lord your opinion over theirs and act like yours is objectively right and that anyone who has a different opinion is just being a snooty hipster.
[editline]5th August 2011[/editline]
you can have your opinion, but don't be a jerk about it and don't be closed minded and dismissive
[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;31554276]super-bad art then or w/e. that's beside the point
other people may like things that you don't like. welcome to everything ever in the history of the world. just because you dislike something that someone else likes doesn't mean it's ok to lord your opinion over theirs and act like yours is objectively right and that anyone who has a different opinion is just being a snooty hipster.
[editline]5th August 2011[/editline]
you can have your opinion, but don't be a jerk about it and don't be closed minded and dismissive[/QUOTE]
Fine then, I'm gonna go sulk in a corner.
Most expensive painting ever sold:
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/4a/No._5%2C_1948.jpg/294px-No._5%2C_1948.jpg[/img]
No. 5, 1948 by Jackson Pollock
Where the fuck is the art?
i dont see why people cant be all like, "hey, whatevs" and judge everything individually instead of making vast, sweeping value judgements of entire fields
[editline]5th August 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=CommunistCookie;31554382]Most expensive painting ever sold:
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/4a/No._5%2C_1948.jpg/294px-No._5%2C_1948.jpg[/img]
No. 5, 1948 by Jackson Pollock
Where the fuck is the art?[/QUOTE]
well wikipedia says that the painting you posted is owned by david geffen but I can't find out where geffen lives so i don't know where that painting is.
[editline]5th August 2011[/editline]
(I know what you're saying and i literally just had this exact same argument with someone else pls read the thread so i dont have to repeat the same argument with you. lets save ourselves the trouble)
A [I]modern[/I] piece of art.
[img]http://tbreak.com/megamers/files/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-2.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;31554388]i dont see why people cant be all like, "hey, whatevs" and judge everything individually instead of making vast, sweeping value judgements of entire fields
[editline]5th August 2011[/editline]
well wikipedia says that the painting you posted is owned by david geffen but I can't find out where geffen lives so i don't know where that painting is.
[editline]5th August 2011[/editline]
(I know what you're saying and i literally just had this exact same argument with someone else pls read the thread so i dont have to repeat the same argument with you. lets save ourselves the trouble)[/QUOTE]
Alright.
You've made your point, the picture I posted is art, but so are toilet bowls to an extent.
[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;31553556]
also pls dont say "hipster" because that word doesn't mean anything[/QUOTE]
Yes it does, and judging by this post and your other posts regarding modern art, you fit that meaning.
[img]http://www.arthistoryguide.com/images/91.jpg[/img]
[img]http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2113/1659438847_b5374beacc.jpg[/img]
[img]http://www.friendsofart.net/static/images/art3/rene-magritte-this-is-not-a-pipe.jpg[/img]
[img]http://www.artsjournal.com/artopia/images/tale92.jpg[/img] (yes, that is a long poo. I saw this at Moma in SF. I couldn't walk in without hearing another great art project in my head, Beavis and Butthead.
art to me is literally any form of self expression managed in a creative fashion. I'm a huge fan of the dada movement and Jean Michel Basquiat is my favourite artist, I don't believe a whole lot in the concept of art having a distinct definition.
[editline]6th August 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=CommunistCookie;31558275]Yes it does, and judging by this post and your other posts regarding modern art, you fit that meaning.[/QUOTE]
the original 'hipsters' were some of the most important people in modern literary history, so I'd be happy to fit that.
an excuse to take pictures of naked ladies
[QUOTE=CommunistCookie;31558275]Alright.
You've made your point, the picture I posted is art, but so are toilet bowls to an extent.
[/QUOTE]
but Duchamp's "Fountain" is a legitimately great work of art
[img]http://www.paperstreetsupplies.com/images/fountain1.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;31571904]but Duchamp's "Fountain" is a legitimately great work of art
[img]http://www.paperstreetsupplies.com/images/fountain1.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
I love you.
Art imo can be anything, as long as you did it, or helped with it. As long as you made your mark into it, or put your mind into it at any amount, that's your art.
See that your eating, that you just took a bite into? That is now YOUR art.
[QUOTE=CommunistCookie;31572798]I love you.[/QUOTE]
not being sarcastic btw
Art to me is anything that looks good or has meaning.
I love art, and I'm a pompous art-lover to the extent where I love Picasso paintings.
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e1/Untitled_acrylic_and_mixed_media_on_canvas_by_--Jean-Michel_Basquiat--%2C_1984.jpg[/img]
this is probably one of my favourite paintings of all time. A lot of people don't get expressionism, I guess it's a marmite thing
[editline]7th August 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;31571904]but Duchamp's "Fountain" is a legitimately great work of art
[img]http://www.paperstreetsupplies.com/images/fountain1.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
once again, something a lot of people don't really get. There's a lot of interpretation when it comes to Dada and anti-art. I always viewed the fountain as an example of beauty of form (I.E. the curvaceous nature of the urinal) that can be found in the ugliest places.
on the subject of Dada, reppin' the merzbau
[img]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-XK3VP0EAAAo/TbwMEuKUkvI/AAAAAAAABx0/Lt1t5pX7Fp0/s1600/schwitters.jpg[/img]
art is something we make so reality has something to imitate.
Art is a very unique way of describing anything, which can involve anything. Feelings, expressions, beauty or simply as a hobby.
Art itself should have some quality in their work, but always respective to the creator of the art. Although I hate people conisdering art as some "old hurf durf paintings and sculptures".
Art can be anything.
I have a very instinctive sense of art. Everything that impresses my senses and my sight is good art to me. Basic shapes, colors and variations impress me more than advanced and complex elements.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.