/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

[Anonymous No.4548141]

"They have accepted the prevailing belief that art and writing are merely forms of entertainment. They’re not seen as transformative forces that can change a human being; that can change a society. They are seen as simple entertainment; things with which we can fill 20 minutes, half an hour, while we’re waiting to die. It’s not the job of the artist to give the audience what the audience wants. If the audience knew what they needed, then they wouldn’t be the audience. They would be the artists. It is the job of artists to give the audience what they need.”
-Alan Moore

What can a painting do to someone? According to his standards, what sort of visual art can possibly have this type of impact on someone? Are there examples of paintings with this level of profound importance?

[Anonymous No.4548181]

>>4548141
>Are there examples of paintings with this level of profound importance?
People would put paintings on their most sacred temples, their tombs, everything needing a feeling of beauty and sanctity would deserve a painting hand. The problem is to know if our ironic postmodern shitposting mentality is still able to look at a painting properly, just like we cannot stand silence or stay focused for an hour.

[Anonymous No.4548199]

>>4548141
The modern mind isn't capable of seeing anything as much more than a product or something to entertain it.

[Anonymous No.4548224]

At the moment the Subject became the Consumer, Art became Product. Even the concept of individually is enslaved by consumerism ideology: you are what you own.

[Anonymous No.4548256]

>>4548141
In this day and age, the main medium you're really gonna influence someone with is movies (film/animation). Let's be realistic, nobody is really looking at paintings these days and contemplating the deep ideas behind it. Every form of entertainment competes with every other form for attention. On the scale of "potential to influence a person", I would put comics and literature 2nd place after movies, because they have a story. And music maybe 3rd, because of its emotional impact. There's only so much you can do with a single static image.

[Anonymous No.4548306]

such reductive opinions

>artists not being able to focus for an hour
are you for real?

[Anonymous No.4548330]

>>4548256

You're conflating the medium's power with the medium's ubiquity. Film is incredibly powerful, sure, but how many things coming out of hollywood are ever going to move someone? How many Marvel™ comics?

Music is first, because even the most soulless of media has to acknowledge its power. Bad movies can't afford to have bad music. The shit that spews out of a frat party radio as white noise isn't what those people go home and listen to in their private time. You don't need to go out of your way to find good music, sometimes you will just encounter it, and feel it wash you away.

[Anonymous No.4550688]

>>4548330
Yeah, but I would still put movies first, because it's a synthesis of storytelling, visuals, and music. One of the best ways to get an idea across to someone is to tell them a story, which is why I ranked narrative mediums slightly higher than the purely emotive power of music.

[Anonymous No.4550761]

>>4550688
I have to agree with this anon based on anecdotal evidence. People will always mention how X album or Y movie changed their life, but I've never heard of someone saying their life was changed after seeing a painting by Rembrandt. They just say the painting "was cool" to see and that I should "check it out" one day. The same happened for Van Gogh's paintings, except people became more engaged with his paintings after they heard about his life's story. Starry Night is a lot more engaging when you learn he was in a mental asylum and committed suicide shortly after painting that night sky. What is going on in the head of a man readying to die? What does he see in this starry night?

Stories just capture our attention more than static depictions ever will. Hell, even I think dinky ol' Calvin and Hobbes is more life changing than one of Frazetta's paintings. Sure, Frazetta's buck naked lady stuff is gorgeous, but I don't think that it'll make me change the way I live. Maybe I'm just biased in favor of stories, but I think humans in general just like stories more than paintings without a story.

Though that does make me think about all the religious paintings in the past few eras. Maybe those hold more meaning for people...?

[Anonymous No.4550774]

>>4550761
>Though that does make me think about all the religious paintings in the past few eras. Maybe those hold more meaning for people...?
Those paintings told stories in times when movies/comics didn't exist.