/lit/ - Literature

Daily reminder that people who complain about the degeneration of art have never read a book on aesthetics, art history or art criticism. Daily reminder that people who complain about art degeneracy are about on the same intellectual level of pop music listeners who complain about classical music being "too long", i.e. children throwing a tantrum over something that they don't immediately understand because they can't immediately understand it. Daily reminder that people that invoke "beauty" are praising the immediate reaction as superior to the learned aesthetic understanding: if they had their way the art that they deem "beautiful" could never have been made. Daily reminder that they often conflate the terms "beauty", "Aesthetic", and "sublime". Daily reminder that these people think that photorealism is a good thing.
Daily reminder that in spite of all the talk of "correct aesthetic standards" they have never touched a book written by a formalist art critic, nor do they know that formalism is an actual thing. Daily reminder that the "muh degenerate" crowd ignores all the sociocultural situations under which all the different currents of modern art have been born: they ask the artist and the viewer to be purposefully ignorant of history and historically deaf, despite the fact that the art that they champion as standard of aesthetic beauty has never been historically deaf (i.e. the renaissance, romanticism). Daily reminder that these people have probably never been to Rome, Venice or Paris. Daily reminder that these people often complain about eroticism being present in art despite the fact that eroticism has been present in art since the Greeks (since prehistoric times, to be more precise).
Daily reminder that if these people had their way we would never have had all the Van Goghs, all the Otto Dixs, the Renoirs, the Modiglianis, the Picassos, the Kandinskys, the Matisses, the Monets, the Cezannes, the Klimts and the Joyces, the Rimbauds, the Eliots of the world: these artists that we correctly understand as being geniuses would have been classified as "degenerate" and thrown into a trash bin. Daily reminder that the most representative spokesman of this crowd of resentful minus habens is someone who thinks Metallica is good music. And, last but not least, daily reminder that there are even today a ton of artists who reject the avant-garde of the last century in order to paint in a more traditional or realistic way (there is, in fact, a whole website dedicated to this kind of stuff: artrenewal.com) but the "muh degeneration" crowd doesn't know about them because they don't actually care about art.

Daily reminder that people who complain about the degeneration of art have never read a book on aesthetics, art history or art criticism. Daily reminder that people who complain about art degeneracy are about on the same intellectual level of pop music listeners who complain about classical music being "too long", i.e. children throwing a tantrum over something that they don't immediately understand because they can't immediately understand it. Daily reminder that people that invoke "beauty" are praising the immediate reaction as superior to the learned aesthetic understanding: if they had their way the art that they deem "beautiful" could never have been made. Daily reminder that they often conflate the terms "beauty", "Aesthetic", and "sublime". Daily reminder that these people think that photorealism is a good thing.
Daily reminder that in spite of all the talk of "correct aesthetic standards" they have never touched a book written by a formalist art critic, nor do they know that formalism is an actual thing. Daily reminder that the "muh degenerate" crowd ignores all the sociocultural situations under which all the different currents of modern art have been born: they ask the artist and the viewer to be purposefully ignorant of history and historically deaf, despite the fact that the art that they champion as standard of aesthetic beauty has never been historically deaf (i.e. the renaissance, romanticism). Daily reminder that these people have probably never been to Rome, Venice or Paris. Daily reminder that these people often complain about eroticism being present in art despite the fact that eroticism has been present in art since the Greeks (since prehistoric times, to be more precise).
Daily reminder that if these people had their way we would never have had all the Van Goghs, all the Otto Dixs, the Renoirs, the Modiglianis, the Picassos, the Kandinskys, the Matisses, the Monets, the Cezannes, the Klimts and the Joyces, the Rimbauds, the Eliots of the world: these artists that we correctly understand as being geniuses would have been classified as "degenerate" and thrown into a trash bin. Daily reminder that the most representative spokesman of this crowd of resentful minus habens is someone who thinks Metallica is good music. And, last but not least, daily reminder that there are even today a ton of artists who reject the avant-garde of the last century in order to paint in a more traditional or realistic way (there is, in fact, a whole website dedicated to this kind of stuff: artrenewal.com) but the "muh degeneration" crowd doesn't know about them because they don't actually care about art.

>>12516963

>>9613343
How about some Julie Mehretu?

I wish more artists today were like Julie Mehretu.

She is very abstract and post-modern, but still firmly planted in the whole history of art.

Very few people even manage to straddle the line between standing on the shoulders of giants before you and yet be innovative. Especially in the era where a glove lying on the floor of a museum is mistaking for an artpiece.

Skill still exists OP. It's just become so narrow that it no longer subsumes all of art, but is now up to the individual itself.