This painting of a black square is worth millions of dollars. It's boring to look at and everyone can draw one, irrespective of skill level. Even my 3 year old brother can draw one. So why is it so praised and so valuable? Is this madness?
>>2453747
its worth rather reflect the disgusting economic inequality in our society. Regarding its value, it is clearly subjective, it is probably its connotation and producer that makes it a valuable from a collectors standpoint.
>>2453755
So basically people pay for the artist's name and fame here? Someone would pay 60 million because... it was Malevich's hand that drew a square and ten filled it with black paint?
>>2453758
Well, arguably its not only their fame but perhaps conceptuall originality or aesthetic and importance in a historical context that makes it collectable. People don't pay a fortune to people that try to make similary pieces but aren't the originator of the ideas them selfs.
>>2453758
Malevich was a great artist, I don't see how it's weird that people want to collect his work. It might not be as elaborate as his other work, but it still holds the value as being created by Malevich. His care went into making that piece.
>>2453747
Don't know enough about it to judge. Paintings tend to spike in value if they articulate a relevant theory (and if their creators are in with the right crowd). It's not just about skill. Read more if you want to dip your hand into those deep pseudointellectual pockets.
>>2453747
You just have to google Malevich and Supermatism to know why people eat this shit up. Doesn't matter if you don't buy into it, you're an idiot if you sit there and bitch about how confused you are about how valuable something is without even taking a second to look into the movement in which it was created:
"...a blissful sense of liberating non-objectivity drew me forth into a "desert", where nothing is real except feeling... ("Suprematism", Part II of The Non-Objective World)"
"For Malevich, it is upon the foundations of absolute non-objectivity that the future of the universe will be built - a future in which appearances, objects, comfort, and convenience no longer dominate."
It's in opposition to Constructivism and materialism which you should also look into for context.
>>2453747
it's worth that much because bourgeois folk make it that way. how they spend their money is out of your hands, shut the fuck up.
>>2453747
It's one of the first pieces of art that isn't a representation or interpretation of something. It's just a square. The concept behind it, not the actual painting itself, is what makes it worth millions -- and extraordinarily important to modern art.
OP should visit a modern art museum and invest some time into it, then complain
instead of looking at art on a PC screen and mindlessly follow the mainstream dislike of modern art.
>>2453811
But I've been to one and modern art is indeed shit.
>>2453809
Why? There's nothing to fucking discuss, this is nothing new, shitheads like you make threads like this every month and it's the exact same kind of post every time complaining about the same kind of shit art. You know the answer to all the questions you're asking.
>>2453809
Are you illiterate?
It's supposed to be a just a black square. The theory explains why that was desirable or aesthetically refreshing when it was created. It's a shame you're too narrow minded/focused on your own shallow expectations to imagine the intellectual environments of different time periods, and how works like these might've affected them.
>>2453747
> OP doesn't know that art like this is used to launder money
OP please take an art history course.
Please spare us your banal uneducated opinions.
Read up on art history and aesthetics.
This is like someone looking at the japanese language and saying, "oh it's just scribbles, why would someone write a book in this chicken scratch?"
fuck
>>2453841
And you totally don't get my point. Despite what was going on and the trend of that time. paying $60 million for just a black square is stupid. When Malevich painted it he never meant for it to be fucking 60 million. It was a statement. If he was alive right now he would have laughed at people paying such money for a simple black square.
>>2453860
Except he's right, Jace.
>>2453869
He would be if art was just about making pretty pictures. Unfortunately there's more to it than that chief. Art that pays attention to theory in other fields and capitalizes on paradigm shifts is just as valid as the masterful figurative shit that gets your dick hard.
>>2453868
It always was a black square :^)
>>2453877
I guess it's cool among hipsters of all time to see shit when there's nothing to see.
>>2453747
It's interesting because it's the birth and the end of art at the same time
hello art friends,
what price do you think an authenticly compressed digital copy of pic related would fetch?
>>2454746
Nothing because you have zero value as an artist therefore no one would listen to your opinions therefore you would affect nothing and no one therefore existence of your art is pointless therefore 0 value ( maybe negative value for shitposting) now remove yourself from genepool
>>2453747
can we pause for a minute to mourn the fact that this painting is so fucked because of poor conservation? i know everyone is flipping about about their ill informed views of malevich and modern art but can we all agree that something that is historically important shouldn't be kept so poorly as to have cracks and color fading to the extent black square has?
>>2454784
Yeah I cringed at that when I opened it. I know most of these type of works are made by layers and layers of thin oil washes, perhaps he fucked up his ratio somewhere?
I had a chance to see some of Maleviches work as part of a retrospective. Photos don't do these bitches justice.
Or you know, that it's a deep valued high chroma purple.
>>2454930
Or my screen is miscalibrated. Gg
I'd expect such a thread from any board but this one.
>>2455274
The vast majority of /ic/ is actually pretty retarded when it comes to art.
It's literally money laundering dude.
ITT: Emperor's new clothes
>>2458963
Majority of /ic/ came here because they like cute anime girls
Not because they like rembrandt
>>2454781
not gonna make it
>>2459435
I love Rembrandt's work and I still think that this 2deep4u art is just a hipster circle jerk.
>>2453747
The contemporary art market is entirely based on money laundering.
>>2459460
I went to reddit once too.
>>2459460
lemasterofdeception.xls
>>2453806
It's an interpretation of a square you mongoloid.
>>2453747
Crap like Newman, Malevich, Kandisky, Picasso, Reinhardt, Rothko, Klee, Pollock, and similar degenerate idiocy such as "white square on white background" or "two red and one black line" or "paint drops here and there" or "retarded square anatomy" are designed exclusively to :
1. Distill art into something worthless and common, something "everyone" can do, which helps deteriorate the culture of the civilization and ultimately remove value of everything good.
This paves way for shit like abstract paintings, modernist avangarde, not only in art, but also architecture. music, writing. Think of shit like Liebeskind, Corbusier, punk, noisecore, Rowling, etc.
2. Launder money (minor).
Modern art should be thrown onto piles and burned at city squares. World would lost nothing if you burned all of it.
>a 3 y/o can do it
a 3 y/o can input things into a calculator and computer as well. It doesn't mean they will do it correctly or have the sense to do it right.
Rather than technical skill think of their aesthetic sense.
>>2459814
art is subjective math is not.
there is no right in art so fuck off
>>2459857
Art has very clear right and wrongs.
The point was however that there is a difference between technically being able to do something, and choosing to do it a certain way.
a 3y/o can look at a chart and input a set of numbers he was told to type. a 3 y/o can also point a black square.
Why would he do either of those things though?
You know how fiat currency works, right?
If you collectively pump up some schmuck artist you "create" xxxx amount of money by selling it to some status seeking nouveau riche/government institution. If you keep investing time in doing verbal blowjobs to his work (it might be your job anyway, depending on occupation), then you multiply it. Galleries and, by extension, art communities are a lot like banks, that lend money they don't have. Abstract garbage is optimal, because it has no inherent value, so what makes it or breaks it are authoritative 3rd party opinions.
Welcome to modern art, don't stay too long.
>>2459694
It's pretty straightforward tho, and it's a well known fact. You can invest gigantic sums of money into these easy to produce goods that have been given arbitrary value. Ever wondered why south american drug lords' houses are full of expensive paintings? You really think it's because these people like art?
>>2459806
To some people art isn't merley a craft it is an medium that can create impactfull statements that influence and challange our perception of reality. When it comes to art as craft and science there arguably are masterpieces that only by the merit of its technicality should be praised.
But considering that the decay of anything, civilization included, is an inherent process of progress. The edgiest art will maintain and change, to provoke, in order to challenge the current world view. And I will bet that we never will find an ideal world view that is fit for everybody.
I fundamentally disagree with you. Not because I'm infatuated by pollock, malevich or kandisky's work. But rather because the tenet of yours isn't very appreciative of art as an individuall expression. You seem to want homogeneous selection of art only accessible as a tool of expression for the few and cultivated, which never could be sustained in reality. It is naive to think otherwise; and without it being a free medium of expression we probably would't have amazing artist that draws from abstract, expressionist, fururistist art traditions.
Whether or not it's millions of dollars important isn't an artistic question, it's an economic one. High end art is less about the art and everything about having a portable asset that has a lot of potential worth as an investment.
>>2460011
>When it comes to art as craft and science there arguably are masterpieces that only by the merit of its technicality should be praised.
That merit's called mastery. You can dress it up as cold, unfeeling science all you want. It makes people marvel at a simple gesture of a lone figure draped in shadow. It captures world as seen by the human mind, evokes beauty and majesty within the mundane and is the basis of western art.
>But considering that the decay of anything, civilization included, is an inherent process of progress
The word as you use it is meaningless. Degradation is not a type of "progress" anyone cares for, unless they seek profit from it.
>The edgiest art will maintain and change, to provoke, in order to challenge the current world view.
It already stopped. The only thing the current piss jesuses and the like challange is lowered expectations - by lowering them even more. A cesspool has been made of the place in culture previously reserved for art for rich kids to shit into. Nobody expects anything from it anymore.
>merley a craft
Craft is far more than simply "making a statement", i.e. using the pretense of "art" as a soap box to preach nonsense only connected to the piece via the artist's/criotic's I-say-sos. What is this fine blank canvas about? Patriarchy? Starving Ethiopians? Oh wait, it's a wall panel, nevermind. To top it off the whole charade usually masks a profound lack of anything meaningfull to say.
>But rather because the tenet of yours isn't very appreciative of art as an individuall expression.
Please, peddling emperor's new clothes in excrement form on the public's dime has fuck all to do with "freedom of expression". People can go force out paint pellets through their genitals all they like in private and share with friends and family.
>You seem to want homogeneous selection of art only accessible as a tool of expression for the few
A few trustfund babies and sycophants already make "high art" their little fortress, huddled around government grants and art gallery owners/curators. I'm sorry, does that little circle of mutual appreciation make you feel liberated?
>would't have amazing artist that draws from abstract, expressionist, fururistist art traditions.
Good riddance. Wouldn't plaster most of that on a wall of a toilet stall. The exceptions are usually techinical marvels in drag.
You probably imagine these somehow counterbalance what we lost when peddling bullshit took over the pedestal of art? Social proof does wonders I guess.
>>2460428
*"technical"
>>2453747
>It's boring to look at and everyone can draw one, irrespective of skill level
>doesnt understand suprematism
American education everyone. Just kill me now.
[spoiler]i know its a bait but suprematism needs some loving[/spoiler]
>>2460426
>That merit's called mastery. You can dress it up as cold, unfeeling science all you want. It makes people marvel at a simple gesture of a lone figure draped in shadow. It captures world as seen by the human mind, evokes beauty and majesty within the mundane and is the basis of western art.
I don't disagree with you here. I only think that it is a antiquated notion that art mainly should be assesed based on the criteria of skillfull renditions of reality; which was the basis of western art for very long. There have been many other tradition over the world, equally impactfull, that never where anchored in chiscuro approaches to capture the beauty of life. See the japanse ink impressionist, fractal art and architecture from the muslime era; and not to mention the countless ground breaking new aestetics from the west including the light impressionism and expressionism and cartoons.
What I'm getting at is that what I consider "technical" and you "mastery": the chiascuro, meticulous rendition and accurate anatomy and proporitons, is only one kind of aesthetic; it is an amazing aesthetic, but perhaps not appropriate for art with satirical, humorous, or more conceptuall content.
>The word as you use it is meaningless. Degradation is not a type of "progress" anyone cares for, unless they seek profit from it.
Its just a way to say that old ideas die with the senior generations, and so does its institutions, laws etc, that held back certain kinds of progress.
>>2453747
It's representative of the US's victory in making other people adapt to its capitalistic & individual driven culture.
I don't understand all this "everybody could do this" shit. A lot on /ic/ revolves around the thesis that anyone could it make to a good artist if you just work hard enough to get a certain point of skill where everybody on /ic/ says "yeah man you did it you are a good artist".
What the fuck.
Why would you like to make Art something as boring as this shit. Sure you can reach a skill but your skill ist just a part of the tools you can use to express your ideas. It all evolves around ideas and when you have ideas there is always the option that someone comes by and turns it all over. And that you never got the idea to paint a black square shows how unique the idea was. Which is the reason behind the price.
Art shouldnt have to be a craft where you have laws and your do's and dont's. Laws wont give you freedom for surprising elements, laws are for robots. And now look at the Captcha.
>>2460426
>It already stopped. The only thing the current piss jesuses and the like challange is lowered expectations - by lowering them even more. A cesspool has been made of the place in culture previously reserved for art for rich kids to shit into. Nobody expects anything from it anymore
>Please, peddling emperor's new clothes in excrement form on the public's dime has fuck all to do with "freedom of expression". People can go force out paint pellets through their genitals all they like in private and share with friends and family.
>A few trustfund babies and sycophants already make "high art" their little fortress, huddled around government grants and art gallery owners/curators. I'm sorry, does that little circle of mutual appreciation make you feel liberated?
I don't appreciate the pretentious college art either, most people don't. It is easy to impugn their legitimacy and get a crowd behind you. Why, even bother? Most of them are throwing money in the shitter and get no applicable vocational training or valuable experience that they need in real life anyway.I still have deep appeciation of mature artists that experiment with new ways to express ideas visually or push aesthetics frameworks in innovative ways that captures the imagination of the viewer.
>You probably imagine these somehow counterbalance what we lost when peddling bullshit took over the pedestal of art? Social proof does wonders I guess.
I think you lose the forest for the trees. In every generation of artist there have been subpar art and artists. Do you know what happens to them? They disapate into oblivion. Whats left are those that, with the cultural buffert of their time, create excellent art and those who's new ideas have influenced a new aesthetic that communicates different and new beauties.
Do I like contemporary art?
sure, it is what art is supposed to be in this day and age.
Do I think it's worth millions?
heck no
modern art is money laundering.
Also malevich was jewish.
>>2463647
>>2463650
Those appear to be German citizens saluting by a mound of burning bodies. That goes against the picture I have that most German citizens were relatively unaware of the real reality of the atrocities committed in the camps.
Goes completely against it. I saw a film once the reich had fallen where winning troops were parading the citizens through the camps to show them what was really going on - and all of them being surprised and crying and such.
really just goes right against it. here are people saluting while inhaling the smell of burnt flesh . probably most out of fear; it is still unbelievable to me.
>>2454784
The Soviets didn't give a shit about the conservation of any art that wasn't socialist realism.
>>2466295
Those are books being burned, anon.
>>2466303
oh ok. Thanks.
I was actually just reading about Nazis and their hatred of "degenerate art" this morning.
>>2466314
no not "okay thanks"
you typed out that whole paragraph based on assumptions. that's crazy.
>>2454746
Pure genius.
This piece has changed my life.
