Is it art? Does it live up to the hype? What's your take guys?
It is art because art's only value is to be pissed on
Urinal/10
Oh look, another 'what is art?' thread that will do add nothing to the general discussion.
Who will be the first to mention the jews/CIA did this? Who will post the link to the 'Why is Modern Art so Bad?' video?
babbys first thoughts about art
>>2474306
>>2474306
Ooh, me! Pick me!
I bet it was the Jewwwwwwwws...
>>2474293
idhk i mean he just took a urinal and wrote his name on it. there wasn't really a process behind it he just took a manufactured thing made in a factory and called it his own.
>>2474326
Well, then, another thread about the question 'What is art?' can be successfully ended.
Make sure to catch the next thread 'This is my first post here and my first drawing, do I have potential?'.
>>2474334
kek
what are some good books on modern/contemporary art history/criticism/theory?
>>2474334
You're welcome : )
>>2474340
the communist manifesto by karl marx
>>2474306
that really shows you the actual level and knowledge of /ic/ "artists.
its just a bunch of fags who aren't even good at drawing, let alone art.
>>2474293
it's shit.
>>2474340
if you weren't baiting I would probably recommend some books.
>>2474306
>>2474354
>I believe we sit at the top rung of a ladder below an old ceiling
You guys post shit like this w/o understanding the context. The very point of this piece was to say "fuck you" to the rich art snobs. Dude took a urinal and got it into an art exhibition and probably made millions off of it. That's the very point of the piece, that the industry is so fucked up that he could make millions off a urinal and snobs would praise it.
>>2474367
kay smarty pants
>>2474361
how is that "baiting"?
>>2474363
>let me post some shitty installation by a collage student, that will sure prove me right
fuck off fag, that's the equivalent of posting someone tonal study from beginners thread, and saying high art is crap.
>>2474367
I give credit where credit is due, the shit is just boring and played out today to the point where it's become embarrassing. I can't stand up their own ass abstractfags who act like their Duchamp and Pollock derivatives are any less vapid than a drawing of an anime girl with her tits hanging out or a grizzled merc-wip analogue because they're not. This shit has long since 'proven its point' and all accepting it as 'art' has done in a practical sense is remove any token barrier of entry to these hundreds of for-profit art schools where countless naïve young people (prodded on by their equally naïve parents) go on to accrue insurmountable financial obligations and are left without any practical skills to show for it.
If you defend this shit in spite of everything you are an enormously gay retard with a weak little baby dick
>>2474415
I'm not disagreeing with you gayboi. I think it's played out too, the point is that there was thought behind it even if it is overdone. Most people on here think someone put a urinal in there just cause.
>>2474415
Its played out but fine art isn't played out?
>>2474433
lick my balls pleb
>>2474418
I don't purport to know why others feel the way they do or what they think about this subject and perhaps you're right, but personally I understand the origins of this stuff but I don't believe it deserves any reverence or respect all things considered. The success of Duchamp's admittedly ballsy move and those of his similarly edgy contemporaries basically deconstructed art to the point where people 'are' showcasing their own figurative urinals as you say, just because. It's like a hundred year old joke that stopped being funny 95 years ago and the comedian won't get off the stage because the grant money will dry up
>>2474449
I think you just have shitty taste dude
nothing wrong with that
>>2474367
agreed anon, the whole point of this piece was to make a statement very similar to many of idiots who browse ic
>>2474458
>Defending a literal urinal and the decades of often scatological 'too deep for you' morass it spawned
>I'm the one with shit taste
Nonetheless, it's impossible not to have shit taste, conceptually everything's been done at this point in history so it's just a matter of how your pretensions manifest themselves. Thankfully I didn't need a retarded arts degree to be duped into believing my pretensions were more valid than others.
>>2474293
>Is it art?
It succeeded in its goal of making you ask "is it art?"
>>2474367
>Dude took a urinal and got it into an art exhibition and probably made millions off of it
It didn't get into the show and was thrown away
Lrn2arthistory
>>2474367
>That's the very point of the piece
It isn't. The point is to make the viewer question the nature of art, and to assert that the art comes from the intention and will of the artist rather than the process of creation or product.
>>2474637
>>2474641
Yeah I'm not too knowledgeable about art history, that's hoe someone explained it to me. My main point though was that there's quite often a deeper meaning to these things (I don't always agree with it but thought usually goes into it) and someone didn't shit it out and sell it for boat loads of dough.
>>2474293
For its time, yeah.
>>2474700
this. it's impossible for the avant garde to have the same effect in 100 years as when it debuted, especially something so avant garde that it questioned art itself. the shock factor is lost the questions it presents have been answered and studied and regurgitated.
>>2474697
>My main point though was that there's quite often a deeper meaning to these things
You're just seeing what you want to see.
>>2474293
ok, lets go from a base is this art.
it was designed for function first, looks second, and even then probably had a utilitarian design... that said, i can look at many knives and other utility first things and see an artistic merit in them.
HOWEVER, that's where the art in this dies, and the bullshit begins. this is conceptual art, and i refuse to call something like this art in that sense, if the entire value of a piece is in how well you can bullshit it, it has no value. if someone unaware could look at it and reasonably think it's trash, its not fucking art.
>>2474742
I didn't say I liked it. I'm not seeing what I want to see, I'm telling you that the artist had a goal with this. My feelings are irrelevant.
>>2474293
Do you go to KCAD?
>>2474697
Wasn't it just nothing more than sarcasm taken literately?
>>2474293
It was pretty good, the tractor trailer got me bicycle pumped and urinalOT gonna believe the praise it got from rotten tomatoes
>inb4 I'm a tryhard reddit :(
its trolling
and trolling is a art
>>2474771
its not for everybody, and centrally not for simpletons like you.
art was never for everyone.
If a farmer piles up manure in front of some state building entrance, it's not because manure is artistic, or that it holds much value, quite the contrary. Here we have the same thing. It's not an art piece, it's a historical piece. But in terms of artistic value it doesn't hold much of it, because that was the fucking point.
I like to think of it as a piece about context.
In the context of a bathroom it looks normal, but put on its back to the floor/pedestal in a gallery and it reads differently.
That and he was just being a troll, which is also a fun silly art in itself.
>>2475251
>being this much of a pleb
>>2475251
Great. So put it in a museum, not an arts display.
>>2475300
but its art, not just any art, it is THE art of this age, idiot.
>>2475311
1917 was about 99 years ago.
and
> It's not an art piece, it's a historical piece. But in terms of artistic value it doesn't hold much of it
Basically contradicts your statement above.
>>666
>>777
>>1000000
