Why is modern art hated, /lit/?
> mfw that grammar
Because most of it is the epitome of pretensiousness. Post modern art is garbage because it comes from special snow flakes who can't believe they arent individuals. I'll be the first to admit still visual art in general does not move me as much as other forms of art, but I have seen a painting or two that has moved me, none of them post modern trash.
>>8128721
thanks for you opinion, senpai
>>8128688
Some of it is quite loved, Francis Bacon for instance practically has universal currency
people are stupid
honestly would rather live in a world that looks like the top one t b h
Because art has been reduced to be a factory of ideas instead of a guild of ideas + talent.
And not really that status quo shattering ideas either... I went to an exhibition that was all about evoking solidarity for muh refugees.
Now anyone with a liberal idea can produce art. Doesn't require any skill.
>>8128688
because of what you just posted. One clearly took more effort than the other and is therefore worthy of consideration.
>>8128737
how's being a liberal treating you
>>8128721
Because it's conceptual art which means you don't need to experience the work of art for yourself. You can hear about it and understand it in a way you can't hear about a Michelangelo without experiencing it.
So modern artists just think of an idea, usually social commentary that ends up being ironic because the artist doesn't actually want to risk anything, and they make the work. The critics immediately get the gimmick and see its potential for easy writing. They write about it and hype it. Everybody gets rich.
>>8128718
fuck jeff koons
>>8128688
Leftists
Because STEM god tier.
>>8128737
I am too a man whom is intelligent and nihilistic with a wicked sense of humor
![204011[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/q7GZVwn.jpg "204011[1].jpg")
>>8128688
late capitalism happened
People are getting bored with realism. They want to do something more,
>>8128744
proper liberal or american liberal?
also what does that have to do with my taste in art?
>>8128758
That's exactly it, people are 'bored'.
That's why you had this enormous proliferation of isms in the 19th and early 20th century.
More like fads than schools they were.
>>8128763
liberalism means 'everything is subjective, a feminist who shits and periods on a canvas is as good as Michaelangelo becaues of muh feels of EQUALITY and women are great xD'
It's pure Marxism
>>8128740
It never required skill.
>>8128688
It's just the easiest target for the anti-intellectual crowd to go after because the merit in it is harder to see than the merit in mocking it. Basically people are stupid fucks and would rather make fun of art than try and understand it, even though seeing the perspective of other people is basically the point of art.
>>8128688
I'll give you three reasons why I hate it.
1. They are not philosophers but they attempt to materialize philosophy in their works. Say you come across a pure black painting in a museum.
Before you know anything about it, you start to wonder what is going on. Before you get to any idea, any conversation with yourself, the artist will be patting themselves on the back because they "made you think". You may later come to some idea of what it means but it already doesnt matter.
It is symbolism so vague and loaded it can mean anything. There is no courage to create something specific that the audience can realistically find.
2. Most works are treated at stock. It will go up in price because it will be older in a few years, and thus more valuable as art. Because of reason 1 it is difficult to devalue the work because it is so vague.
3. It is generally not aesthetically pleasing in the most basic sense to me.
>>8128688
Because it's worthless, end of story.
>>8128758
Fuck you. People are bored of the avant garde which has been the same since the 70's.
>>8128757
/thread
>>8128757
>le capitalism happened
FTFY
>>8128688
Because it's dishonest. It has nothing deep going for it other than complete and total subjectivity. Subjectivity is fucking boring and shallow.
People don't know how to derive the layers of meaning within art that isn't abstract subjective trash. Old art was art that was created with a stern purpose of expressing an idea to an audience. And not only a singular idea, but layers of meaning hidden within the skin of the art. Meaning that may never be unlocked by those who experienced the art many years later. It wasn't created hoping the audience makes up their own minds. It was created with true meaning and purpose.
The difference is that a pure work of art will forever express something solid to an audience thousands and thousands of years later, that same meaning will be held to those throughout the ages. This "modern art" doesn't even convey a decent point to an audience 10 years after it's creation.
>>8128816
What does that mean?
Because people can't comprehend it.
>>8128831
french capitalism
Because it's far less deep than the artist imagines it to be.
Because it's all nu males and third wave feminists now. The majority of working class people can't get into that shit.
Like honestly, try dating an "artist" nowadays and she not being a fucking islam apologist and going "omg Drumpf xD"
>>8128868
LIBERALS ABSOLUTELY BLOWN THE FUCK OUT
will they ever recover?
#TRUMP - 1
#BERNOUTS - 0
>>8128688
As Iong as it doesn't lead to a holocaust, burning witches, etc, I'm cool with this.
Also this meme is pure false dichotomy, but you won't let that stop your circlejerk, so have at it.
>>8128875
So sarcastic, funny.
But even more funny will be how Bernie Gutman won't get the nomination.
>>8128884
Trump will make America great again!
Can't wait to see the looks on the spics' faces when the wall is built.
>>8128688
It's hated by the sort of reactionary turds who frequent /lit/ and /pol/
In the real world, there is bad "modern art" (however you define it) and good "modern art".
All art was "modern" at some stage, and some of it was hated. For example impressionism was despised by the art establishment of the day. The good bits of it have survived, the shitty bits have not.
Tate Modern (London): 4.7 million visitors per year
MoMA (New York): 3 million visitors per year
>>8128868
damn, i only needed a "sjw" for a line on my /pol/ bingo card
>>8128910
>All art was "modern" at some stage, and some of it was hated. For example impressionism was despised by the art establishment of the day. The good bits of it have survived, the shitty bits have not.
Did you feel nervous when typing this out, because this argument is sketchy as fuck.
Most artists I meet tend to be mediocre minds that use to many commonplaces and silly doxa when explaining their outlook.
>>8128910
The last decent piece of art was made in the 1950s which was paradise on earth, a literal Utopia.
Back then, gender roles were perfect, and the white man was in his rightful place.
Since then the world has fallen to Marxism, and soon we'll have world-wide communism.
We need to wake up and recapture the glory of the 50s. Take the redpill and spread it
>>8128929
The 50s was such a shitty time period. I bet you are some fat neckbeard anyways. You would get laughed at in the 50s, probably sent to some military camp for rehabilitation.
>>8128753
how does you know???
>>8128935
And yet now we coddle such neckbeards and tell them that their autistic opinions are valid and that they are not worthless pieces of shit... Thus said neckbeard is correct, the 1950s were a better time.
>>8128688
Because there's no skill in it anymore. Literally anything can be art if you come up with some bullshit symbolism behind it.
Some cunt can smear her period blood on a canvas and claim it's about women's struggles and people will eat it up. Some douche can piss in a jar with a crucifix in it and claim its a criticism of religion, and people will eat it up because of the supposed "meaning" behind it, which is purely constructed by the artist as a form of self masturbatory satisfaction instead of actually looking to move people emotionally.
When anything can be art, then nothing is.
![3f9b6e7beff54863b094dc42935c3c3b[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/iFEWHTR.jpg "3f9b6e7beff54863b094dc42935c3c3b[1].jpg")
>>8128935
>>8128945
>pic related is evil according to modern day nu-male feminists
Because it's a meme shared by a minority of people that everybody hates
>>8128992
Notice how you got no replies from the assblasted lefties
>>8129003
Why? It's clearly a polyamorist relationship.
>>8128995
Serrano's Piss Christ is pretty good though.
>>8128995
>there's no skill in it
Word for word the answer that came to my head when I read OP's question.
>>8128926
Not at all. For example, pic related was rejected when it was first submitted to the Paris Salon, because the nude included was not allegorical. The Salon rejected a number of impressionist works now considered classics.
Is it really difficult to grasp that it is mainly good (and/or popular, well-funded, hyped etc) artists whose work has survived? In the past bad artists (or those who fell from favour) were forgotten. There are exceptions, of course.
Of course now in the age of mass media and popular culture, anyone can produce any old shit and someone somewhere will like it. That explains why so many people still own Thomas Kinkade works, for example.
the captcha system appears to be totally fucked today
>>8129018
It's not. It's two white couples, with a child each. And as you can see, there is an absolute innocence and no degeneracy or filth or sin between the two children yet. It was a period of innocence and love of fellow whites.
Later, they will develop feelings for each other, get married, and have intercourse and thus ensuring the next generation of white children.
THAT'S WHAT AMERICA WAS ABOUT.
Now it's degenerated into a veritable Hell on Earth
>>8128995
And I forgot to mention, any legitimate criticism of it can be handwaved as someone simply "not getting it", which creates this nebulous later of artificial depth that the artists think they're representing, thus preventing their work from facing any true criticism unless the critic wants to admit to their own stupidity.
>>8128910
Less than 1% of americans visit the MoMa each year.
Shameful.
I wonder how many of those visitors are foreign.
ALL
KITSCH
MUST
DIE
>>8129037
It's one woman with her cuckolded husband and her male and female lovers. The children are hers and her lovers, not the husbands.
>>8128770
>being this much of a positivist
>>8129039
In fairness, although I would actually like to visit it sometime, I'm sure it's an absolute pain in the ass to get to, and then you have to cough up whatever it is now... 20, 40bux? for the privilege of Pollock. Most people are uninterested, and if you're even-handed about it, you can hardly blame them.
>>8129031
Get a load of this relativist.
>>8129003
>fedoras
>>8129024
>>8128995
Yeah, pic related took absolutely no skill to make. It's like you people don't actually have any understanding of modern art and are just attacking this vague notion you have of it instead
People don't get modern/post modern art. Art is not supposed to always look like naked women in the sky or war depictions.
>>8129057
I'm positive about my white, European heritage. Only liberal see something negative about it.
You calling me a positivist is a compliment. I'm redpilled.
>>8128995
>>8129038
This sums it up beautifully.
>>8129003
You have some gross faggot fantasy that the 50s was exactly like Stand by Me or exactly like a Norman Rockwell painting. You sound exactly like one of those fags like Stephen King who obsesses about their childhood in the 50s except you are a 20 year old neckbeard. You are sick in the head dude. Fuck off back to /pol/ you small minded shitstain.
>>8128868
>third wave feminists now
They're 4th wave and even worse they're revisionist swine.
This thread is embarrasing to even look at.
>>8128995
why is anyone buying this terrible argument? are you just samefagging?
>>8129077
I lold
>art have to be representational
>art have to be beautiful
>art needs purpose
>art have to be realistics
GET OUT UNCULTURED SWINE
![retro-housewife[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/OzayLml.jpg "retro-housewife[1].jpg")
>>8129088
>"this was such an evil time!"
>>8129101
Everything you listed is a product of an advanced culture, and yet you are calling us uncultured. You wouldn't know culture if it smacked you across the face.
>>8129105
Well yeah it was. Just look at that pedophile in the bow tie. He's bribing those kids not to tell anyone he had sex with them by giving them a cake and his wife is enabling this sick behavior.
>>8129109
He was being ironically facetious. I don't think you get it anon.
>>8129101
>art can be whatever I want
>art should be whatever I want
>Me me me me me
![art-1950s-20traditional-20roast-20dinner-20111024124850744154-420x0[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/2MbIj2R.jpg "art-1950s-20traditional-20roast-20dinner-20111024124850744154-420x0[1].jpg")
>>8129112
>"this is SOOO problematic, look at all these happy white people!!"
>>8129034
Because I don't want to be one.
>>8129120
exactly
dont you know danto and dickes
my main men
>>8129105
If you think this an accurate representation of what the 50s was actually like you are a fucking fool.
>>8129083
I saw that painting at the Botticelli exhibition at the V&A recently.
Remember that Botticelli was commercially successful in his lifetime but was largely forgotten for 300 years until he was rediscovered and repopularised by the Pre-Raphaeliltes
>>8129034
Not a part of the cult it seems.
>>8129123
Happy? That family is $30,000 in debt to the bank. There's no way they can ever pay that back.
>>8129126
dickies, sorry
>>8129088
In contrast with today's era of mass divorce rates, the resulting broken families and attention craving narcissist dickholes as a result, social alienation, dark triad evil shitheads dominating every aspect of social life and unemployment all around.
Not to mention the European ghetto's filled with salafists that are just ticking jihadi time bombs and the declining portion of whites in all white countries. What is happening now is a postponing of a bloody civil war of which Syria is just a foretaste.
Calling someone /pol/ and then going on a rant about how great life is today makes you a conservative by all standards.
>>8129105
There is no time that is inherently evil, and there is also no time that is inherently good. There was a lot of fucked up shit happening politically in the 50's in America. I am not saying the traditional white 50's conservative family is evil, but of course it's not some mythological perfect family either. /pol/ is just full of neckbeards who grasp to periods of history they never experienced as a way of expressing their lofty alt-right ideals in progressively deteriorating American culture. There are better things to latch on to than the 50s if you are in opposition of extreme leftism. You just make yourself look like an idiot if you paint the 50s as the perfect ideal period.
But you are trolling anyways so theres no point.
![7c4a4569abadc1ea1da35ff912c5ab66[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/snzFoDA.jpg "7c4a4569abadc1ea1da35ff912c5ab66[1].jpg")
>>8129127
>>8129134
Even blacks were living prosperously and happily.
This is what liberals want us to believe was an unjust time to ensure that Marxism will win
>>8129127
>Things weren't better in the past, not even in certain ways; now pass me that cocaine! We're going on a wild ride kids, buckle up! The future awaits, utopia no less! And things can only get better! Change is always good, remember; nothing was better in the past, so throw away those rose-tinted glasses! After all, we don't need eyes where we're going!
![retro-family-morning[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/hRopOCr.jpg "retro-family-morning[1].jpg")
>>8129145
>"look how unhappy they are! They're clearly fake smiles"
>>8129151
dude if you think the 50s were so much better switch off your computer and go and die in a minor car accident that would be easily survivable today
>>8129067
Except that clearly took skill to make and has aesthetic merit. If I lack understanding of modern art perhaps you could explain it to me? What makes art modern?
>>8129097
I samefagged once to add to it. And more people are disagreeing with me than agreeing. I'm fully open to arguments but if you're just gonna name call you can fuck right off.
>>8129151
This reads like my stereotypical idea of Hunter S. Thompson shit. Fear and Loathing, I like it.
>>8129148
Liberals do this with everything in the past.
It used to be that the right was the "muh present day is deh best" faction and then started naming all the bad shit that went on in previous centuries, but nowadays they have become the ones who will go "LOL NOTHING IN THE MIDDLE AGES WUZ GOOD U DUMB EVOLAFAG ENJOY THE BLACK PLAGUE".
All admitting that they want you to glorify the current era as much as they do.
>>8129039
>going to new york
![726dd0e8a2d62bf18ae1cee4e3f5e4eb[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/i5NZBkh.jpg "726dd0e8a2d62bf18ae1cee4e3f5e4eb[1].jpg")
>>8129164
>"look how unhappy they are! They are even Christian, ughh! The woman doesn't even work, she just has to stay in the kitchen all day, and take care of her husband and kids, and that's terribly oppressive!"
>>8129148
>This is what liberals want us to believe was an unjust time to ensure that Marxism will win
How is It's A Wonderful Life even possible unless you mean it's time travel propaganda.
I think the 50s was a great decade but it wasn't a conservative decade by a long way. The 60s was much more conservative in a lot of ways.
>>8129161
That's a fucking painting
>>8129148
my dad(who is black) was born in '54.
it wasn't a happy time.
you're supporting your claims with commercial images.
That's like using a picture of a family from a Burger King commercial to represent our generation.
![ab8de152995b5bb96ba206c5945ac36b[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/l6uXk0O.jpg "ab8de152995b5bb96ba206c5945ac36b[1].jpg")
>>8129185
This picture, for me, sums up the entire decade.
We need to make this sort of society resurface
If you really think people were so happy in the 50's then why did the 60's happen? Stop looking at the past through pretty pictures. Buy a postcard and jerk off over it if you have just don't pretend you know shit.
>>8129199
In reality, you're that budgie; trapped in a cage of another's ideology.
![6a013488670c86970c0148c679631e970c-800wi[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/7YnvEUP.jpg "6a013488670c86970c0148c679631e970c-800wi[1].jpg")
I'm literally crying going through these images.
If only I had been born 40 years earlier, I would've been happy. How can Western civilization have crumbled so much in such a short time?
>>8129067
Actually that just takes time to make no particular skill
That motorbike pic is equilvant to the "artist" who takes a photo, simplifies and prints and then paints this image. It's pretty trashy
>>8128688
>most people itt actually think visual artists are trying to be """deep"""
>>8129199
plot twist, the guy is hugging his children because he's just been diagnosed with lung cancer because tobacco was advertised as healthy at the time
Can you faggots one day maybe understand that people have different tastes?
Pic related, the most beautiful painting ever painted
![Church-family[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/D5spthN.jpg "Church-family[1].jpg")
>>8129222
I'm distraught that it had to end.
>>8128688
real answer: because art has moved for the most part into the academy, and most non-specialists not to mention the general public lack the critical apparatus necessary to appreciate most art. some of it is shit, but the art scene (I assume you mean visual art) really is not bad as reactionaries make it out to be.
>>8129230
>>8129230
Looks like your mothers mouldy minge
>>8129239
Good one, and now you've made me hungry
People don't understand art so they think they can put some kind of leash on it and also say what is and is not art.
That "stupid shit" like a trash can knocked over and arranged is art just like how whatever Michaelangelo painted is art. If people actually cared about art and not simply looking at things they'd learn to appreciate it in its own way.
Pretty much my entire point is shut the fuck up.
>>8129230
>Emperor's New Clothes
In fact, that's what all modern art is.
>>8128770
That's pretty good art if it can evoke that much retarded anger in you, I would say. The spaghettiopussy one, I mean.
>>8129243
>Pretty much my entire point is shut the fuck up.
You should have led with this, and saved a post.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lbece7RqZU
(((((Modern Art)))))
>>8129243
>"you don't understand" handwave dismissal of criticism
>claim that anything is art simply because you say so
>discrediting the value of visual aesthetic in a primarily visual medium
>wanting people to "shut the fuck up" in a blatant attempt to shut down rational thought
Convince me you're not an emotional retard. I'll wait.
Mindless veneration of craftsmanship, nothing more. And 99% of the people who cry about modern art don't know the first thing about the craft themselves anyway. So the process of photorealistic painting takes on a certain mystique for them. Anyone with half a brain knows that there's something of value in both traditional(ist) and modern art.
>>8129105
Do you think cartoons are real? Honestly, I need to know.
>>8129268
>Anyone with half a brain
Heh, he's speaking from experience.
Nothin' personnel, kid.
Because it's nihilistic, self-involved, lazy, elitist & promotes rampant pretentiousness.
MODERN ART =/= CONTEMPORARY ART
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>>8129275
Traditionalists, everybody.
art is dead, but not for the reasons you think it is. artists have become pseudo-philosophers. duchamp and his fountain had some symbolic meaning, but his other pieces like the wine rack were done entirely to question its aesthetic validity. these experiments have some value, but as time passes, the ironic and avant garde experiments he brought forth have slowly become serious, normative pieces - typically intended for the academic population. the apotheosis of this is the charlatanic work of damien hirst, specifically "the physical impossibility of death in the mind of someone living"
i dont see why people hate modern visual art when conceptual art exists. it's academic masturbation.
>>8129199
>We need to make this sort of society resurface
I'm telling you now it has never seen the light of day, it cannot re- anything.
>>8129266
But if you're putting limitations on art and saying what it is and what it isn't then you genuinely do not understand it.
Honestly some of it is pretty fucking amazing.
>pic highly related
>>8129292
Same thing is happening in literature mate. It's our generation
>>8128929
>the 1950s
>a time of social democracy and advances in equality
Everyone has the 1950s wrong. It really was quite good, but not for the same reasons that conservatives make it out to be. It was a time of high wages, economic prosperity, and a flourishing postwar culture. Minorities were gaining more rights, and America was more accepting to the idea of desegregation. It was a flawed but still pretty sweet era.
>>8128688
well the second image is the product of an entirely different society, you want art like that bring back the bourbons, bring back the absolutist monarchy, bring back power centralisation take away muh constitution. Art is simply the reflection of the society in which it is created. You want aristocratic art? Bring back the aristocracy. You want to live in a decent, comfy place with all your rights in tact? modern art it is.
>>8128929
>3 people replied to this
you guys are fucking stupid.
>>8129304
There is no limit to my definition of art, only that it has to adhere to some form of aesthetic.
Something being aesthetically pleasing with no deeper motive is fully valid. A simplistic piece that doesn't take much skill is equally valid if feeling can be conveyed through it.
The problem arises when art becomes a platform purely to "force" a meaning without regard to the art itself. Aesthetics are important when it comes to art. A piece can be ugly but still aesthetic, as the aesthetic is still being regarded as an important function of the medium.
>>8129318
looks like a fucking magic the gathering card lmao
>>8128688
i can't speak for everyone else, but i dislike a lot of it (not necessarily all) because it is usually characterized as one of the following
1. it's a hamfisted political statement that tries too hard to be edgy and/or contrarian out of shock value and little else (whoa, that guy used shit instead of paint! scandalous!) and as a result gets praised because it panders to the right people
2. its value is heavily dependent on how much it costs, making it come off as materialistic and disingenuous (whoa that can of shit is worth a shitton of money, it must be deep) and the "artists" themselves are just greedy as fuck
3. there is very little actual criticism of it, its just hurr durr you don't get it, there's no discussion of craft or execution or anything and as a result it's just a massive circlejerk
>>8129216
You're really grasping at straws
>>8129378
I just had the privilege of seeing that irl, so I liked it
>>8129292
To be honest, "The Physical Impossibility etc" is pretty rad as a purely aesthetic experience. Divorce it from whatever nonsense Hirst says it's supposed to represent, and what you think of him as a person and artist, and the ridiculous amount of money that it sold for. What are you left with? A presentation of a vicious predator, dead. You can walk around it, see it from every angle in absolute stillness, notice where it has begun to decay. And you people think of yourself as aesthetes.
>>8129388
>it is usually characterized as
So you admit that your knowledge of modern art is secondhand at best?
>>8129388
>whoa, that guy used shit instead of paint! scandalous!
I think most of the famous shit flingers (Gilbert and George would be an obvious example) tend to do it in reference to painting materials of a bygone era. In the Dali autobiography he writes about how royal shit was highly prized for painting.
So none of you know the difference between modern and post-modern.
>>8129435
>look at me everyone I read a wiki page just now!
Yeah, everyone knows.
>>8129426
i'm not admitting anything, the OP asked for my opinion and i gave it
>>8129431
i don't necessarily hate all contemporary artists. There wasn't really any craft in Piss Christ, for example, but it wasn't just an attempt to be edgy because no one was told that it was urine and that was done on purpose
>>8128770
I don't think you know what liberalism actually is.
>>8129474
So you don't know the difference between modernism and post-modernism? I'm confused, what does my post have to do with wikipedia. It has something to do with this thread.
>>8128929
Do you seriously think now is when full communism will take over the world, when there is not a single communist society in the world and the number of state socialist countries is shrinking?
You're seriously brainwashed.
>>8129512
How can something be postmodern if what is modern is what happens now? Is postmodernism a representation of the future?
>>8128774
for you
>>8129528
>How can something be postmodern if what is modern is what happens now?
>>8128929
The 1950s was when modern art was happening, dumbfuck. Jackson Pollock died in 1956.
>>8128745
Sounds like a wonderful system. How do I join?
>>8129528
Modernism isn't just what is happening now, you are conflating the terms modern and contemporary. When people talk about modernism as a artistic or philosophical movement, they are talking about a movement that started in the late 19th century which ended in the early to mid 20th century, and was replaced by post-modernism.
>>8129148
The 50s were ok and you are a complete moron. Whiteboy, you best be trolling.
Didn't /his/ kill these threads here?
Anyway saw this today and few other Klees today and I really liked them.
Unrelated but is it possible today to own a great piece of art for about 10000 to 20000 dollars?
I've been thinking about how I would love to own just one great work of art in my room that I could always look at and take inspiration from.
Any art is fine and no one should be discouraged from making whatever art they want to. But it shouldn't be venerated unless it's clearly the product of hard work, hard thought, and dedication. It isn't that hard to tell when that is the case - work by Morton Feldman or Cy Twombly or something are obviously legit. 18-year-old art students' sculptures about the patriarchy probably aren't.
>>8129251
Is that what you value highest? The ability to invoke anger?
>>8129105
Go to bed Caleb
>>8129243
Or maybe I just don't like litter.
>>8128688
You've answered your question with your image retard
>>8129105
>>8129003
>THIS TIMES WERE GODLY LOOK AT THIS PIECE OF CARTOON ADVERTISEMENT ! LOOK THIS IS PROOF
Cmon dude
I don't under what post-modernism means and what is modern. So is post-modernism the future? I don't get these terms and don't care to figure it out. I hear people say that shit about literature but when I'm reading the books they seem similar to other books I read. Is there a pre-modernism? Or is this just some buzzword like Millennials but no one actually knows what it means and depending on who you ask the definition is changed?
>>8130224
I've got much more of a background in music than visual art, but the idea that displays of technical skill are the only artistic expressions worth admiration is pretty shallow IMO. If you consider the goal of art as communicating ideas, then why would you want it to harp on the same themes for hundreds of years?
A lot of these "real works of art" thing is the visual equivalent of "le born in the wrong generation like this if you remember when real music required skill" and a ton of them are just rote memorization and repetition of previous artists ideas.
Some of these things that are really not technically impressive do have some idea or concept that they're playing with, but typically they do cater to an audience that's more well versed in the subject, I though minimalist music was really stupid until I worked my way through a lot of Modernist and 20th century Avant stuff.
Sure a lot of it's trash but I'd argue that's true of most art being produced at any point in history, just because a work of art looks pretty or would be hard as fuck to play doesn't mean there's any appreciable depth to it
>>8130340
>If you consider the goal of art as communicating ideas
I don't.
>>8130333
post modernism is just what comes after the artistic/philosophical movement "Modernism"
TLDR version, Modernism i concerned with experimentation and progressing it's medium, always being new. Where Postmodernism tends to be characterized by more cynicism, deconstruction, irony and playing with context.
>>8130340
>the idea that displays of technical skill are the only artistic expressions worth admiration
I didn't say or imply that though.
People can admire whatever happens to tickle their fancy. I just think it's usually obvious when the work is from an artist who was truly dedicated to it, regardless of whether it requires "technical skill" or not.
>>8130347
What do you consider it to be then?
If it's just to look pretty or feel good then why not just go admire nature or use drugs or something?
>>8130366
>I didn't say or imply that
>it shouldn't be venerated unless it's clearly the product of hard work,
What do you mean then?
>>8130363
Sounds boring. So the only way for post-modernism to die is for a new wave to become popular?
>>8130373
It took effort to create. That effort might've gone into thinking or experience or education or whatever. Not necessarily "skill".
>>8130392
Pretty much
That seems a bit unlikely at this point, at least for a while. Pop art and academic art communities are so divorced from each other at this point that they really don't interest each other. A lot of post modernist stuff is made for people who already have a formal background in that medium, and they seem to be enjoying it for now
>>8130409
My mistake then, I completely misunderstood
>>8130368
I do admire nature and I do use drugs but art is another thing that provides another experience. I do not care about an artist's philosophy or opinions. My interest in art is the same as my interest in the creek by my house. I hate philosophy, I hate opinions, I hate people and I hate artists. I want the artist to disappear. I do not care to see them in their work and I do not look for them there. I just want the art. But some artists are just far too loud to ignore so I would really like to drive a railroad tie into their stupid fucking skulls. Now THAT would be a pleasant experience. A beautiful colour, a beautiful sound and a pleasant change in texture felt through the hands. That is the type of art that I really enjoy.
daily reminder that you view old art through a modern brain
>>8130425
No prob I probably wrote my thoughts poorly.
Did you study music at school? I'm decently versed and play classical guitar, but got scared away from actually studying it in college.
/ic/ here.
I'll give my worthless opinion:
I consider good or real art, something that consists of a good idea (it's inner message), a technique based on the historical skills of the masters and emotional catharsis you feel from it.
So far all masterpieces fill those three values, idea+technique+emotion.
Look it up and any piece of art that contains those three will be considered masterpieces among all cultures and among all periods of time.
Of course this mean post modern art usually fails at the technique (non existant), usually exposes dirty or ugly emotions that are nothing but gross shocking garbage and some intelectual deepness that is nothing more than shallow liberal ideas.
Overall there's nothing good about that art.
Classical masters despicted shocking scenes that were huge scandals by their peers (caravaggio) but they were even seen then as beautifull pieces, even by their oponents.
>>8130432
Ok, so you are just extremely shallow
Also edgy
>>8130438
wew lad u r blowing my mind
>>8129239
underrated post
>>8130438
>brains and emotions are somehow dependant on culture and not biology
>brains magically have evolved into radical diferent shit in 500 years
>>8130417
I'm not that into art so none of this really affects me or bothers me. I just like to do my own thing if I draw.
Who is making and appreciating "modern" art? Conceptual art? Not the elite, nor the commodity purchasing class, but the academia, and the wannabe academia.
So why do we assume that academia has any clue about art?
>>8130444
Yeah I used to, played Oboe for about 6 years and took a bunch of theory. I never really liked anything I wrote though, and the orchestra culture is actually just really stressful, and petty. You'd think that within groups that had to cooperate to produce good sounding music people would be on the same page as each other, but it's full of really huge egos and extremely competitive. I once heard that something like 70+% of professional orchestra musicians tested positive for amphetamines or similar, and I absolutely believe that based on my experience.
I eventually got out of that and I'm in tech now, still play for fun or in small groups, but the culture in the academic/serious professional circles is really draining. You shouldn't regret passing it up, playing with friends or alone was always the most memorable and rewarding to me at least.
>>8130468
you don't have the same level of consciousness as someone from the middle ages do you?
>>8130451
So anyone who isn't fascinated by some painter's dull opinions is shallow? I'm not that guy, and yes he's obviously an edgy faggot, but looking to art (in any medium) for visceral feelings and aesthetics isn't shallow, it just means you know what interests you and what doesn't.
I have nothing against people who like modern art, I just don't see it myself. I will say, however, that they do seem to be somewhat gullible (cf. Exit Through the Gift Shop).
>>8130489
why anybody is giving a fuck about that circlejerk?
the ones that are pushing the envelope are videogames.
>inb4 games are crap
games are the ones that are now who are pushing the limits, taking all previous art forms into something new.
AAA games need so much quality is something similar to ancient marvels.
>>8130501
So you imply that morality and basic morality values like justice, caring for elders, women having to be pure, fairness magically have changed since them?
>>8130451
Everyone has their own tastes and interests. I never told you what you should like. I never belittled you. I simply told you that what I appreciate is different from your assumption. And sincerely I do find murder appealing. The image of someone flippantly calling another "edgy" as the stranger guts them is a fun one. The smugness would inevitably cede to something else wouldn't? What would that look like? I'm sure if you bring your imagination to bear you can come to an understanding of what I appreciate about that type of scene.
>>8130448
Why can't dirty and ugly emotions be art?
Art is going to change so much with VR.
>>8130537
I never implied that.
If you see master works, there's plenty of ugly emotions being despicted beautifully.
Shitty modern hacks lack the years of training, so they end up making the same stupid shitty shit (human wastes, fetuses, randomness, corpses, garbage).
>>8128817
>>8128795
>>8128721
>>8128740
>>8128868
>>8128995
Wow, I see you guys are all rising high school juniors! It must be exciting finally being upperclassmen, huh? Have a good summer
>>8130564
me on the right
>>8130564
Explain Matisse's artistic evolution, my man
>>8130509
>So anyone who isn't fascinated by some painter's dull opinions is shallow?
Not even sort of implying that they're all of merit but
>just turn your brain off brah
>>8128688
>pic
Both sides look like huge wankfests, screaming "look what I can do!".
>>8130564
Why can't you depict ugly shit in an equally ugly manner? Wouldn't that be more appropriate?
>>8128770
>liberalism
>Marxism
Are you literally this retarded. You realize those two are mutually exclusive, yes?
>>8130582
do you mean garbage like this?
It's garbage.
I see better shit on /ic/ or reading doujin shit from the comiket.
>>8130590
Art = beauty.
Art that isn't beauty is art that doesn't glorify our human life, want ugly shit?, simply google news, there's plenty of ugly shit, kids starving in africa, refugees drowning in the middle of the ocean, americans bombing muslims and muslims child hospitals, muslims stoning women, cuck shit.
Why do you want to add uglyness to the world?
>>8130598
He's using the American definition of liberalism. From an American perspective, hes correct. The term means something different to the rest of the world.
>>8130599
>Art = beauty.
No, it isn't.
>>8130586
Why do they have to put fucking stamps all over it?
>>8128868
>nu males and third wave feminists
is this what you call people who disagree with you?
>dating an "artist" nowadays and she not being a fucking islam apologist
so you don't actually hate modern art, you just hate a hypothetical girl you made up in your head who you hypothetically disagree with. lol ok
>>8130584
If I don't care about the idea being expressed, I'd rather seek out something that gives me aesthetic pleasure. If I wanted ideas, I would read philosophy.
>>8128745
>>8128757
I see the idea here - that postmodern art represents the commodification of art as opposed to the pure aesthetic treatment of art.
In late capitalism, even high-brow 'art' becomes a meaningless, empty, ironic attempt to gain exposure and money. What distinguishes 'modern' art, then, from mass-market trash like YA novels and superhero movies? It seems to me like both are created to generate hype and money, nothing more.
More importantly, how do we get out of this pit? New Sincerity is annoying, cloying, kitschy and just as fake as postmodernism most of the time.
>>8130611
has been the proper definition of masterpieces during all history.
I don't care about your shitty garbage like picasso doodles.
I only consider art something that has a technique based on tradition, provides an emotion on the viewer and has a deep and intelligent idea.
So far modern garbage doesn't even come close to what I consider art.
Pls don't use the maymay that anything can be art, is a tired cliched used by hacks and non artists and the jew paying academics to write shitty fanfiction over garbage.
>>8130599
>matisse
>garbage
try harder
>>8130629
You're showing your ignorance. Read Kant because I'm not wasting my time with you.
>>8130599
>want ugly shit?, simply google news
I wish some of this stuff was on the news.
>>8130613
Why do we put la Gioconda on an air-tight casing, meters and guards away from human hands, in a glass pyramid where silence is the imperative?
>>8130599
>Art = beauty
This is a very simplistic way of looking at things.
>Art that isn't beauty is art that doesn't glorify our human life
One could argue our human life shouldn't be glorified. The point of depicting ugly shit is to make people feel uncomfortable, confused, disgusted even. How are we to survive as a race if we simply ignore the ugly shit?
>>8130601
American liberalism is not Marxism. You are also fucking retarded.
American Liberalism is about equality and social security programs under a capitalist system. Marxism is about class struggle and exploitation of labor in capitalism.
>>8130640
I suppose the answer to both questions is "Chinese people"
Maybe President Trump will ban decadent art.
>>8130648
American liberalism has it's roots in Marxist thought.
By saying equality, you mean economic and social equality, both Marxist ideas and rooted in the idea of class struggle. Welfare and social security programs are anti-capitalistic in essence, and the more we embrace programs such as these, the closer we are to a Marxist society.
>>8130657
It's good enough.
>>8130599
You have literally no conception of movement, aesthetically or regarding artistic evolution. Also, pic related is one of his earliest. Why do you think that he moved from this to Danse? Does your smooth little brain even register the concept of exploration?
>>8130631
would you care to show me anything from matisse that isn't garbage?
pic related:
composition is pretty basic, symetrical shit without tension.
use of color is random and have no cohessiness.
brushwork is poor and amateur.
knowledge of anatomy is inexistent.
use of focal point is non existant.
values are non existant nor there is contrast.
perspective is non existant.
use of materials is non existant.
again, pretty much an amateur work as fuck.
I see better shit on /ic/
Also the narrative of the image is simplistic as fuck.
I don't see nothing, not even a good thing about this painting.
Seeing this painting, I can conclude he's amateurish as fuck and most people dickride him are not real painters.
I can't wait for the ultimate end of art, random acts of pure violence, the murder of an innocent in the gallery, it will "shock" and "make you reconsider what a work of art is." The murderer will become an art-world celebrity and will never be charged with a crime because it is art. Eventually his career will culminate in the ultimate end of Eliot's call to "make it new," a murder-suicide alongside Damien Hirst.
JG Ballard was right about everything
>>8130640
That painting is not ugly anon, there's plenty of technique and vission and training to make it beautifully.
>>8130641
What's else to do?
Life is already meaningless, it's a nihilistic view of life to not make art that is beatifull.
Again, there's plenty of old masters who were doing beautifull paintings about deads, corpses, rapes, envy, cannibalism, horrible topics, but that in the end are beautifull.
>>8130635
Kant wasn't a painter, why should I take his opinion worth a shit?
Imagine if Kant made a philosophical book about why eating shit is better than proper food.
Also nice weak minded faggot, you rather repeat opinions than form your own, using your own arguments.
>>8130688
>composition is pretty basic, symetrical shit without tension.
>use of color is random and have no cohessiness.
>brushwork is poor and amateur.
>knowledge of anatomy is inexistent.
>use of focal point is non existant.
>values are non existant nor there is contrast.
>perspective is non existant.
>use of materials is non existant.
shouldn't we judge art on its aesthetic effect rather than on its objective technical qualities? personally, I really don't respond to that painting, but ones like pic related give me this real nice sense of pleasure in viewing them.
>>8130670
>American liberalism has it's roots in Marxist thought.
Neo-Keynesian economics has influenced American Liberalism 10x more than socialism.
>Welfare and social security programs are anti-capitalistic in essence
again no it doesn't. They were started to revitalize the american economy.
American Liberalism has small influences from Marxist thought, sure. But the guys point was that they were the same thing. That's wrong.
>>8130698
>there's plenty of technique and vission and training to make it beautifully.
Are you an artist yourself, Anon?
>>8130682
if you think that painting means he had top skills, you're deluded as fuck.
>>8130700
there's no aesthetic effect neither in your painting.
It's like reading some basic ideas with awfull and shitty prose filled with typos.
It's shit.
Also I can explain your sense of pleasure in technical terms.
Do any of you even do painting or are simply repeating stupid comments?
>>8130698
>it's a nihilistic view of life to not make art that is beatifull
>thatsthepoint.jpg
>>8130705
I do drawing and painting for fun, even while I'm just an amateur.
Painting is visual language and therefore it should be value on terms of it's expressiveness, same as when you enjoy more complex prose than simply YA garbage.
>>8130708
I ask this everytime I hear a nihilist:
Why don't you kill yourself and avoid to keep living?
Are u a coward?
Are u an hypocrit to that philosophy?
Don't you 100% believe that life is worthless?
Why not simply kys?
>>8130670
>American liberalism has it's roots in Marxist thought.
American Liberalism's roots go back to the founders, who were all assuredly the Liberals of their day.
Your roots go back to not knowing how a fucking apostrophe is used.
>>8130629
>I only consider art something that has a technique based on tradition, provides an emotion on the viewer and has a deep and intelligent idea.
>and
You realize that your idea of masterpieces have, up until the industrial revolution, have all been commissions? That artists were told what they were to depict, how to depict it, what implications they were to convey, how to convey them, how long they had, where they were to do it, etc., etc.
Expression was intensely limited, and deviation usually resulted in legal action. The first instance of an artist actually winning one of these cases was in the goddamn Baroque period with Feast in the House of Levi.
Also, if you don't think that Picasso isn't one of the most tradition-dedicated artists in history, you're out of your fucking mind, you fucking idiot. You have no fucking notion of art, aesthetics, history, or anything beyond personal taste.
Just admit it.
>>8130708
nihilism is boring
>>8130707
Good goddamn, it IS true that retardation can't recognize itself
>>8130707
I'm pretty sure you're baiting but whatever
I can only guess at what you're trying to say.
>there's no aesthetic effect neither in your painting.
This is a highly personal thing, but you should be able to understand how others can take pleasure in such forms of art?
>Also I can explain your sense of pleasure in technical terms.
What do you even mean? Please explain my sense of pleasure, then? How does this even advance your argument?
>>8130573
>multiple people come to the same conclusion.
>they must be wrong
>>8130715
>Why don't you kill yourself and avoid to keep living?
Nihilists believe that the only truth is that there is no truth. I don't killing oneself is the next logical step after accepting this.
traditional fine art (i.e anything that would be shown in a gallery) has become largely irrelevant
people often say we need to 'fund the arts' but I fail to see anything being produced to support that argument
>>8130723
Do you think those artists personality and ideas were expressed in those commisions?
Mozart didn't wrote much original pieces for fun and all his major pieces are commisions.
So because mozart pieces wasn't originals they're not imbued with mozart personality.
>le picasso maymay
He had potential but he decided to break the norms and be a special snowflake.
I don't give a fuck if he had the skills to make realism and masterpieces, most of his shit is garbage, deal with it.
Imagine if Pele stopped suddenly playing soccer and became some hobo asking for money.
>>8130728
Generally all the aesthetical pleasure can be explained by the use of colors, composition, narrative, line work, curves, and other technical terms.
Do you think musicians can't explain why a song can be sad or happy?
>>8130736
It's the logical step.
Or they're cowards and are afraid to die, or they deeply inside still believe life has meaning.
Because art has moved from technical and well planned conveyance of message to "I'm going to throw something on the canvas because I 'feel' it and THEN tell you the meaning of it."
The only reason why Pollock and Picasso are even notable now is because they started their own art movements, if their movements didn't catch on they'd simply have stories similar to van Gogh or lesser still your average college artist baristas.
After the dadaist and abstract movements and general philosophical change from believing in a god-like being to believing 'what you want' post-modernism has become the shithole of trash art it is today.
There's no technical skill unless it's used commercially in comics or vidya or films. Everything that ends up in art shows now is just throwing stuff together and then telling your intention with a bit of marketing.
>>8130720
The liberalism of the founders was classical liberalism, equality of opportunity, natural rights, laissez-faire economics, small goverment that sort of stuff.
Modern american "liberalism" is more focused on forced economic and social equality, socialized welfare, big government etc. It's largely antithetical to what the founders had in mind.
>>8130744
>Generally all the aesthetical pleasure can be explained by the use of colors, composition, narrative, line work, curves, and other technical terms.
And so? I can explain how the simple blue-white coloration of the Matisse I posted brings me a sense of piece, how the simplicity of the figure encourages a sort of relaxation; in more technically detailed pieces, much more intense feelings emerge, this can be a good thing but art should seek to express the full extent of the emotional spectrum.
>>8130744
>It's the logical step.
How so?
>>8130744
>Imagine if Pele stopped suddenly playing soccer and became some hobo asking for money.
False equivalence. Cmon man. Art has no objective or goal like soccer does. Art's role is not to please your stupid ass.
>>8130715
I see.
Now tell me: Would you enjoy a life where you were being watched constantly? Where, when you did wrong, a barrage of reprobation came your way; when you did right, appraisal came just as overwhelmingly. And all of your moves, all of actions, even those you had not thought of, down to the socks you're wearing, were at all times being judged and recorded, and everything you do was being deciphered, everything in a painting need to have intent, need to be the most it can ever be, to have perfect precision.
Now ı'm not much an authority myself, but a world where all of the pain ı've had to go through in the search of beauty, to either preserve or destroy it was constantly being thrown back onto my face, does not seem like a pleasing doom.
The recognition of acquiered skill is a great compassion, it's good empathy--please don't turn it into something else.
>>8130755
yeas, I do agree the piece is not complete garbage.
It's coherent and nice.
But I still focus on the following:
It's basic.
There's no high level of mastery on the technical aspects, so the message ends up as some watered basic shit.
Have you seen stuff like the meninas?
compare that feeling.
Hell, even hentai doujins contains a bigger aesthetical impact than that piece.
I assure you some satoshi urushihara porn waifu illustrations will give you a bigger feeling.
>>8130756
Because otherwise they're cowards and don't trully believe that ideology.
Would be like seeing some nationalist right wing not avoiding some nigger from burning his flag.
>>8130715
>I ask this everytime I hear a nihilist:
>Why don't you kill yourself and avoid to keep living?
You're fucking retarded. You don't even know what Nihilism is. Read a book for a change, will you?
>>8128688
>why is modern art hated?
Because it's awful.
Thousands of years to learn how to paint well and then some dickhead invents the camera
Modern art is just people throwing a fit because they were born too late to be relevant by being good at art
So they try to be relevant by being bad at it
>>8130771
>Because otherwise they're cowards and don't trully believe that ideology.
You didn't answer my question, just repeated why you said earlier.
>Would be like seeing some nationalist right wing not avoiding some nigger from burning his flag.
What the literal fuck are you talking about
>>8130752
holy crap you literally described the New Deal America. Do you think 40s-70s America is Marxist? Obviously fucking not. Now stfu.
>>8130764
>no objective
false.
The objective of art is the seek of beauty.
If you take that then art is meanignless, it's a dead end to argue about something that has no meaning or even a definition.
So you're wasting time argueing about something meaningless.
It's a suicidal point of view.
I hold the position that the point of living is beauty and that beauty hold all the range of emotions, happyness included.
beauty also holds spiritual meaning and for some people it could change their lives from degeneration into being worthy persons.
See how many people the beauty of jesus message can rescue them from drugs.
Your opinion means my life has no meaning, therefore has no value.
I don't share that opinion.
The goal of life is to seek beauty, and art is the only way to archieve beauty.
Anime is basically the pinnacle of human achievement in art. Shit moves nigga!
>>8130775
>>8130778
nihilims was the answer some faggot from the XIX century invented to destroy tradition and don't hold humans to society limitations, fullfiling their own potential.
as such nihilism doesn't hold the view that life has a meaning beyond the personal one.
But as you can see I'm talking about the teenager view of nihilism.
>>8130780
The New Deal had roots in Marxist thought. It featured vastly increased government regulation of housing, insurance, trade, etc. These are all things Marx thought should be socialized, and therefore The New Deal brought us closer to Marxism. Never said it was literally communism, though.
because people always pull up examples of it being bad like the abstract stuff
>>8130799
>as such nihilism doesn't hold the view that life has a meaning beyond the personal one.
True. Again, how is suicide the logical conclusion to believing this?
>But as you can see I'm talking about the teenager view of nihilism.
Is this some sort of disclaimer to let us know you have no idea what you're talking about?
>>8130707
all you've done this whole thread is assert certain qualities as requirements for "good art" without explaining why they're required.
>>8128817
Give use one example of "pure" art, and please peel back each layer of meaning so that we can see for ourselves the objective truth hidden within it.
Thx.
