Why do normal fags/none-artists hate loose art work/drawing styles so much? Like, the type of art that focuses on the big picture instead of small details. They'll often judge the skill of an artist based on the small meticulous details. Know what I mean?
>>2285835
Like stripping away an assload of detail for nice simplified planes and push color to absurdity to abuse contrast? Because anyone can create an orange circle, it's where that orange circle is placed that is a reflection of the artists skill. That's a ton harder to judge, instead of tiny brush strokes and delicious gradients along with apple-looking apples.
I'll take tasting an apple through a green over looking at a juicy real-apple over there.
Because they have no concept of the history behind it. People hate modern art because they don't understand it. They don't understand what preceded the modern era and WHY artists abandoned traditional concepts of aesthetic to push the boundaries of art.
They're ignorant, basically. Not in the i-just-want-to-sling-insults way, but in the they-truly-have-no-knowledge way.
>>2286387
>you just don't GET it
lolol
Careful there anon, /ic/ hates minimalism and can't see the beauty of it
>>2285835
>the stuff in the back ismore detailed than the stuff in front
you wont make it Henri
Modern art is shit, it has no beauty, it only focuses on self.....this was planned to be, to rob the citizens of beautiful things and leave them with evil demonic statues and portraits. I make real art, it still lives even in the darkest places.
>>2287041
>beauty
>human construct
>not relative to other human constructs
Inb4 objectivly good. Your objective is even subjective because you believe in it at the construct level.
>>2287041
Fag
>>2287041
>it only focuses on self
It does seem that with most modern art and literature you are kind of seeing the world from inside someone elses head in the past it was less personal. I guess it's just the times we're in.
Because people like complexity porn and images that remind them of what they've seen before. Modern art is a lot less technically complex than what came previous (in the sense of the number of actions the painter needed to make, as well as how organized those actions needed to be, to make the image) and most people don't know enough about art to be able to connect the dots between how modern art is a very natural derivative of premodern tradition (which is closer to the things we see everyday and is more likable by mere familiarity).
Because they are plebs and its really easy to asses the qaulity of fine detail vs composition, use of colour, tone,brushwork etc. Which require more experience and knowledge to appreciate
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNI07egoefc
>>2286668
not op but this is my time on the board and what you said is VERY evident. some in the art scene are just smug people needing a good ego jerking to validate them selves.
>>2286387
so yer saying...we just don't get it?? ahahahahah
Because technical skill is the only thing you can judge completely objectively in art. So /ic/ focuses largely on improving that.
Also you can't deny that some of modern art is just pretentious and self-referencing. That probably spoils it for everyone else who actually puts thought into composition, color and so on.
>>2288454
it's all just shit. Like a shitty video game that's lacking design and visuals but is a fantastic story.
If you're lacking either of those categories you're art is shit. Modernists were shitty, contemporary is even fucking worse.
>>2287273
>fine details
>vs
>composition, use of color, tone, brushwork
isn't it more like:
>perspective, construction, understanding of subject, composition, use of color, tone, brushwork
>vs
>composition, use of color, tone, brushwork
look who's the ignorant, putting everything prior to modern art under "fine details"
>>2286387
This.
>>2286387
I'm not even sure if it's history tho. desu I don't know why anyone should feel obliged to give a fuck about the history of something; if it can't stand on it's own then the only appeal is basically fandom nerdiness.
What I think they actually lack is a open mindedness, reflectiveness and curiosity. To appreciate a piece of modern art you need to be willing to really ask yourself why it's interesting and be open to how it makes you feel, whereas most people reject it before even giving it a shot (probably because it takes mental labor and doesn't just serve up meaning on a platter like simpler images).
Basically, I'd argue that it's laziness more than ignorance.
>>2288792
>I'd argue that it's laziness more than ignorance
Modern "art" is laziness on the part of the artists as much as the onlookers, at best. At worst it's just a bunch of conmen getting people with no clue to pay musem entry fees, and contributing to money laundering.
>>2288764
ebic tumblr post
>>2286387
look faggot, I absolutely LOVE the idea behind modern art.
But modern art looks like shit. They designed it to look like shit. It's fucking atrocious and they knew it while making it.
>>2288467
Where did I say that classical paintings didn't have those qualities? They do, but the plebs who praise them sure as hell aren't complimenting those things, they just see the nice realistic pretty details. I'm not toting classical or contemporary art.
>>2289207
oh, we are talking about what plebs like
why?
omg, I hate "modern art", looks like my son could've painted that... (fucking hate those kind of people)
modern art has gone kind of lazy, and repetitive. I mean, this black square was painted 100 years ago, and the fact that people still make this type of paintings and call it new, is just stupid and not creative at all. That's my reason to hating modern art. >>2286387
Yeah people are ignorant, they simply are not interested in learning art and it is far easier for them to like renaissance art. >>2285835
fauvism is one of my favorite styles, and Franz Marc definitely one of my favorites.
>>2285835
>Like, the type of art that focuses on the big picture instead of small details
Just because a painting has details doesn't mean that they don't focus on the general. In the majority of art before modernism, most people don't even bring up how detailed something is. In a lot of cases even, it's exactly the looseness that is called detail.
>>2286387
Knowing concept of art history doesn't mean you have to agree or even like the art that is represented. Besides, statements like that expects people who don't like something to study the same something and from having learned about it will like it, which doesn't make sense. There's a general idea behind something for which a person dislikes it. A person can dislike something for the very same reason that it is liked.
>>2289623
Because that's the whole point of the thread, read the OP.
