When did Art died?
>>1412685
>Implying art was ever good
>>1412685
1945
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lNI07egoefc
>>1412685
If your'e talking about technically skilled art, there is a resurgence of that now.
Otherwise, Art doesn't die. You either don't appreciate or enjoy popular movements.
>>1412685
>Art
Spook bro
>>1412752
This guy paints some kitschy shit.
>>1412825
Looks like a screenshot from a King's Quest game.
>>1412685
Apparently, when artists stopped doing commissions and were free(r) to pursue the limits of perception and imagination, and to comment directly on the development of society and art itself.
Duchamp started and ended conceptual art. I have no idea why anyone continues. Lots of good artists though op. They just aren't always going to be popular or famous.
>>1412685
Modern art is pretty good, bro.
>>1412685
Dadaism
>>1412728
>gassing the kikes is art
"no"
>>1412685
It didnt die, the only thing that happened is that western leftist artists became major self-hating cucks after ww1 and that spread the deconstructivist and meme (((art movements))).
Also pop art (industrialized art) and colour photography destroyed the portrait and landscape bussiness which was a major source of income for artists leaving them on scraps and seldom rare fundings
Add to that the power to use "art" as money laundering schemes and dehumanization of modern era and voila modern art
>>1412901
How is this good
>>1412752
Modern art is great, it's just western modern art is shit
Reminder that anything is art if it is presented as such.
>>1412685
Why have realistic art when a photograph does every better and cheaper?
>>1412752
I will never understand how people post this unironically when everything about it basically comes off as self-satire. That fucking graph pushes it over the edge.
>>1413258
/his/ isn't great when it comes to history or the humanities but on the topic of art, my god.
>>1412728
nazi germany's attempts to be aesthetic were usually very corny, they only succeeded in creating stylish military uniforms and large domineering structures for obvious reasons
>>1412901
why can't they make more like this, but more complex, like a large masterpiece
>>1412685
>When did Art died?
When photography was invented.
>>1413288
why did sculptures die long before 3d printing
>>1413258
t. Modernist faggot
Go back to your African lesbian fingerpainting forum
>>1412728
This. Fascism and National Socialism were the last chance for beauty and sanity to prevail on this earth.
1875, everyone knows that
>>1413295
fatigue of the faustian weltgeist
>>1413343
how is that art?
>>1412685
Art became the thrall and mistress to corporate culture. Suddenly it became disconnected from things that actually mattered or left an impression and was transfered to a manufactured aesthetic as outlined by marketing studies.
The rest of art made by people outside this sphere of influence are for the most part focused on narcissism and self-adulation, or gutteral instinct.
Not dead, just sleeping
>>1413360
I said beauty, not necessarily art.
In the NatSoc world-conception, however, everything was aesthetic. Watch the documentary architecture of doom.
the same time god died
it's impossible to have art without a deeply religious society
>>1413372
Good one
>>1413370
aesthetics are opinion dude. anything can be aesthetic if you want it to
Post God tier artistic movements from the early 20th century
>>1413383
Christians did the same thing when they destroyed temples to roman gods
But they then went on to themselves produce amazing art
and, yes, there is amazing islamic art out there
Check out this turd from 1872
>>1413408
>But they then went on to themselves produce amazing art
Which, according to their own religion, they're not allowed to do.
Or is the 3rd Commandment now suddenly a metaphor as well?
Monet sure liked his colored pencils, didn't he?
The original title of this was BLACKED, 1875
No-one on /hispol/ knows anything about art.
Here's a painting of a dead person, by Monet, 1879, which represents the death of realistic art
>>1413429
2nd commandant, not third.
Not him but, as I understand it, don't Christians only diligently follow the New Testament , while selectively following parts from the Old according to convenience?
There is virtually no Jewish/Islamic art that I'm aware of the violates the second commandment. Which is why Christian art proliferated much more, being basically pagan art with a fresh coat of paint.
>>1413480
Including yourself?
>>1412901
What the fuck am I suppose to be looking at?
>>1413480
So no one in the entire world understood art for whole millennia until the enlightened artists of the 19th century finally figured it out?
>>1413372
>>1413383
Not him but I guess he has a point. Religious systems demand certain moral standards which are pushed on art as a whole.
The current lament over how art is dead is just because there are no standards anymore to what art is. In art everything you could rebel against has already been rebeled against. We had shit in cans for fuck's sake.
Religion however sets very strict rules an artist would have to obey. Islamic iconoclasm spawned its own art style which centered on floral patterns and Islamic calligraphy.
>>1413401
Meh. Too noisy.
>>1413334
Modernism was absurdly Eurocentric, you genuine, unironic retard.
>>1413343
I guess that's why nazi art was terrible and mundane
>>1414265
Mundane, sure, but not technically terrible.
>>1414267
Compared to most modern art pieces, which are being sold for some ungodly amount of money on the market, for something I could do for about six dollars or so... This is neither the worst nor the most mundane piece of art that could be birthed on this planet.
>>1412757
That's pretty good.
>>1414267
>>1414519
Nah, man. Besides not being technically accomplished, it's just ugly. It's not even good decor. You'd have to pay me for me to take this into my house. Meanwhile, I don't really get abstract art compositions, I'm not an artsy type, but I think a lot of them would look pretty and cool on my wall. Unlike this drab, grey, melt-y mess.
>>1414267
The perspective is completely fucked.
>>1412685
The real question is: why can't rightists into subjective taste?
>>1413401
surrealism
>>1413499
If I painted a picture of an apple, just an apple with a black/white bacground, that was photo realistic 100% would it be the best painting ever?
>>1414582
Because because being a conservative now is what being a hippy was in the 60s:
>fun and edgy
if hating modern art/philosophy/etc is required then so be it, as long as they can be edgy.
>>1414567
>art as decoration
Kill yourself
Uncle adolph's paintings weren't top notch, but if you compare them with to the other jews who got in, he was a fucking renancentist master. Also why the fuck would you try to get in if your technique was flawless in the first place.
>>1413622
Also if you think your art is to please god, you don't give a shit about anyone. Take Bach as an example, his style was already kinda outdated, but he was just out of fucks.
>>1412752
just posted a reply to this pleb
what an imbecile
>>1414617
I said I'm not an artsy type. Dunno why a piece of piece of shit that was hard to make because the artist sucked would be worth more than something nice looking regardless of the source or craftsmanship.
That grey thing is just an eye-sore. Why should I pay more for it than for something that can please or move me?
I heard once that garbage art is created and sold for crazy prices for the purposes of laundering money.
I can't verify that, but it sounds pretty brilliant.
Art didn't die. It's always been about expression and articulation of the human condition, and it still is. The difference is that the emphasis has shifted to subjective experience and meaning rather than anything objective. It's a reflection of how we live our lives, how we view knowledge, and how we think and feel.
If you complain about that, then you simply don't get the point of art. You can say "well, that's great, but gee, I just happen to like more technically virtuose works." But turning that statement of taste into an assessment of merit is the mark of someone who doesn't know very much about art.
>>1414648
Basically.
Is this artistic enough?
The quality of art should equal the time and dedication spent on it. If you look at the old huge canvas paintings the average observer can tell that the painter has spent a lot of time, and probably spirit on it, whereas if you look at the art now it looks like the kind of thing that could be assembled in like 20 minutes. It probably didn't, but because it looks like it, regular people will give it less respect.
>>1412685
>>1414684
>should
I don't want to antagonize, anon. But on what basis?
>>1414684
>The quality of art should equal the time and dedication spent on it.
But what about all the people who simply suck? They may spend more time working than this guy and still end up producing something that just isn't that good.
>>1414687
Probably used the wrong word. Its more like art back then had the amount of time spent on it evident in its final form. If you look at sculptures and other forms of art like that you can tell that time was spent on it and in turn you admire the persons dedication. That's probably why people can look at art back then, and even if they don't like it they know that it has quality. Now though, there is no self-evident quality that shows time put in, and so people can more easily hate the piece of art, because they see no positives that the artist put into it.
>>1414697
I'd actually agree with you there. Interpretation and critique have become more difficult and complicated as our ideas of meaning have changed.
>>1414684
>quality of art should equal the time and dedication spent on it
t. Marx
If I make doodles for 5 straight days it's still shit art.
>>1414617
Funny enough, the style Adolf painted in was very often used for decoration. His art is hallmark-tier and very boring. I wouldn't let this fucker into my academy either.
>>1413414
>>1413430
>>1413499
Why do you have to pick on the man who painted the light? He was a revolutionary.
>>1412728
correct answer.
And no not because of the fall of the Reich, you absolute retards
>>1412825
>>1413258
>>1413270
explain how he is wrong
It is great that you want to challenge society, but the urinal is over 100 years old now. At this point you are just trying too hard to be edgy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3ne7Udaetg
it didn't really. there's a lot of good art out there
The Harvard Art Museums have this across the hall from a gallery with Van Gogh and Picasso.
>>1414617
>Also why the fuck would you try to get in if your technique was flawless in the first place.
Complain about the downfall of art, and then demand that universities shouldn't have standards to meet for artists.
Hilarious.
>>1415133
For one, he's turning his nose to anything outside of academia or ivory walled art galleries which would prove him wrong.
He's avoiding any mention of commercial artists, i.e Illustrators, Muralists, Designers and so on.
>>1413401
pic unrelated
>>1413288
but most of contemporary art is photography
notice how no one posts photography in these threads? only 100-year old paintings?
>>1414684
>The quality of art should equal the time and dedication spent on it.
I'm reading a generic fat fetish piece that someone has been writing for 10 years. The Gambler, by Dostoevsky was written in 26 days.
Which of these is more worthy of respect?
Your argument against the death of art is the abortion of it. What you call art is visual art, and the greeks didn't consider it art at all, for the reasons you've stated.
>>1412901
Nigga this is some math textbook from the 90s shit
>>1415164
Isn't the point of art school to learn how to paint better?
>>1415274
"no"
Is the point of STEM to learn multiplications ?
>>1415274
Yes just like the point of a math degree is to do math faster.
>>1415274
Networking at universities.
Ateliers are a mix of tech and networking.
>>1415274
The reason art degrees have no prestige these days is because there are no standards for entry. Any decent conservatory by contrast is going to require you pass an audition. Why? Because they don't want to have to waste years teaching beginners the very basics so at the end of your time as a student you might, and this is a strong might, have a small grasp on classical music.
The same used to be true of art academies. They didn't want their graduates producing sloppy, inelegant work and the academy's name being attached to that poor output. They wouldn't entertain the idle dreams of students who don't have any fundamentals, if anything that's unethical.
>>1415303
source?
>nobody mentions AAA videogames or 3D animations or tabletop games or magic the gathering cards or comics or warhammer 40k shit
>it's always irrelevant fine art BS
>>1415312
Because none of those things are art. They are bastardizations at best, and products to be bought and collected and worst.
>>1415310
Most Fine Arts programs take all comers, they don't require a portfolio or anything first.
I was speaking too broadly though, I'm sure there's some elite art academies that do.
>>1415317
>products to be bought and collected and worst.
that's the story of art
>>1415317
>products can't be art
You do know that most art was and is commissioned by the rich.
>>1415317
>shit like The last of us and the order 1886 and other games
>not art
>stupid BS in museums about literal garbage is
>my opinion is a fact
nah, you're a cunt.
I'm glad LOL make more money in one month than all modern artists togheter in history.
>>1415331
each magic the gathering card has a painting that would compete with most classical masterpieces.
>>1415331
the fuck is 'true art'?
>>1415336
on what terms?
>>1415317
Yeah i know right i saw the sistine chapel and i was amazed but then i heard that faggot got paid so it was automatically shit and expressed nothing
>>1415330
>You do know that most art was and is commissioned by the rich.
To be displayed publicly for all to see
>>1415332
>The last of us and the order 1886
LOL. Those are horrible excuses for video games as they are just half-assed ripoffs of movies, at least name some good games if you want to pass them as art
>>1415340
magic has the best alive painters.
>>1415344
we're talking in technical terms.
>>1415345
what do you mean by spirit?
if we follow spiritual terms, how modern art isn't real art?
>>1415344
>To be displayed publicly for all to see
not true at all
>>1415332
>>shit like The last of us and the order 1886 and other games
>>not art
>>stupid BS in museums about literal garbage is
>>shit like The last of us and the order 1886
>>The last of us and the order 1886
Those wouldn't even be in the top 100 of "artful" videogames. Are you literally 14 ?
>LOL make more money in one month than all modern artists togheter in history.
Oh guess I got my answer
>>1415348
so magic the gathering 'paintings' compete with most classical masterpieces because all the old painters are dead? really
>>1415344
>To be displayed publicly for all to see
Companies want the art they've commissioned to be seen.
Why do you think they spend millions advertising?
>>1415354
you seem retarded if you think the order isn't a technical masterpiece in terms of graphics.
I wasn't talking the game was GOOD.
I was talking it is among the better games of the PS4 in terms of technical skill.
fucking idiots.
>>1415357
http://www.cgsociety.org/gallery/
the top digital artists today are way better than any classical master.
like way better, no competition.
>>1415348
I never said modern art isn't real art. I'm generally not a fan of video game stuff due to how crude it is. There's very rarely any deeper aesthetic being presented other than the very surface level presentation of two characters fighting or something. Usually for the sake of marketing in a promotional ad or a box cover or something. It's utility art for the sake of selling a product. That doesn't necessarily lessen it, it just almost always is lesser. Yes these are subjective terms but it's art for fucks sake.
>>1415351
Most commissioned work through the church would be displayed within the churches themselves, of course every person didn't see them, but it's not like they kept them purposefully tucked away for only the Pope to see
>>1415348
>we're talking in technical terms.
Define "technical terms" for a video game, because I will stand by my statement that The last of us and the order 1886 are wannabe ripoffs of movies that are complete garbage as a video game, and as a story being told.
>if it isn't realism it isn't art
Most of you people don't even draw/paint
>>1415362
>like way better, no competition.
again, on what terms? you obviously like them more but you haven't stated why
>>1415363
Oh and I'll add I'm in no way doubting the technical skill of these concept artists. That just isn't a particularly important criteria by which I enjoy art.
>>1415370
What criteria then?
>>1415364
>Most commissioned work through the church would be displayed within the churches themselves
that's work for churches though. you're ignoring work used to decorate private spaces that only a select few could ever see like the papal apartments, art in the court, devotional works, portraits, art created specifically for collection, art sold on market, art bought by the state and kept in storage i.e. nearly all art ever made. public works are an exception, not the rule
>>1415378
How well it metes out the artist's aesthetic vision, how well it presents a symbol or emotion, if it displays something poignant about existence, and hey even if it's just really pretty. Technical ability can help with everything I just listed, but it's not the be-all-end-all.
>>1415363
>>1415370
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3o0HFXPfco
there's a few art games, you'll usually find them being made by some lonely small team.
but they exist, simply you need to look up for them.
look up the void.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcx7vqkRvTc
also pathologic.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVBXPWxSLHc
you'll be a moron to not call such games art.
Also look up journey that was made as an artistic game.
>>1415364
>technical terms
graphics.
>>1415381
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkL94nKSd2M
look up the jouney, is basically what you're asking.
check the studio other games like flower and the flow.
most games (good ones) thrive on basic emotions, like horror games thrive on creepy stuff.
you're ignoring all the human experience.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzS96auqau0
there's stuff like fighting games who thrive on the competition aspect.
moments like moment 37 is art.
>>1415383
I didn't say games weren't art, I find that idea pretty thick. I was talking purely about concept art and again concept art is still art. I was just describing why I think it pales in comparison to fine art.
>>1415383
>technical terms
>graphics
See here is right where I have a problem with people claiming video games as Art.
Graphics have little to do with Video Games. You don't need "good graphics" to make a good video game. Notice even the games you posted, Pathologic is by all modern means fucking ugly, but it's a great video game because it tells a great story in a very strange, player-driven way. That's how Video Games can achieve the "status" of Art (in my opinion). A "true" artistic video game needs to actually set itself apart from other mediums instead of aping off them, gameplay should be the main focus. Games like ICO and Shadow of the Colossus, where the graphics work, but the gameplay and the way the story is presented through the gameplay is what makes it so memorable.
The reason why I denounce video games as art is because these days you have mouthbreathing retards saying Skyrim HD edition is a masterpiece, or even saying shit like Stanley Parable is worth buying when it is utter pretentious garbage.
>>1415391
I absolutely agree that a game's value as art can't be separated from the total experience of playing it. The graphics and sound and plot are cursory elements to actually experiencing the game. They are of course necessary, but they aren't what's uniquely resonant about games.
Jet Set Radio is one of my favorites for this reason. The game as a whole is a joy to play and every element fuses seamlessly to present a total vision. There's absolutely no filler or anything that takes away from the purity of the vision, loud and trendy as it is.
>>1415391
>moments like moment 37 is art
you're actually 14 oh my god. "look up journey" who the hell do you think you're talking to.
This might actually be the worst argumentation I've read about art and video games ever, I'd rather talk to Undertale-worshippers at this point.
>>1415403
>The reason why I denounce video games as art is because these days you have mouthbreathing retards saying Skyrim HD edition is a masterpiece, or even saying shit like Stanley Parable is worth buying when it is utter pretentious garbage.
So video games aren't art because bad video games exist.
>>1415403
>gameplay vs graphics
look it's the line vs colour debate all over again!
>>1415410
I get what he's trying to put across. The problem is even fairly bad shit like Flower or Journey are still some of the more noble attempts in recent memory to have a game be something other than a puerile escapist fantasy.
>>1415397
games are still driven by comercial sucess.
you're asking why an art form that has less than 100 years haven't produced the same as more ancient art forms is silly.
if you compare an atari 2600 with a PS4, there's no other art form, not even film that has improved so much.
Last years we have finally seen the older japanese developers, the first masters of the medium, to start making their own games.
we've finally seen how games like bloodstained are being made because of love of games, not because of money.
>>1415403
Graphics is one of the big criteria for videogames.
If you want to ask about other criteria, then nobuo uematsu games fall into the music aspect, michiru yamane, yuzo koshiro, koji kondo fall into the audio aspect.
If you want to ask about programming, then DOOM is a masterpiece (the original one).
If you want to talk about complexity, then dwarve fortress is up your alley.
There are some films that are pretty bad but considered among the best because of one or two aspects in the film.
>>1415410
fighting games are basically sports.
something like the moment 37 is like an epic historical moment in the world cup.
they can be art, if you consider performance art to be art.
It never died. People like you just have no taste in the art or desire to find good contemporary art, as you relies on spoon feeding of great masterpieces by some kind of experts or cultural tradition and a modern experts wasn't interesting in seeing 100th imitation of the classical arts, that people like you believe to be impressive because of your lack of a personal experience with a various art of the past.
>>1415428
>early
pretty much this
the older generation that grow up with atari is still alive for gods sake.
all the better artists today are moving towards games.
fine art is just BS for lazy people scamming rich faggots.
>>1415422
I'M TALKING ABOUT CONCEPT ART. I never said video games themselves are not art. I didn't even say that about concept art frankly. The only thing I was disputing was the notion that magic the gathering cards and video game concept art is equal to the works of classical masters, and you seemed to be implying that was because of the technical ability involved. That's all I was talking about.
>>1415165
Of course modern artists would neve turn their noses up at anything outside their own subculture. Modern art craves originality and is flourishing with openness, new ideas and creativity, they have created over 9000 variations on a theme of blobs and geometric shapes as well as 101 different poop and sex related things that would shock a victorian, they are very open to other genres and new styles.
>>1415422
>something like the moment 37 is like an epic historical moment in the world cup.
they can be art, if you consider performance art to be art.
alright alright I got it this is bait and I fell for it super hard ahahah well bamboozled my friend. Not going to answer this
>>1415428
>it's arbitrary.
not really, graphics have their place in video games, as does gameplay
The Poussinists believed in the Platonic idea of the existence in the mind of ideal objects that could be reconstructed in concrete form by the selection, using reason, of elements from nature. For the Poussinists, therefore, colour was a purely decorative addition to form and drawing (design or disegno), the use of line to depict form, was the essential skill of painting. Their leader was Charles Lebrun[3] (died 1690), Director of the Academy, and their heroes were Raphael, the Carracci, and Poussin himself[1] whose severe and stoical works exemplified their philosophy. Their touchstones were the forms of classical art.
Hippopotamus Hunt, Rubens, 1616.
They were opposed by the Rubenists who believed that colour, not drawing, was superior as it was more true to nature.[4] Their models were the works of Rubens who had prioritised the accurate depiction of nature over the imitation of classical art. The Rubenists argued that the aim of painting was to deceive the eye by creating an imitation of nature.[2] Drawing, according to the Rubenists, although based on reason, appealed only to a few experts whereas colour could be enjoyed by everyone.
>>1415443
I consider sports to be art.
kinetic arts, just like dancing and martial arts.
>>1414567
>how can basement windows at waist height be real if I've cast away the monarchist yoke
Someone's never been to europe...
I am ashamed to ever post here but did the people who criticize modern art seen that in a museum? I doesn't believe that photos do the justice to an art pieces. Little internet pictures isn't the medium for which work was intended be it shit work or a good one. It doesn't seems to be fair and honest to me.
>>1415472
Exactly. A thumbnail of a Rothko bears no resemblance to the transcendent experience of standing in front of one.
>>1412685
I firmly believe that this type of "art" is specifically made for uppity critics and people that are deeply entrenched in the worst part of the art world.
Every time I've been to the museum in my city, all the sections are full of people admiring the beautiful traditional art old and new, the sculpture, the photography, but the section of the museum that houses the 30x30 ft canvases with an orange line across the middle is ALWAYS completely empty.
>>1415266
top kek
>>1415528
That was for a same reason why many people read popular science works, but only minority would jump into pure technical articles from a same discipline. It wasn't for common people, doesn't mean that it isn't important. The same could be say for the Riemann Hypothesis. For most people it us hard to figure that one, even harder to understand its importance or impact. Some art isn't for everyone and it shouldn't be.
>>1415528
>I firmly believe that this type of "art" is specifically made for uppity critics and people that are deeply entrenched in the worst part of the art world.
have you not read anything about suprematism?
>>1415549
I can assume the riemann hypothesis is valid because I can at least study and understand the mathematics it is based on and multitudes of people who do this and go further than me all agree it is valid.
However with modern art I see apparent flaws in the explanations for why an orange line or somesuch is "deep" and proponents simply get whiny over criticism like some of the posters here and resort to the "2deep4u" meme.
Friendly reminder that anime is the pinnacle of modern art
>>1414692
maybe he spend 1 month on that one, but years on what he did up to that point. A beginner spending 2 months on a painting without years of experience to back it up will just create a polished turd.
>>1415369
>on what terms?
fundamentals, technical skills
>>1413272
>stylish military uniforms
Stop this meme now
Nazi uniforms were gaudy, fascist shit
>>1415448
>>1415748
but digital art doesn't exhibit any of the fundamentals of classicism and considering how rigorous the academic system was i am extremely doubtful that they are surpassed in terms of technical skills either
also these aren't what defines "art"
>>1414578
Hitler had been to places man should not visit.
>>1415802
k
>>1415860
If this uniform is so good, why it isn't used today? Checkmate, pleb.
>>1415864
>>1415802
>gaudy
What?
>fascist
shitty insult desu
Movies are Art lads
>>1414617
Lmao schiele shits all over dolfys sub-mediocre house paintings
>>1415822
>digital art doesn't exhibit any of the fundamentals of classicism
name one fundamental you find in classicism and can't in digital art
pro tip: you can't
>considering how rigorous the academic system was i am extremely doubtful that they are surpassed in terms of technical skills
he think we haven't surpass the classicism, how cute
>>1413146
You forgot to say pic related.
>Abstraction toward pure form is merely an indication that everything is possible. The realm of the permissible and of the artistically possible keeps growing, so long as what saturates this realm can still be observed as a symbol for the fact that the only thing excluded is exclusion itself. Theory becomes the agency of permission. Its general question becomes: What does it mean for the art system to contain its own descriptions, and how can this fact be rendered observable in a work of art?
Instead of arguing subjective taste people should read Luhmann or literally any other modern theory on art. This is one cringeworthy thread.
>>1415348
Magic doesnt even commission Rebecca Guay anymore
And seriously if you put up each card against a classical master the master will win anytime
Not that its unexpected when a prominent magic artist paints for like 3x4 cms of cardboard and does so probably dozens of times a year
>>1414684
Explain Bob Ross
>tfw I'm going to study Fine Arts this year because the only thing I'm good at is drawing
What should I expect to see?
>>1416145
Prepare to be brainwashed and being poor forever
>>1412685
never
I'll never understand how people don't get good design.
>>1413146
>You think that performance piece went a little too far?
>Not far enough I think.
Well if my friend's grasp on his Art History class in undergrad was anything to go by (and this was during a drunk stroll on the Las Vegas strip) its stagnated because we are entering a period of post-post-modernism where sincerity is being met with sarcasm and the that itself is being met with criticism so people are going back to older art movements and trying to recreate them rather than be influenced by them.
>>1415864
>if the uniform was so good how come no one uses it.
Do you really want to be the country that's known as that one country whose military look like Nazis?
>>1415951
So are video games
>>1416080
Great painter. Mediocre artist. I love the man but if you ever see his work with anything not involving landscapes, you see why he only does landscapes. Furthermore, some of his paintings only look good from a moderate to far distance but up close look pretty lacklustre due to lack of detail (which is understandable, it took 30 minutes after all).
>>1415336
Fuck... I don't know why I'm laughing so hard at this.
>>1416423
Who is here to get? I can draw exactly that in like 2 minutes, so it isn't the art.
>>1415336
No.
I love MTG art, but no. Things like Gift of Orzhova, Endless Ranks of the Dead, or the Guay version of Channel are the exception, not the rule
>>1413372
>it's impossible to have art without a deeply religious society
Wew, lad
>implyign that in the future, when all people who are augmented by super computers thousands billions of times more capable than today's, will not be instantly analyzing all of 4chan's posting histroy and appreciating it as a work of art.
>>1416736
There's some pretty good stuff here desu
>>1416459
nice meme
>>1415274
the point is to be as offensive or pathetic as possible
older art had meaning and historical context. Modern """""art""""" is completely detached from society, history and culture. It's a scam for gullible rich people and people wanting to make money off the art market
When it didn't
>>1416768
curing this thread with real art
>>1416768
Its absolutely not detached from society history and culture. You are an utter moron. Do you think that back then many people looked at art? Most of it was private or for decorating the houses or gvoernemnt structures of the elite. Peasants had no access to "art" you dumb faggot.
>>1416797
an examination of history as well as satire regarding current politics. What modern art has this?
>>1416800
>Do you think that back then many people looked at art?
no, but they wouldn't instinctively cringe in its presence
Have you guys ever noticed that in every one of these threads, the only people who actually know anything about the theory, criticism, and history of art always, literally ALWAYS dismiss and argue against the "hurr MODERN ART" people (all of whom, usually, have misconceptions about criticism founded on personal preference and what they personally like)?
I wonder why that is.
>>1416797
>stare at a pretty landscape.
This is shit son.
It provokes no thoughts, no feelings.
We are living in a time where you can literally see alive camera feed from the top of mount everest or outer space in full HD. Why the fuck do we need paintings like this one?
It is only historically important(I assume its an old painting).
So tired of pretencious shits like yourself who think they should "get" art without any effort.
>>1416898
Because those that know "anything about the theory, criticism, and history of art" are gullible people that had the misfortune of striving for a degree that requires one to parrot the '''views''' of pseudo-intellectual authority figures both in the form of modern art proponents past and present(critics and artists alike) and of their university professors that outright discourage critical thinking in their field.
>>1416923
I wonder what sort of person you are. Are you a STEM fag? Or a teenager?
>>1416935
Neither.
>>1416941
Did you escape the /pol/ containment zone by any chance?
>>1416967
Great argument, anon.
>>1416973
>implying anyone is gonna try or bother to disentangle the bullshit macaroni in that post.
>>1413144
Looks cool.
How else do you define "good".
>>1416973
It isn't meant to be an argument. There's nothing to argue with someone who throws out the entire intellectual and academic framework of the subject.
>>1416976
Don't care either way.
>>1416973
what on earth would he argue?
>these universally agreed upon principles at the heart of almost all academic criticism don't suit me! fuck them!
you absolutely are either a teenager or a STEMfag.
>>1416979
>someone who throws out the entire intellectual and academic framework of the subject
When pseudo-intellectualism is brought to the rank of sole authority within the ranks of the modern academia, '''anti-intellectualism''' is the sensible response.
>>1417025
>fuck them!
p. much
>>1416796
What happened to that piece? Did they actually tear it up as a performance?
>>1417037
great. just don't be surprised when nobody takes you seriously because you make ignorant comments and enter debates armed only with your hot opinions.
scurry along back to /pol/ now.
>>1417073
>you make ignorant comments and enter debates armed only with your hot opinions
I have quite pertinent opinions that I've developed through my own lecture and thought, it is only you that is an ignorant par excellence through formal '''education'''. What you masquerade as your own '''personal opinions''' has no substance, you only parrot what you were taught. I know enough of Western academia(through personal experience, no less) to know that humanistic faculties only present contrary views in the form of ideological critiques. Even if a student is presented with the opportunity to research base material, he is only tasked with deconstructing it in the light of the established academic view with no pondering whatsoever.
>scurry along back to /pol/ now.
Scurry along back to your university if you want an echo chamber.
>>1416923
He's right.
If it looks like dogshit it should be treated like dogshit.
>m-muh STEMfag!
Yeah I am a STEM fag. Do you know what we do with our failures? We ridicule them. What do the art fags do with their failures? Praise them! They make up some arcane pseudo-intellectual nonsense to argue how it's actually quality, but it's obviously shit.
This is why nobody takes art seriously anymore.
>>1412685
Anime girls in my folder would disagree.
>>1412685
It didn't, but in terms of what I assume you're getting at this guy gets it >>1412878
pic related
>>1412725
>Being this retarded
>>1415330
>Posting the inferior David by the inferior artist
>>1412685
Rothko is great though, Picasso however... It started with Duchamp though and art hasn't really recovered since. But Rothko is great. Pollock is hit and miss but to a large extent art has become void of man and god.
>>1412685
I recommend yall niggahs to watch The Power of Art, absolutely sublime.
>>1412685
*die
>>1417148
>Yeah I am a STEM fag
Color me shocked. You can be culturally destitute on your own if you want, but don't act like everyone should.
>>1417148
>This is why nobody takes art seriously anymore.
This thread is hilarious, why do autistic STEM fags always try to take part in humanities threads?
>>1416035
composition of narrative
>he think we haven't surpass the classicism, how cute
not when dumbasses like you with no knowledge of art tries to argue about 'fundamentals' of classicism that aren't even in digital art because it's not trying to achieve the same thing
>>1416814
nearly all of it
>>1416797
>real art
>not history painting
>>1417037
modern academia doesn't just say "all modern art is good and all traditional art is bad". it's not the 50s anymore
>>1417142
you parrot things you picked up on a forum
>>1417221
duchamp didn't really affect the art world until the 50s or something. picasso had a bigger influence
>not posting based symbolism
reminder that photography killed art, the CIA popularized abstract art and it is now money laundering and celebrity that drives it
>>1418718
photography is art and abstract art isn't very popular
>>1417192
>realism
>art
end ur life
>225 posts
>no mention of Soviet Realism pushing the West towards abstract art
>>1416459
I'm LMAOing at your life.
you are the type of people that think some faggot who can copy a photograph so well it just looks like a black and white version of it is a creative genius
hyperrealism is the lowest form of art. it takes no creativity, only practice
you are the type of faggots who think one band is superior to the other because the guitar player can shred notes faster
>>1418834
>hyperrealism is the lowest form of art. it takes no creativity, only practice
You think there is no creativity in try to discover the best practice to which one can create the illusion of a plastic bag with nothing more than pencils and oils?
>>1412685
same time god was killed
>>1414267
this looks cheap as fuck
>>1415434
This. Also, I honestly can't understand how you people can look at some bland painting of nature for the thousandth time and still find it more fascinating than something by Kandinsky or Mondrian. I find lots of Baroque art gorgeous, but it just gets boring after a while.
Also, art's a reflection on the society that produces it. If you can't at least grasp some of the basic ideas behind it, you have no hope of understanding the modern world.
