Art Thread
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /lit/ - Literature
You are currently reading a thread in /lit/ - Literature
Let's have an art thread.
And give me some recommendations for books about art. I'd like to read Marilyn Stokstads "Art History" but why is it so expensive? Any good alternatives?
>>6326795
Kandinsky anyone?
>>6326793
>>6326801
>>6326804
>>6326809
>>6326810
>>6326814
Please stop spoiling this thread with your shitty modern art
>>6326801
Reminds me of Greece.
>>6326821
What's the problem with modern art?
>>6326821
>being a realism pleb
/lit/ life
>>6326828
Most of it is appalingly bad.
reddit coming through
>>6326838
Fair enough if that's you oppinion. But could you go a bit into detail? What exactly is bad?
>>6326846
nice
>>6326828
4chan is full of neurotic and alienated young men convinced that modern life has been carefully engineered by liberals, Marxists, (3D) women, and Jews to frustrate our ambitions. Modern art reminds of us modern life.
>>6326857
sad
The old question: What does the black square stand for?
>>6326859
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=421pZgg-vlY
>>6326868
the rabbit hole is deep
>>6326868
Fuck off with your bane posting
>>6326868
So deep! So visionary!
>>6326871
that bosch was one crazy motherfucker.
>>6326789
Daily reminder that C. D. Friedrich was not a patrician, but a lonely virgin protestant neckbeard fedoracore no gf r9k-tier loser.
>>6326876
The fuck is this shit?
>>6326890
That's what patrician mostly means here though.
>>6326890
which of course made him quite the unique snowflake in the world of art and literature.
u mad bro
7
Do you faggots who post modern art ITT actually enjoy it? Or are you just posting it to boast about how hip and cultured you are?
Define "modern art".
>>6326935
I'm not sure how hip you are these days when you say that you like Kandinsky for example.
>>6326933
noice
>>6326942
yep, those art threads are always a good away to get away with posting tits on /lit/.
you have 30 seconds, fuckers
People who pretend to like this sort of edgy nonsense are the ones trying to look hip and cultured: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lbece7RqZU Not the guys posting modern art in this thread.
>>6326935
Here's some David Lynch, just for you.
>>6326946
left edge in the middle
found him in like 12 seconds
>>6326947
I refuse to believe this is not an elaborate troll.
>>6326953
took you a full minute to respond
too late, pleb
>>6326946
you too.
murica
>>6326789
It's super cheap on ebay.
>>6326956
I counted to 25, while I could had missed some bits that was my first post in the thread.
>>6326955
why? because it repulses you?
that's some tumblr tier "it hurts my sensibilities so it must be a troll" logic. the correct reaction is to ignore it because there was no creative input to her work, the end result wasn't a human creation but a natural reaction so it's not art. Just like the ocean isn't art.
Nice performance if 4channers find it so memorable and disgusting, though, if you're going for impact and shock that's some pedigree right there.
>>6326978
It has nothing to do with my repulsion to what is actually being depicted as graphic.
>>6326983
>why?
>it had nothing to do with that
so? finish your argument.
>>6326810
teenage mutant ninja apples?
>>6326857
Stop making me like modern art even more!
>>6326988
It is mainly the environment the performance is taking place and the grins on some of the audience, and the intentionally pseudo-arty vibe I get, like it is a joke.
>>6326993
>>6327003
I did (or at least one of them), but like with all famous paintings the hype is always too big and even a good painting can't give you the excitement that you'd get if you never heard about it.
>>6326996
oh, yeah, sorry. it does have an incredible first-year "i'm not sure waht the fuck is happening but i'm sure being artsy" ambient.
You're still using a pretty modern take on the word troll.
>>6327028
>>6327025
Absolutely haram
>>6327014
I haven't, but Rothko is quite impressive in person and you wouldn't guess so just by seeing a 1000x500 jpg since the size and the detail is part of it. I don't know why people cry, though, that's a bit too much.
Bacon, on the other hand, did impress me a lot as a child. But that's sort of his thing, a bit Palahniuck-y even if he is objectively talented.
>>6326933
wonderful
>>6327034
And something less cheap and a bit more interesting in its detail.
>>6327033
On one hand I feel we've at least extensively documented most of those works while other works of that same period were destroyed in various fashions including that one. A bit of the shock comes from people who don't realize that that's what happened to every other piece like that and that there are more than a few still under the earth. The Museum of Cairo has so many sculptures they aren't even sure how many they have, with many "repeated" works being forgotten and sold in the black market.
>>6327033
I know that the worst thing is of course the senseless violence and the thousands of people killed by IS. But it really makes my blood boil what these barbarians are doing to these old artworks and sculpures. Just for that they should be shot.
>>6326972
Very very nice
>>6327046
I wonder though how much damage they are doing to places that haven't been fully excavated yet.
>>6327034
I can attest to the Rothko needing to be in person. I saw a room (I think at Tate modern) dedicated to several of his Four Seasons commission paintings, and it gave me some odd feels.
>>6326933
>mfw this painting is from 2014
>>6327074
and you don't see anyone complaining about modern art there.
>>6327079
because it's done in a traditional 19th century style
people seem mostly disturbed by the modern styles rather than the actual age of the paintings
mucha always gets a ton of love in anime forums
>>6327071
yes, having more than one work also helps you get into the feeling. his studio must have been some crazy shit.
>>6327068
i'd assume that aerial bombings are worse for that.
>>6327088
well, that's quite obvious, isn't it?
>>6327087
Is it Dore time?
yep
>>6326821
Your fedora is getting blown out from all this gorgeous art eh?
>>6327103
So be it.
>>6327110
that goes probably for a lot of art but it must have been a bitch to make these.
>>6327122
love Magritte
>>6327126
yep, must've been a cool guy.
>>6327138
they might be different paintings, Magritte painted a lot of these, many of them almost identical
>>6327138
check the clouds.
>>6327140
>might
my bad, didn't look at them close-up, they are indeed different
>>6327142
amazing
what does /lit/ think about joseph beuys?
>>6327162
>tfw the eyes follow you around the room
>>6326963
w-why is that last guy looking at me
So, side question, I feel guilty posting trap pics to identify since they are usually pretty poor art. Doe anyone have a cultured equivalent? Castrati paintings? Some greek stuff? I'm open to ideas.
>>6327162
I saw a retrospective last year and it was mildly interesting, it surely helped having read about his obsesions with grease or felt and the story he invented for it (barely surviving a plane crash, being rescued by tartars through those things). It also had some documentation of his short stunt in government and it was quite interesting, it clearly clashed with the pop crap liberty america was way into at that time.
But his best works are probably his performance. Death hare and coyote are awesome and I wish I could see something like that in museums now.
>>6327170
he is mocking you and your commie friends with your brown rice and homemade vodka.
>>6327187
why would you mock the freedom to make your own alcohol to your own tastes?
>>6327185
like this?
(description in the file name)
>>6327192
A bit too much, I think. Subtlety is a nice thing.
>>6327202
Well, here is a classic one by Borghese.
>>6327185
sounds like for once someone has an idea what he's talking about.
looks like chris chan made an album cover. could a retard like considered to be an actual artist?
>>6327207
cool, saved
>>6327212
I always know, more or less, what I'm talking about. I'm sure a lot of /lit/ does too.
>>6327218
I'll go ahead and assume that they wanted to have a cover art by CWC for status and free publicity.
>>6327218
does chris chan listen to anco?
>>6327221
It made me lol but that image wasn't what I though I was posting. Let' see what this one is.
>>6327227
he only listens to britney spears and sonichu talking to him.
>>6327126
Looking at it, this seems to be a 3D render.
can we talk about modernist music too?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UeSVu1zbF94
>>6327227
Animal Collective? What's the connection?
>>6327248
the album cover he drew is vaguely similar to STGSTV's cover, not hugely i suppose.
Looking for a painting I seen in one of these threads previously.
People playing tennis on grass behind a house with a giant conical hedge in the foreground. Really striking painting for some reason and I want to know more about it.
>>6327248
only if we can talk about the greeks as well
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPCtQe8RN4c
>>6327248
I prefer postmodern music
youtube.com/watch?v=tMgkt9jdjTU
>>6327253
This one?
>>6327265
not him but that's a nice pic.
>>6327192
Is that real
>mfw got a small book of Beksinski's works in the mail yesterday
>mfw I have no face
>>6327019
Better version
>>6326814
>>6326809
>Kandinsky
Hell ye hell ye
>>6326963
Rockwell's works are some of the most genuine and pleasant things I have ever seen.
Are videogames art?
>>6327295Video games are a form of media, which can fall into the genre of Art. They're not considered "High Art", but there is really no need to debate if a form of media can be art.
>>6327289
yep
What makes art art?
>>6327300
that painting lacks subtlety and is therefore bad
>>6327312
l'art pour l'art'
>>6327313
Couldn't agree more.
Whats an artist you enjoy, friend?
found some interesting interpretations of what a trap pic could be, now I can post again
>>6327257
I don't see why not
>>6327259
I really feel modern music hasn't been given a chance ever. It's taken as more of a joke than modern painting while being much more focused.
>>6327265
>>6327286
though that's some really poor tennis
>>6327295
not inherently, just like painting your wall isn't art.
>>6327300
was america ever that friendly and open?
>>6327312
according to who?
I sort of like Benjamin's interpretation as long as you don't take it as far as he did: art is anything that makes you wonder how such a small thing can mean so much.
>>6327313
maybe rockwells critique of america is not what can be seen in his paintings but more in what he decides not to show. that would be pretty subtle.
>>6327295
I think that depends on your definition of art really, like >>6327300 says, they *can* fall under the "genre of art" but 95% of games released today, (even if you exclude AAA first-person-shooters) are almost exclusively designed to entertain the consumer. If you look at games that market themselves as "art games" (although never implicitly in order to avoid a mawkish, pretentious image) the methods in which they try and portray feelings and ideas are still restricted to the format of game mechanics, which are tailor made to keep the user immersed in the actual physicality of gameplay. Dear Esther is, in my opinion, is a great example of a game that rejects these mechanics and strives to make the entire focus of playing the game centre around artistic imagery, "literary" (for lack of a better word) dialogue and, most importantly, a central theme that make it entertaining in its own right, without the need of any other stimuli.
TDLR games are still very young, and it'll take time for more people / "artists" to realise the potential of it as an artform. If you look at music and painting, there's a similar pattern- the intention for their existence focused entirely on entertainment, albeit an educated and "serious" form of it. Maybe in the fullness of time we'll see a movement in games that mirrors these artforms, who knows.
No one into contemporary art?
My book recommendation would be Against Interpretation by Susan Sontag
>>6327323
That statue got so much shit because of the feather Don put behind David's leg, oh man.
>>6327323
>that's some really poor tennis
that's badminton son, one of the most eloquent sports around https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivSLHWgDZW8
>>6327231
shid, i think you might be right
>>6327311
he's a big guy
>>6327328
wehad a rush of anti sontag vitriol a few months ago but I really like her books about the impact of social photography.
>>6327335
please expand
>>6327337
I know, the anon was asking for a painting with tennis.
>>6326789
art is fart.
>>6327367
art is 75% of fart
OP here. Still curious if anyone of you could recommend me some books about art. That one by Sontag sounds interesting.
>>6327380
Walter Benjamin's The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction is a pretty interesting text, you can find it on line.
>>6327357
Easy enough.
Short explanation, the feather was gay.
Long one, is that if you look at the statue from multiple angles, you'll probably notice quite a few feminine features. The youth there is considerably younger than other renditions, and also far less muscular than David was classically depicted to be (Compare this work to, say, Michelangelo's famous rendition). Viewing the statue from one side, there's even a slight bulge to his nipples. The feather I'm talking about comes from the base of Goliath's helmet, trailing up the right side of Davids leg, forcing the viewer to follow it up to a certain area.
Remember that Sodomy was highly illegal at the time, and that David was a beloved symbol of the Florentine people.
Caused quite a stir when it was placed in the center of the courtyard of the Palazzo Medici Riccardi with the blessings of the Medici family, though it might have been for political reasons, if not social ones.
>>6327357
>anti sontag vitriol
I compeletly missed that. Why?
I never read On Photography. Is it worth reading if I have no interest in photography?
>>6326857
3D women?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?x-yt-cl=84503534&v=lNI07egoefc&x-yt-ts=1421914688
>>6326809
>>6326814
What do you like about Kandinsky?
>>6327400
>Is it worth reading if I have no interest in photography?
It's called "on photography". What do you think?
>>6327405
This could be a great reaction image
>>6327400
Not really worth it if you have other stuff in your list, I can't remember the name but circa 2008 she published a really nice book about home photography.
She got a ton of hate for some sjw and pro jews comments she had made decades ago and that aren't at all surprising from a 50 y/o woman. After that any simple line where she rejected masculine societal elements got lumped together.
You know how 4chan is, if someone at any point defends something you don't like it means that every single thing they said is automatically wrong forever and ever.
>>6327401
and even 4D!
>>6327393
I loved it, thanks for sharing
