/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>claims to be an artist
>just reads things

>>6122878
>History!?
OK Cocksucker!
find my a tree with more than 200 rings
or a semitary older than 150 years
Don't site the Fake buildings they are GAY!

>>6122878
Know what shitter Van Goh was an artist, shitty one but a real one at least. Picasso was a fucking fraud, eat shit op

>>6122895
pyw

>>6122898
And so you are a fraud cOPe

>>6122903
I'm proven right again...

>>6122906
A fraud

I know history and think Picasso was a bad artist who sometimes gets shilled for being able to do paintings well before he went for what he is knkwn for. Even though these works are not even good.

>>6122878
picasso probably didnt even gave two fucks about most of art history

>>6122878
11/10 people who I've talked to that know a lot about art history and culture suck at making art. It's either always this abstract bullshit that requires a 'sophisticated visual eye' or a niche medium. It can be argued they care more about the concept of art than the creation or that they get caught up in their little circlejerks and lose sight of what normal people think looks cool. Don't get me wrong, I'm absolutely sure in their circles their art is totally edge pushing and beyond our time, honestly I'm too much of a pleb to understand. Anyways what was that about that Bacon guy?

>>6122878
Damn, i can gain my drawing&painting skills just from knowing the specific times an artists from 500 years ago took a shit?

>>6122878
>be me
>artist
>dont care about art history
>just draw characters i like

>>6122878
Picasso was a bad artist, yeah

Picasso was the epitome of "White men can get away with anything if they pretend to be smart while doing it."

>>6122878
Art history readers are not artists. They are lesser than the tranime artists.

>>6123122
Found a nigger, boys. Get 'em

Frosty pooky eddy eddy

>>6122878
When I was younger I couldn't wrap my mind around why people thought Picasso was a good artist. When I dissed Picasso, I felt superior. Then I discovered his older work, and thought that was what made him a real artist, and maybe he just kinda sold out or went with some modern nonsense trend. I mean, it made sense to me at the time, because the modern art world is pretty pretentious.

It took me a very long time to appreciate Picasso and understand why he actually is an incredible artist. I mean, I still don't really quite understand, but now at least I do appreciate him. Art just has such incredible depth, and the more you make something that is unusual and requires a lot of understanding to appreciate, the fewer people will actually appreciate it. So much of the pretentious art people was people pretending they understood Picasso and appreciated his work, even though they didn't really.

These kids who have the audacity to diss Picasso are just fedora wearing atheists with massive egos who've never drawn a pimple in their life. They're so focused on art being conventional, they don't even understand the most rudimentary concept of what art even is.

No one will remember them when they're gone, but they all know Picasso's name.

Curse Satan boaes

>>6123149
I understand what you're saying and your point about people pretending to understand is exactly why so many unconventional artists are fucking insufferable. Going against the grain could be considered 'the path of the true artist' as it's one that is looking for the novel, the thing is, it's one thing to look for the novel and try to shove it down other's throats, and it's a completely different thing to find the novel and have other come to naturally appreciate it. That's the difference between a fucking pretentious prick and one of the greats. I have nothing against Picasso but the culture that surrounds ''enlightened art'. The artists who make us look at everyday ordinary things in a new way will always be the greats because their art doesn't try to exclude, it is inclusive of the human condition. In other words, fuck pretentious 'enlightened' who's only reason for creating art is mental masturbation.

>>6122963
Plenty of artists know art history who can do good art. It's just that the ones who make a point about history tend to be the shitty ones and these mainstream academic fucks don't consider artists who know other areas of art history to be learned in art history.

>>6123154
So many unconventional artists are insufferable? I don't know... I mean sure, but aren't conventional artists even more insufferable?

I personally like unconventional art and enlightened art. You may want to try not sounding pretentious when you criticise others for being pretentious. Just saying, some self-awareness is much needed there.

>The artists who make us look at everyday ordinary things in a new way will always be the greats

Yeah, I could get behind that.

Speaking of Picasso, Jackson Pollock is another somewhat overrated artist imo. When these guys did what they initially did, it was phenomenal because it was so unique. However, they then just rinsed and repeated the same style over and over. The interesting thing about Pollock is he used a lot of tools that weren't used for painting, but the idea of splashing paint on a canvas just never appealed to me very much. It's only certain ones that have a lot of detail and interesting colors that I like, but most of them I find rather boring.

And who's that guy who makes all the weird ugly sculptures you see in parks and plazas? I guess there a bunch of them, but that stuff just always disgusted me.

A lot of these guys are highly celebrated by the art world, and I find them mediocre. I guess compared to them Picasso is a genius. Still, my friend's 8 year-old daughter makes more interesting art in my opinion.

I attached a picture of her art.

One thing I really like about Picasso is the quote: "It took me four years to paint like Raphael, but a lifetime to paint like a child."

>>6123178
Too bad he never learned to paint or draw like Raphael in the first place. So it's a meaningless quote.

>>6123178
>>6123196
Picasso made something unique for his time (but so did others like Matisse) when most paintings were realist or impressionist. We also have to place him in his time to understand his paintings and art and the people he interacted with but also the people who popularized his art (French art circles and actors, popular women since he was a womanizer too). He's a man who went through two world wars and some of his earlier works are genuinely interesting. I think people hate Picasso because Picasso is popular and popular things tend to get popular. Why was he so popular? Because he knew how to market himself. He's sorta like the Sakimichan of the 60s (lol).

>And who's that guy who makes all the weird ugly sculptures you see in parks and plazas?
I fucking hate that guy too but seems every city council likes to put those "experimental" ugly monstrosities in every square and roundabout.

Art history is fairly simple.
>40000BC-600AD : cringe
>600-1500 : cringe and gay
>1500-1900 : gay and Italian so double gay
>1900-2017 : kinda cool for a while then hippies fucked it up and then it was cringe and gay
>2017 : I start drawing
>2017-current : based

@6123244
Impeccably shit taste

There's groups of famous artists that are liked by normie non-artists just because they are the only artists they have heard of.
Van Gogh, Picasso, Dali, Shiele
Monet, Degas, Renoir, Klimt, Manet, Cezanne
Da Vinci, Raphael, Michaelangelo
Pollock, Warhol, Rothko
Vermeer, Rembrant, Rubens

It's only when you start trying to draw and paint that you discover so many other artists that still hold up to this day rather than just being known due to innovation or historical context. It makes you cringe when you hear one of the artists above because you know they have spent no time actually looking for art they like and were fed those artists in school or popular media.

>>6123271
Pollock has some zing to his art. Its some retarded drips on a canvas, but they’re not purposeless

>>6122878
>I don't need to be able to draw because I understand Picasso's emotions
lmao, I'd call you a crab but you can't even get into the bucket in the first place

Being a good artist and then choosing to make garbage because it's le 20th century so things have to be WEIRD and DIFFERENT MAN doesn't make your garbage good

>>6123196
Absolute funniest thing I've heard someone say about Picasso in here so far. If you aren't familiar with his Blue Period, you should probably get familiar with it.

>>6123271
First of all Normies haven't heard of half of those. Second of all every accomplished artist respects all those artists too. Thirdly, plenty of normies diss Picasso, Van Gogh, Pollock, and Monet, so what on Earth are you even talking about?

>>6123365
Yeah, I mean art kinda actually does have to be weird and different in the first place to be art. There's nothing creative about drawing conventionally. You're the kind of snob who calls anything you don't like trash, as if you're taste is the epitome of quality, when it's clearly undeveloped. You sound like a picky eater claiming certain vegetables are bad as if it's a fact. I hope your Fedora falls in a puddle.

>>6123798
Do you really think someone will read your shizo bait nigger baka.

>>6123122
>Spaniards
>White
pick one

>>6123801
>Asks an incredibly stupid questions, but reaches epic levels of narcissism in trying to make it sound like a legit insult.

Bwahahahaha
I love 4chan, so much entertainment.

>>6123809
You will never be a Picasso

>>6123815
But I'm off to a pretty good start, right?

>>6122878
picasso is basic bitch boomercore taste and if you are younger than 30 you should be ashamed to bring him up in a convo about art

>>6123798
What does blue period have to do with Raphael, you blind fuck? Unless Picasso and people who believe in that quote thought and think doing "realism" is somehow the same as painting like Raphael, in which case that is a superficial way of looking at Raphael and art, from people who claim to have special insight.
He could not even draw like Raphael let alone paint. Actually, show me that one drawing in red chalk with Madonna and child done in the tastelessly exaggerated classical style by Picasso, so I can laugh at how apish Picasso's lines are. I have seen countless old master drawings, many from real llife. I can tell a Raphael from the rest by a glance. Picasso's red chalk drawings with the hatchings are laughably amateurish, lacking in grace, control, and harmony, compared to raphael.

>>6123938
You need to fuck more skanks if you ever want to be like picasso

>>6122878
why exactly should I be versed in art history if I just wanna draw anime pussy?

>>6122878
Did 4 years of art history and if you think Picasso was good at any point, let alone good for art in general, you're a beg and retarded

>>6122878
this isn't a real art forum it's an anime forum full of retarded zoomers what do you expect

>>6123244
you need to be over the age of 18 to post

>>6124110
You're problem is with language. The key part of that quote was "like". Instead of putting so much effort in measuring your dick, why don't you try actually understanding what he meant by what he said?

>people who believe in that quote thought and think doing "realism" is somehow the same as painting like Raphael

This just proves that you're feigning ignorance and trying to make the other person seem stupid. It's a classic psychological manipulation tactic.

Congratulations, you're an asshole.

>>6124201
Good think I don't want to be like Picasso. You need to realise there are more important things in life, if you don't want to remain a shallow looser.

>>6125327
I'm not sure why "Good think" was at the start of that. That's a bizarre typo.

>>6125330
Oh right, I meant to say, "Good thing..." Lol