>>2584315
kitsch is at its heart a matter of taste, and taste is a class identifier. When someone says that is kitsch, they are saying that is a non-educated, working class piece of art. Therefore it must be ridiculed because the poor do not have good taste because they're dirty etc.

it's bogus essentially. It's a way for the educated to distinguish themselves form the uneducated.

>>2584315

Pic related is not a style that is generally considered kitsch. Kitschy artworks are in general more sentimental and easily digested, not dark gothic edgy stuff

>>2584315
kitsch is when someone likes something because it
seems to look like something classy, fancy or important but it's really not. It's about stupid artists thinking they know a thing or two about art because they can copy or mimic whatever thing that is "in" at the time.

Kitsch is for hacks because it breeds more hacks, Greatest example is weeb and vidja artists. They flock to whatever "in" thing and build a patreon/tumblr business until the next "in" thing comes along. They're like vultures thinking they're peacocks.

Nothing is real skill or talent with them. They'll use whatever trick, cheat, or theft they can get away with. They'll ruin anyone that calls them on it.

>>2584357
No, there are two types of kitsch. The artist is Roberto Ferri and a part of the movement for kitsch works.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Kitsch_Movement

There's kitsch as in knick knacks and kitsch as in 'regressive' values and aesthetics in art.

Someone on these forums said Bouguereau is kitsch in a negative connotation.. why? Why the negative?

Kitsch imitates Culture in some respect yet lacks in form, subject, substance, mode, or any combination, that inner fire that is the mark of men of Genius and true understanding. And so often you will see that, in the frustration at such want, they imitate a worthy master, feign to flatter, yet at any varying degrees mock and distorts that which it imitates, adds to it fopperies, excess ornament, makes childish witticism or senseless fancies, while neither capturing any of the true virtues; for in no other wise can they compete. Of the most basic kind, it might be an imitation, however sincere, which has not in the act of creation a fraction of the Purpose which yielded the creation of the former. Or perhaps in some cases as we see, it is not imitation, but the very lack of a good model.

Where art borne of good taste and judgment is the visual equal of polite literature, it is on the other hand the contrary and enemy of anything polite.

>>2584391
I'm afraid Bouguereau came at an ill opportune time. The real fault in his art is that his patrons were men of weak spirit.

>>2584391
Because he made some really moving stuff with weeping madonnas and dead babies and Dante in hell, yet he spent most of his time painting boring little girls playing with flowers. Saccharine bullshit, but expertly painted

>>2584388
>the poor do not have good taste because they're dirty etc
this is true

good non-kitsch art however appeals to both educated and uneducated. kitsch for the most part only to the uneducated.

>>2584451
this
the subject matters make me gag

>>2586253


woops, quoted the wrong person.
meant >>2584324

still, after reading a bit of the wikipedia article. the whole movement seems like a mess. it claims to be based on a general philosophical system, but it's clear that the primary mover of it is the art that it defends, rather than the general philosophic system being that which forms. the result is a narrowness of scope.

>>2584451
This.

From a craft/formal perspective, his work is often near perfect. Conceptually, though, it's mostly trite.

I actually think his allegorical paintings are guilty of this, and that some of his simpler pictures of children are more authentic/interesting.

Either way, I don't think his lack of popularity is solely due to the Era he painted in.

At this point, the avant garde have eaten their own tail to the point that it has become the embodiment of kitsch itself, and the two are no longer antipolar however completely disparate they may now be.

This is insofar as painting is culturally relevant these days, which is to say barely if at all.

>>2586864
avant garde has a lot of things about it that's kitschy to begin with. late 19th and 20th century art theorists were retarded.

When I was a kid, kitsch was paintings of jesus weeping and black velvet paintings of elvis with light up rhinestones in his jacket.

Now I see Rothko-esque color field stuff for sale at Target and on pinterest, and I've met an artist who has won major grants with paintings of sparkly pine trees surrounded by touchy feely nonsense words like HOPE SPIRIT FLY

I think the whole dichotomy between trash art and high culture is broken. Rather than two ends of a spectrum, it's more like hundreds of little tribes loyal to various traditions and aesthetics. Apart from big money fine art in a Soho gallery, which is irrelevant to most people, and serves primarily as a sort of exclusive collectible trading card game for the super rich.

>>2584388
That's not Kitsch. Nerdrum just started calling his stuff kitch as a protest, because Norwegian art critics were attacking him for painting in the style of the old masters.

In case you're unaware, contemporary art has nothing to do with art. It's left-wing political expression that incorporates their bullshit ideals of equality and everyone being special. The only thing they value is the message that the "oppressed" or left-wing artist claims to express in their shitty attempts at art, and they completely disregard traditional values like hard work and skill. This leaves you with the esoteric bullshit you see nowadays that can be interpreted however you want, so everyone can be an artist, regardless of skill level.

>>2589062
I'm not disagreeing with your basic premise, but the guys with the most flagrant trash are white men from Europe and America.

Contemporary fine art mostly sucks, but lumping the average artist in with Damien Hurst is a bit like pointing to a couple grips on the back lot at Paramount and saying "look at those rich hollywood fatcats ruining my culture!"

>>2589183
>but the guys with the most flagrant trash are white men from Europe and America.
I never claimed anything else, which is why I said "oppressed or left-wing". Those white men fall into the left-wing category, though they also represent many of the pretentious morons you seein the art community.
However, many women and minorities get praised simply because of their race and gender, and because their work supposedly represents what it's like to be oppressed. White men in the art community don't have the opportunity to play this card, so they usually play sensitive, sympathetic, alternative or rebellious roles.

The funny thing is that Odd Nerdrum, despite his controverial imagery and eccentric personality, considering himself bourgeois, and consistently gives credit to the historical middle- and upper classes for the proliferation of art, considering the poor didn't care or have the opportunity to enjoy, sponsor or participate in making art.

>but lumping the average artist in with Damien Hurst is a bit like pointing to a couple grips on the back lot at Paramount and saying "look at those rich hollywood fatcats ruining my culture!"
I'm mostly referring to the state of the contemporary art community. When artists are lambasted for painting like the masters, or are fired from their position as art teacher because they want to teach their students the fundamentals of classical drawing and anatomy, there's something very wrong with the community.
That being said, obviously there are many artists outside the community who do great work, and even a handful within.

>>2589214
Agreed on all points, cheers anon.

I went to art school and had a couple drawing teachers who were very craft oriented. One would walk up to a drawing you'd spent half the class on and brush off any part he thought was not thoroughly observed.

Then of course there was the painting prof who would hand out an -A for a pile of unfinished canvases, as long as the student could bullshit a little.