/lit/ - Literature

>>15975138
You are dumb

>>15975138
The Qur'an.

All you need is this. Giga based book.

>>15975138
>NO NO NO YOU CAN'T LIKE THE WEIRD AVANT-GARDE WORKS I DON'T UNDERSTAND THEM
>IT'S STUPID!!! IT'S STUPID!!!
>MUH RENAISSANCE ART!!! MUH ANCIENT GREEK SCULPTURES!!!

>>15975140
>>15975161
cope

that would be as useful as criticizing Marvel movies for their quality.
The industry doesn't care about any of it as long as it makes money

>>15975161
In 200 years no one will want those works of art but people will still go to Rome to look at the work of Michaelangelo and go to Vienna and Prague for the 18th, and 19th century architecture.

>>15975138
Tom Wolfe - The Painted Word

Retard thread

>>15975140
You are a nigger.

In any age, most people believe that art has lost its way and no longer has quality. They're always wrong. Leonardo da Vinci petitioned to have pants put on Michaelangelo's David. Impressionism was savaged by critics of the day. Basquiat and Warhol had a combined exhibition that was considered a flop. Everything in that exhibition today would be considered priceless.

Gaugin or William Morris? Only one of these men saw the future.

>>15975241
>muh relativism
cringe

I like it how everyone tries to make a point for modern art in highlighting its worth, but that was not the question, was it?

Modernism is just the confusion after the collapse of monotheism. Soon, art will go back to its polytheistic roots, and summon a new era of greatness

>In 200 years no one will want those works of art but people will still go to Rome to look at the work of Michaelangelo and go to Vienna and Prague for the 18th, and 19th century architecture.
And? Do you think I care about what happens years after I'm dead? I wouldn't care what happens in the following hours of my death because, if you didn't know, i'd be dead.
I don't follow art, literature, music just so I can flex on normalows with muh based knowledge on muh classical art!!!
I follow art for the most human reason: because I like it and because it speaks to me.
You are a mindless automaton who's only criteria on you liking something is "do the critics say it's good"

>>15975241
Modern art is shit, though. It's only "valuable" because it's inflated by galleries..

>>15975294
You're the mindless one, you like it because it's popular now.
>>15975306
explain why it's valuable.

>>15975138
>Anabasis by Xenophon
Cool epic story
>Anabasis by Saint-John Perse
Work of genius
>Anabasis as a word
Sounds very nice

why is anabasis so anabased?

>>15975319
Explain why it's not valuable.

>inb4 Vonnegut

>>15975319
Because my opinion is the only one that matters to me as an individual

>>15975155
Where do you even buy this book?

>>15975138
Decline and Fall of Western Art

>>15975350
It is valuable because people value it, people value it because it's valuable.
Before it was valuable people said it was good and worth money, so the made people pay more for it, then it was valuable.

If you can't judge if a piece of art is done by a master, an amateur or a child at glance you are on very thin ice.
Wine fraud is very common, but people are happy to pay 20k USD for bottles, and enjoy them, when in reality the wine costs 20 USD.
The same is true with a lot of contemporary art.

>>15975261
How does listing historical facts necessarily imply cultural relativism? Do you think cultural aesthetic values have remained fixed throughout all of art history?

>>15975449
It's available for free. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Qu4HAKjeRE3zJcCghvzBS9uLG3tt0VSs/view

>>15975161
>YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND, ME SHOVING PAINT UP MY ASS AND SHITTING IT ON A CANVAS IS DEEP, INSIGHTFUL AND INTERESTING, JUST ASK THAT CRITIC

>>15975161
Big brain goy over here defending jewish scribbles.

>>15975496
fun fact about Richter, he can actually paint astonishingly well. Saw pic related in person, thought it was a blurry photograph at first. there is a lot of bad, uninspired modern art, but a retreat to just classical art is just as bad. I value a piece if art if it conveys to me that the artist is both a visionary and a craftsmen. that holds true for any period. there were many excellent craftsmen in earlier periods but all they did was soulless kitsch.

>>15975496
>Before it was valuable people said it was good and worth money, so the made people pay more for it, then it was valuable.
If by people you mean (((gallery owners))) and (((critics))), then yes.

>>15975651
Yes, not only (((them))), but very often.

>>15975138
Roger Scruton

I never understood why people thought that if you don't like modern art, you must necessarily want endless rehashes of classical and romantic art - I don't dislike innovation, I dislike the obvious hijacking of the arts by the watchful mandarins of our era, the cloistering academicization, and the downright incestuous scenes it spawns where artists, critics, and dealers care more about jacking each other off than actually making art.

>>15975140
>thinks its art because people told him
>inb4 same is true for Raphael Rooms in the Vatican city

>>15975138
Is their anything that filters brainlets more then Modern Art?

>>15975765
Yes, almost anything. Liking it means you are prone to following the herd, and that's not really correlated with intelligence.

>>15975189
Sounds interesting. The "Critical Reception" section in the Wikipedia article contains some delicious butthurt.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Painted_Word

>"The Painted Word hit the art world like a really bad, MSG-headache-producing, Chinese lunch," wrote Rosalind E. Krauss in Partisan Review.

>>15975794
Tom Wolfe has a lot of great nonfiction. "From Bauhaus to our House" is basically the Painted Word but for architecture (though I didn't agree with him entirely like I did when I read the Painted Word). "Radical Chic & Mau-Mauing the Flak Catchers" is also extremely relevant today.

>>15975765
Yes, actual culture.

>>15975765
>He thinks modern art filters people because they're low iq
On the contrary you can fully understand something and still hate anon. Modern art is truly degenerate. Its entire existence is to be a subversion of beauty as we know it, and only pushed by kikes, whose genealogy demands subversion.

there are really weird abstract genres of music that nobody seems to care much about
why is abstract visual art such a big deal?

>>15975765
There's nothing to understand. Based Avelina Lésper has BTFO this myth that "dude there's something very deep to get, you just don't get it bro."

>>15975830
because it's a billion dollar mafia

>>15975820
>I'm not low IQ
>I believe Modern art is a from of subversion pushed by Jews who are genetically disposed to subversion
Sure you're not low IQ man, I met a flat Earther who has 130 IQ once.

>>15975138
Blame the CIA for steering America away from class-conscious art. Everything else has been dominoes, even internationally.

Modern art reflects modern times: Godless, ugly, confusing, self-righteous, and ultimately meaningless, existing only for profit and academia. People who defend it are the type to defend intersectionality. The emporer has no clothes.

>>15975319
And you only hate it because it's popular now.

>>15975882
Muh soviet realism

>>15975496
I like this painting. I think it looks neat.

>>15976014
You could make your own.

>>15976014
That's the highest compliment you could give modern art.

I find it sad that there is no board for art like /lit/. /ic/ is too much about grinding "fundies" and everyone seems to want to get into manga or concept art.

>>15976147
Wasn't there one? I remember visiting a board and they were discussing how to paint and draw and all that. It probably was /gd/.

aren't things like Salvador Dalo also modern? do you dislike that too?

>>15976241
Yes, exactly. That is what I'm complaining about. If /lit/ was like /ic/ it would be all about crafting more exquisite fantasy/science fiction/ etc. prose.

>>15976352
I meant contemporary art, pardon the confusion.

>ctrl f "money laundering"
>0 results

disappointed

>>15976019
Prove it. Paint a Richter.

>>15975986
Artists are a symptom of the high regard that is placed on absolute trash these days. It’s the people who encourage and sanction the exhibiting of this garbage that we blame. We wouldn’t let them whitewash the outhouse. This and similar art represents all that is bad and is nothing more than The Emperors New Clothes. Historians say art reflects the culture of its people. This so called ‘art’ to our mind is totally despairing to any advancement and enlightenment of the human race. If this is a reflection of our present day culture, we really are in trouble. We spent a considerable amount of time and effort trying to ‘understand’ art. It was quite a miserable experience, because we felt really thick and stupid; because we couldn’t for the life of us see what was good about any of it. Then one day it just struck us that absolutely all modern art is simply worthless. Personally we wouldn’t walk to the end of the street to look at this trash.

>>15976850
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlOFtL8Ems4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcHyvqueuyA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6g33shACXMg

Follow something like that and tell me how it goes. It's 100% doable. Thre's nothing special about his technique.

>>15976887
Prove it. Paint a Richter.

>>15975182
The traditionalists of 200 years in the future will be fighting to defend the art of today, by definition. Your idea that history has ended with you is essentially narcissism.

There's only so much you can do with paint on a canvas. Maybe it's just exhausted.

>>15975182
Oh yes, the pinnacles of NEOCLASSICAL·ARCHITECTVRE!

>>15976068
Thats why its terrible

People only like modern art because it's 'currebt' and they are told to like it.

>>15975161
this lmao. I get it, you dont get it. But you dont need to write essays about how you dont get it

>>15977574
There's nothing to get. If you need a rethoric on an index card to explain your artwork then it's not art. Art speaks for itself.

>>15977005
There’s only so much you can do with words on a page. Maybe it’s just exhausted.

https://youtu.be/bHw4MMEnmpc

Get some hot choccy and watch this. Explains it perfectly (RIP Roger Scruton)

>>15975496
I think a lot of the 'value' in modern art comes from it being a money laundering, tax evasion and speculation vehicle. Also it has come to be seen as an asset class like real estate or equity and thus has been subjected to financialization with massive inflows of credit thus inflating prices.

It's not that modern art doesn't have value, just when a normal person looks at a work they value it based on their aesthetic appreciation. This is however only one component that would be considered by someone when spending large sums of money on a work.

>>15977563
People only like classical art because it's "old" and they are told to like it.

>>15978424
And because it's masterfully made and evokes emotions, something that never happens with contemporary art.

In 200 years from now "traditionalists" will be hailing 20th and 21st century art as "based" and "trad"

>>15978439
>something that never happens with contemporary art.
Projection and filtered. Happens to me and real art appreciators all the time.

>>15975496
I think a lot of the 'value' of modern art comes from it being a money laundering, tax evasion and speculation vehicle. Artworks are seen as an asset class, like equity or real estate, and thus have been subjected to financialization resulting in massive amounts of cheap credit which inflates prices.

That is not to say these works are not valuable, but I think a normal person values a work purely on their aesthetic appreciation, which cannot always explain a given paintings outrageous price. For people spending large sums of money, the way a given work looks is a very small consideration.

>>15978461
No, it never happens. It's empty and sterile and devoid of a soul. Name five (5) truly great contemporary artists.

>>15975138
This guy is known for his criticism of contemporary art from the perspective of an art historian:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Clair

>>15975319
You're the mindless one, you dislike it because it's popular now.

Twombly is great though. A furious explosion of "becoming". He's all in the marks, moving between coded messages, grafitti-like scrawls, and myth-making from ruins. A serious but funny guy weathering the storm that is our cultural climate

>>15978488
Happens all the time, you were just filtered.
Anselm Kiefer (personal fav), Peter Doig, Adrian Ghenie, Miquel Barcelo, Mark Bradford.

>>15978562
To add to this: A guy like Twombly is entirely in mark-making on a flat surface. Not deliberate mark-making meant to create some type of effect but the kind of mark-making where you can see the difference in temperament between kids before they start drawing figures. He's a specialized artist because that's what you have to do if you want to be an artist: you have to find an unexplored topic and "go for it". Just doing marks is a project for life

It seems provocative to you because he's not "making an effort" and "he's being too single-mindedly focused on scribbles, that's not the full human experience" but you're not thinking deeply enough about the world we live in. His effort is to exist in this mental space and to mine it for as much as he can. You can't do everything well but you can do one thing better than anyone else. It's not a comment on the world of art but simply the effect of living at a certain point in history where laser-like focus on "one thing" becomes a most beneficial tool for aesthetic development

>>15978665
Every one of them is mediocre at best. Some are even utter shit. I thought you were at least going to name actual masters like Lucian Freud. You're a pseud.

>>15978562
Whoa what a master.

>>15978444
Art can't get any more watered down and degenerate. It's been like this for decades now. Also:
>muh relatisivm

do you really need a book to explain why a blank canvas selling for millions of dollars is shit?

>>15975182
In 200 years earth has probably ridden itself of humanity...

>>15978822
Filtered hard. Now name five (5) truly great pre-modern/contemporary artists.

>>15978854
>>muh relatisivm
Brainlet take. The evolution of art is not unilinear. Neoclassical used to be seen as degenerate form. The same goes for every other newly evolved form.

>>15978424
Wrong. Put anyone who's never seen an artwork before infront of a modern artwork and an classical artwork. 100% they'll spend more time viewing the classical artwork and receiving the emotional experience the artist was trying to depict.
I've got a semi-vapid female friend who likes modern art better just because everyone hates it. She can't even explain why she likes it.

>>15978424
brainlet who doesn't know shit about art history take

>>15976887
You have no visual intelligence if you think that looks the same as Richter.

>>15975138
>/lit/ somehow doesn't know that modern art is just a money laundering scheme
Do you guys really think that a canvas with a few splashes of paint on it is worth 200 million dollars? Come on now...this is one of the most open secrets in the world today. Galleries just artificially inflate everything and make bank off of illegal organizations

>>15978933
>classical art is better because it has more popular appeal
Woah. Justin Bieber and Katy Perry must be the zenith of music then.

>>15978834
Think about how our brains work in regards to meaning-making and sight. Where does it "break down"? What are the constants? You can see this type of "basic" art as the kind that works with these concepts. Can a line look energetic? Can it look joyful? How does a "mature" scribble piece look different from an amateur or juvenile one? Art is the only way to look into the black box that is our consciousness and this is obviously a look into the more childish aspects, the kind where you grab a wax crayon and go to town. Can we unveil something about the child by drawing like a child? These are not meaningless explorations

>>15978665
>Adrian Ghenie,
lmao

>>15978974
Nice strawman. How can you defend modern art with a straight face. Pic related, national gallery near me. If anything, Justin Beiber and Katy Perry are more of an example of modern art, as it's modern, emotionless, bland, copied.

>>15975138
>and explain why it sucks?
Why would you need this? Isn't it self-evident?

>>15978933
No shit. Plebs are unable to appreciate the avant garde. Give it 100 years and they'll spend just as much time viewing a current contemporary piece as a classical piece.

>>15978982
>A Klee painting named Angelus Novus shows an angel looking as though he is about to move away from something he is fixedly contemplating. His eyes are staring, his mouth is open, his wings are spread. This is how one pictures the angel of history. His face is turned toward the past. Where we perceive a chain of events, he sees one single catastrophe which keeps piling wreckage upon wreckage and hurls it in front of his feet. The angel would like to stay, awaken the dead, and make whole what has been smashed. But a storm is blowing from Paradise; it has got caught in his wings with such violence that the angel can no longer close them. The storm irresistibly propels him into the future to which his back is turned, while the pile of debris before him grows skyward. This storm is what we call progress
No your shitty interpretation of a shit painting is't really the force of history.
(Yeah know your post was bait.)

>>15979000
>random gallery is reflective of an entire period of art
Why are anti-modern art niggers so retarded?

>>15978997
He's based, ngl

>>15975138
When you go into turbo-capitalism creativity becomes subordinate to money-making, so sincere artists like writers who don't want to chug unoriginal dumps that sell well end up withdrawing from the system and creating stuff that the bourgeois can't understand, living in ways that rustle their jimmies and adopting an aristocratic lifestyle basically as a fuck you to bugmen middle-upper class. It's nothing new really, bohemians, symbolists, surrealists, dadaists have been doing it for a long time.

>>15978834
This is unironcailly better than a Rubens.

>>15979018
I'm sure many people will come visit these amazing historical artworks.

>>15979024
>a showcase of more the 5000+ pieces of modern artwork is not a good representation of modern art
Right. So I guess the 3000 historical artworks isn't a representation either? Seeing as it's from some 'random gallery.' Get a grip

It's always the same non-arguments about money laundering, the vapid personalities attached to modern art, galleries inflating its worth, etc. Despite it all being true, they're still all humongous copes. You'll never take any interest in anything outside the easily accessible. You're subhuman. The romantic art you adore depicts the opposite of you.

>>15979056
No, it isn't reflective. Let them experience a hundred years of selection pressure first. All the based and trad classic art that you like represents only a tiny portion of what was actually produced. All the trash was lost to time.

>>15979065
Based retard

>>15979065
>you are subhuman for having a different taste

>>15979036
The avant-garde peaked with Russian monarchism, they weren't even industrialised. And futurism developed alongside fascism. Has zero to do with capitalism.

>>15979077
Exactly, it's trash. That's why modern art is shit. That's the point i'm making.
Sure there will be a pool of maybe 100 this whole century out of the billions of artworks created. But right now it's shit.

>>15979023
You consume design all day every day. Highly abstract stuff, small differences in pixels conveying different meanings. One font is serious, one font catches attention, one font indicates that it's working with less crucial information. Differently sized boxes directs your attention and separates content on your websites and in your newspapers. Buildings and cars look aggressive, inviting, modern, timeless, expensive and cheap. You're being attacked with "nonsense", constantly, and for some reason you're completely fine with it here

In art you're going to work with an finer comb than in design. It's more abstract and it might even beg you to consider your own response, if possible. One guy will spend his life drawing boxes. It's not asking for your "interpretation", it's simply the latest news in boxes and trying to see what a deeper understanding of boxes can give to you

Paul Klee is almost illustration so it's embarrassing to get filtered by him. Everything he does is about the musicality of colors and borderline cartoon characters moving about with clear allegorical and poetic meanings

>>15979095
>Exactly, it's trash. That's why baroque art is shit. That's the point i'm making.
>Sure there will be a pool of maybe 100 this whole century out of the billions of artworks created. But right now it's shit.

Will BasedKorea save us?

>>15979113
So i'm expected to see the 100 out of the couple million that probably are located in various countries.
It's the same with music, there are some timeless songs produced now. But I cannot appreciate modern music if i have not heard good modern music.

>>15979121
No. That's boring as fuck.

>>15979092
Retard

>>15979102
>ooooooohhhhh colors
Wow art for a retarded child. I'm so filtered.

>>15979169
How is it wrong faggot?

>>15979121
this shit is even worse than modern "art"

>>15979121
I don't like abstract art but this is bad modern art.

>>15978997
this is incredibly based. Making Trump a kike cornucopia of forms is probably based messaging I can imagine.

>>15979128
No it's not. And it's really good technically.

>>15979126
Playing a part in the avant garde, even just appreciating it, is hard work, and not for everyone. It's uncharted territory, and lacks the safety and guidance that tradition provides. Fundamentally, it's a leap of faith. If you land that leap however, you will have moved history forward, rather than simply being moved along with it.

>>15979191
I'm pretty sure it's just a work in progress. What is bad about it?

>>15979203
Boring. This shit was been done to death.
>And it's really good technically
Means nothing when a fucking computer could have made it.

>>15978950
It's a start. You can use those techniques to mimic his style.

>>15978488
I always love these kind of posts where it's like "oh yeah? name (x-number) of (y)", when you probably have never spent more than 20 minutes reading or staring at "modern art" (as evidenced by you being unable to find a less broad term for what youre prostesting against), so what happens is, someone names 5 modern artists (>>15978665), you obviously have to google them all, then say theyre all shit because your opinion is clearly already formed and youre absolutely not gonna make any effort to appreciate them beyond opening google images.
like lmao, i seriously doubt you could name 5 mannerist painters off the top of your head.

>>15979217
has*

>>15979205
I'm not trying to stick to traditions I'm just waiting until I see something I enjoy. Just like how I wait for a modern song that i'll enjoy and view as an iconic step forward. I do not see 'reggaeton' or 'modern rap' as a step forward. It's a fad, and I feel that is the case with current art. That may change in the next decade

>>15979018
No. Contemporary art is only justified by the rethoric behind each artwork. Otherwise it's indistinguisable from trash. Classic art speaks for itself and doesn't need any meme justification.

>>15976922
Probably not, traditionalists are still trashing the French revolution

>>15979184
You think fascism is not capitalist and the russian avant-garde was an independent phenomenon. Then use your aberrant misunderstanding of art history to infer that art has nothing to do with the material base of the society it develops in.

>>15979229
Nice cope. Those painters are all shit, the equivalent of a pooper scooper.

>>15979247
In 100 years contemporary art will speak for itself, and art of that time will be indistinguishable from trash.

>>15979217
Yeah because new good. amirite.

>>15979248
>I'm just waiting until I see something I enjoy.
Well go out and find it. You can't expect it to come to you.

>>15979252
>material base of society
Ok so you're an internet read commie.
Fuck off retard.

>>15979265
Nobody even remembers stuff from some decades ago meanwhile people like Velázquez were popular in their day. I don't see it happening. Contemporary art is peak degeneracy and watered down aesthetics. It will be seen like the fraud that it is.

>>15979265
Progressive smuggies is a pretty boring genre of post
The pendulum is swinging back harder than you think, in more ways than you think

>>15979267
>new good
Obviously not. >>15979203 is new and it's utter shite

>>15975138
Is it the /pol/ opinion that Italian Futurism is bad now?

>>15979290
>I don't see it happening. Baroque art is peak degeneracy and watered down aesthetics. It will be seen like the fraud that it is.

>>15979280
I'm not expecting it to come to me

>>15979296
What a breathtaking futurist painting in the op

>>15979082
you don't have a different taste. youre probablynot even into art. im gonna go ahead and assume that you never went beyond a superficial interest in "traditional painting" maybe going through the wikipedia entries for major art movements like baroque, impressionism, and maybe the couple 3 most famous exponents of them (at the very most).
you have some sort of political urge to attach yourself to traditional art, and to dismiss modernism, and you somehow interpret this as "having a taste"

>>15979298
>dude relativism lmao xD

>>15979285
Not even a commie lmao. Just not some idealist stupid child.

>>15979316
>dude historical facts lmao xD

MODERN ARTFAGS BTFO FOREVER

https://nypost.com/2015/10/27/modern-art-exhibit-mistaken-for-trash-and-thrown-away/

>>15979303
I have some Boccioni prints hanging up in my "free jazz and carcano collection" room that I won't post here because I know the FEEBs are watching us.

>>15979102
This is what bothers me about this stuff. We have people who aren't even designers (they don't care about kerning, they don't care about proportions, they don't care about colors) thinking they can understand why visual art moved in a more fundamental direction. You've already got the stuff you like from mimetic paintings in movies and games; heroism, a clear storyline, super detailed music by millionaire composers, the latest and greatest special effects in the service of showing all of hulk's muscles in full hd
Visual art moved in a more fundamental direction (how is meaning made, from which components) because that is what's interesting to anyone who isn't edified by Marvel movies

>>15979334
I accidentally sat on a piece at the Spanish Guggenheim that I thought was just a stone bench

>>15979259
who are your favorite painters and why do you like them anon? :)

>>15979343
Sorry, meant to respond to this post
>>15979178

>>15979318
Ok then why do you believe that art follows the material base of its society? And how was capitalism the material base of the Russian monarchy? (And capitalism isn't even the material base in Marxism, you haven't even fucking read the shit you spew)
You can't answer because you're trolling

>>15979334
kek saved

>>15979324
>dude everything will be the same always lmao xD

>>15978665
Those are all decent. The problem is the influx of talentless hacks who are let in through nepotism and propped up by the art industry. The paintings of these artists stand on their own and you don’t need to read a 10 paragraph placard to understand why they’re good. However they are in the minority and you have a lot of pseuds trying to inject profundity into lifeless art after the fact like with that duct taped banana.

If you like any work of art produced after pic related then you are neither trad nor based.

>>15978834
I'm sure if you hanged it upside down not even the painter would notice

>>15978834
My niece does this everyday.

>>15979376
>dude I'm so dumb that I'm incapable of pattern recognition xD

>>15979312
I don't like any art or have a taste i just think your mindset is retarded. The kind of vain mindset that just makes you seem like a little angry man.

i enjoy how "trads" cant realize that their posts read exactly like the boomer takes of uncles on facebook

>contemporary art is so deep bro, you just don't get it

>>15979377
>took a dead octopus and threw paint at it
>decent
No this is literal shit. When I lived with some artfag I drew some meme dinosaur on the chalkboard and he said I should go to the art school. It was shit but he said it was conceptually good and the story really said something.

>>15979381
Insanely stupid comment. Do you think it would matter if we hung an mri scan print upside down? What's the right way to view a picture like that? You (and the artist) can prefer it to hang a certain way but it's ultimately not what's important about the piece

>>15975138
The problem is conceptual art since people can just show you a piece of trash and talk it into art.

>>15979414
its fine to not have a taste, not everyone NEEDS to be super into everything. im just calling out all the trad nerds that somehow think that they have a deep understanding of art without noticing that all of their "appreciation" is just political allegiance

>>15978834
>>15979423
These are some of the worst I've ever seen. I thought Klee and Rothko were trash.

>>15979395
>dude if a past art style was ignored and then recognized then that means every posterior art style will have the same fate lmao xD
https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20170410-the-art-movements-lost-to-history

I don't like much modern art but think this is good. Anything like it?

>>15979425
LMAO

>>15979338

>>15979430
Nothing is important about the piece. It's inflated value justified by a meme rethoric in an index card.

The problem with modern art is that it was dominated by Jews. When the Med Goys get a crack, it turns out alright.

>>15979421
>t. shit artist

>>15979466
looks like a screenshot from a 2010s videogame

>>15979393
Lol imagine if you saw some Lascaux shit on a bathroom stall! It would make sense because any fucking moron could create those kinds of images haha
>>15979460
Because you're a dunce. Read
>>15978797

>>15979465
Cool. "Contemporary art" isn't an art movement though.

>>15979499

>>15979507
It's unlikely to survive either way. It's a glorified meme.

>>15979518
I can get behind this.
>>15978834
This is shit and its artist should be executed.

>>15979520
>Baroque is unlikely to survive either way. It's a glorified meme.

>>15979518

The Futurist Manifesto
Filippo Tommaso Marinetti
We have been up all night, my friends and I, beneath mosque lamps whose brass
cupolas are bright as our souls, because like them they were illuminated by the
internal glow of electric hearts. And trampling underfoot our native sloth on opulent
Persian carpets, we have been discussing right up to the limits of logic and scrawling
the paper with demented writing.


Our hearts were filled with an immense pride at feeling ourselves standing quite
alone, like lighthouses or like the sentinels in an outpost, facing the army of enemy
stars encamped in their celestial bivouacs. Alone with the engineers in the infernal
stokeholes of great ships, alone with the black spirits which rage in the belly of rogue
locomotives, alone with the drunkards beating their wings against the walls.

Then we were suddenly distracted by the rumbling of huge double decker trams that
went leaping by, streaked with light like the villages celebrating their festivals, which
the Po in flood suddenly knocks down and uproots, and, in the rapids and eddies of a
deluge, drags down to the sea.

Then the silence increased. As we listened to the last faint prayer of the old canal
and the crumbling of the bones of the moribund palaces with their green growth of
beard, suddenly the hungry automobiles roared beneath our windows.

`Come, my friends!' I said. `Let us go! At last Mythology and the mystic cult of the
ideal have been left behind. We are going to be present at the birth of the centaur
and we shall soon see the first angels fly! We must break down the gates of life to
test the bolts and the padlocks! Let us go! Here is they very first sunrise on earth!
Nothing equals the splendor of its red sword which strikes for the first time in our
millennial darkness.'

We went up to the three snorting machines to caress their breasts. I lay along mine
like a corpse on its bier, but I suddenly revived again beneath the steering wheel - a
guillotine knife - which threatened my stomach.

A great sweep of madness brought
us sharply back to ourselves and drove us through the streets, steep and deep, like
dried up torrents. Here and there unhappy lamps in the windows taught us to
despise our mathematical eyes. `Smell,' I exclaimed, `smell is good enough for wild
beasts

>>15979350
Caravaggio, Bruegel, Bosch, da Vinci, the Greeks and Romans, Goya.
They made beautiful paintings that told timeless stories. Who are yours?
And actually I'll say that Anselm Kefer isn't bad. Not good but not complete shit like the others.

>>15979526
>>15979465

>>15979524
>This is shit and its artist should be executed.
You're being way too harsh on children

>>15979518

Most forms of western art have been corrupted due to over intellectualization. It is soulless art that requires outside voices to justify its existence. The spirit of art as Whistler described it, “art for art’s sake” lives on in the based Japs and easterners as usual.

>>15979537
>>15979507

>>15979506
I don't get it, why should I read to know that a painting is good. Does Tolstoy only become good if someone paints the stories?

>>15979554
d'Annunzio's flight over Vienna

>>15979567

>>15979559
It's many movements and styles, most of which will be forgotten in decades from now. Many past ones are already forgotten in 2020.

>>15979504
Yeah, shitty version. I think this is also part of the problem with finding anything contemporary that's good. Most of the shit is hard to find and also low res or on some shitty site that doesn't work.

>>15979545
kek

>>15979534
And we hunted, like young lions, death with its black fur dappled with pale crosses,
who ran before us in the vast violet sky, palpable and living.

And yet we had no ideal Mistress stretching her form up to the clouds, nor yet a
cruel Queen to whom to offer our corpses twisted into the shape of Byzantine rings!
No reason to die unless it is the desire to be rid of the too great weight of our
courage!

We drove on, crushing beneath our burning wheels, like shirt-collars under the iron,
the watch dogs on the steps of the houses.
Death, tamed, went in front of me at each corner offering me his hand nicely, and
sometimes lay on the ground with a noise of creaking jaws giving me velvet glances
from the bottom of puddles.

`Let us leave good sense behind like a hideous husk and let us hurl ourselves, like
fruit spiced with pride, into the immense mouth and breast of the world! Let us feed
the unknown, not from despair, but simply to enrich the unfathomable reservoirs of
the Absurd!'

As soon as I had said these words, I turned sharply back on my tracks with the mad
intoxication of puppies biting their tails, and suddenly there were two cyclists
disapproving of me and tottering in front of me like two persuasive but contradictory
reasons. Their stupid swaying got in my way. What a bore! Pouah! I stopped short,
and in disgust hurled myself - vlan! - head over heels in a ditch.

Oh, maternal ditch, half full of muddy water! A factory gutter! I savored a mouthful
of strengthening muck which recalled the black teat of my Sudanese nurse!
As I raised my body, mud-spattered and smelly, I felt the red hot poker of joy
deliciously pierce my heart. A crowd of fishermen and gouty naturalists crowded
terrified around this marvel. With patient and tentative care they raised high
enormous grappling irons to fish up my car, like a vast shark that had run aground.

It rose slowly leaving in the ditch, like scales, its heavy coachwork of good sense and
its upholstery of comfort.
We thought it was dead, my good shark, but I woke it with a single caress of its
powerful back, and it was revived running as fast as it could on its fins.

Then with my face covered in good factory mud, covered with metal scratches,
useless sweat and celestial grime, amidst the complaint of staid fishermen and angry
naturalists, we dictated our first will and testament to all the living men on earth.

>>15975138
I'm no expert in contemporary art but I do enjoy going to museum exhibitions, at least in my experience the way you engage with stuff like conceptual art is completely different to the way one engages to normal visual arts like panting. Conceptual art is more akin to philosophy in many ways. A mexican artist I like, for example, presented with his conceptual art ideas very similar to those of Baudrillard. In this way conceptual art has impacted also some literary theory, as can be seen in the work of someone like Sergio Chujfec (Although he is known known very little outside Argentina). I've assumed, of course, you referred to conceptual art too (which is shat on very commonly) when saying the very vague concept of modern art, unless you are referring to visual arts modernism.

>>15979585
>17-18th century art is many movements and styles, most of which will be forgotten in decades from now. Many past ones are already forgotten in 1820.

>>15979560
It's bullshit, mate. Art should speak for itself. If you have to read a written justification for a visual piece, chances are, it's absolute dogshit.

>>15979484
You immediately retreat into talking about value when being shown how much of a fucking retard you are for talking about hanging
Also, Cy is probably one of those who are going to gain in value because his contribution is so unique. Completely concerning yourself with nothing but mark-making is probably the most extreme you can get when considering two-dimensional art

>>15979595

MANIFESTO OF FUTURISM

1. We want to sing the love of danger, the habit of energy and rashness.

2. The essential elements of our poetry will be courage, audacity and revolt.

3. Literature has up to now magnified pensive immobility, ecstasy and slumber. We want to exalt movements of aggression, feverish
sleeplessness, the double march, the perilous leap, the slap and the blow with the fist.

4. We declare that the splendor of the world has been enriched by a new beauty: the beauty of speed. A racing automobile with its bonnet adorned with great tubes like serpents with explosive breath ... a roaring motor car
which seems to run on machine-gun fire, is more beautiful than the Victory of Samothrace.

5. We want to sing the man at the wheel, the ideal axis of which crosses the earth, itself hurled along its orbit.

6. The poet must spend himself with warmth, glamour and prodigality to increase the enthusiastic fervor of the primordial elements.

7. Beauty exists only in struggle. There is no masterpiece that has not an aggressive character. Poetry must be a violent assault on the forces of the unknown, to force them to bow before man.

8. We are on the extreme promontory of the centuries! What is the use of looking behind at the moment when we must open the mysterious shutters of the impossible? Time and Space died yesterday. We are already living in the absolute, since we have already created eternal, omnipresent speed.

9. We want to glorify war - the only cure for the world - militarism, patriotism, the destructive gesture of the anarchists, the beautiful ideas
which kill, and contempt for woman.

10. We want to demolish museums and libraries, fight morality, feminism
and all opportunist and utilitarian cowardice.

11. We will sing of the great crowds agitated by work, pleasure and revolt; the multi-colored and polyphonic surf of revolutions in modern capitals: the nocturnal vibration of the arsenals and the workshops beneath their violent
electric moons: the gluttonous railway stations devouring smoking serpents; factories suspended from the clouds by the thread of their smoke; bridges with the leap of gymnasts flung across the diabolic cutlery
of sunny rivers: adventurous steamers sniffing the horizon; great-breasted locomotives, puffing on the rails like enormous steel horses with long tubes for bridle, and the gliding flight of aeroplanes whose propeller sounds like
the flapping of a flag and the applause of enthusiastic crowds.

>muh survivorship bias
See:
>>15979599
>>15979465
>inb4 b-but it's not a movement
See: >>15979585

>>15979596
>Conceptual art is more akin to philosophy in many ways.
Spot-on. I've personally found that more philosophically literate people tend to "get" modern and contemporary art.

There was one exhibition where a girl made compilations of jihadjeeps from Battlefield 3. Wish I could find it.

>>15979617
Many philosophically literate people are to tend to "destroy" modern and contemporary art.

>>15979609
>>muh survivorship bias
>See:
>>>15979599 (You)
>>>15979465
See: >>15979507
>>inb4 b-but it's not a movement
>See: >>15979585
See: >>15979599

>>15975241
>Everything in that exhibition today would be considered priceless.
Only because modern art is a great way to launder money.

>>15979626
Destroy? How so?

>>15979560
You don't have to get it, who said you should? It's interesting for those who have seen and thought about cryptography, mark-making and calligraphy. It becomes more interesting when you can see it as a response to abstract expressionism

>>15979604
Thanks for btfoing all these retards, anon.

One painter guy from Spain came up with a definition for this retarded nonsense "art". He calls it "hamparte" ("hampa" = scum, "arte = art):

If one or several objects manufactured in series, which are found for sale in the common market and are being presented as art pieces, these are Hamparte.

If the piece consists in the selection of an object (objet trouvé, found art or ready-made), which is magically made up into a piece of art, just because of the fact of being located in an exhibitions place of any kind, then it is Hamparte.

If talent is not required to make a piece as the shown one, if it is full of common places and trite ideas, it is Hamparte.

If the only value held of the piece is fundamentally sustained by a conscientious theoretical/philosophical/political text, which finds no real reflection on the piece, then it is Hamparte.

The unrealistic and magical attributions of nonexistent values to objects that are being commercialized in the art market with an exorbitant price, it is Hamparte.

An artist never acquires the right of being one. The artist must demonstrate it permanently. Even though the artist has made great art pieces, it doesn’t mean everything this person does is art. Hamparte can be done consciously or unconsciously. If it is done unconsciously then this would be made by a pure Hampartist. If it is done to make evident or denounce what is happening in the market and art world, or just by the pleasure of doing it, then it would be done by a realistic Hampartist. All the pieces which are made under these terms would be Hamparte.

Fundamentally, the art of having no talent is Hamparte.

>>15979608
It is in Italy that we are issuing this manifesto of ruinous and incendiary violence, by
which we today are founding Futurism, because we want to deliver Italy from its
gangrene of professors, archaeologists, tourist guides and antiquaries.

Italy has been too long the great second-hand market. We want to get rid of the
innumerable museums which cover it with innumerable cemeteries.

Museums, cemeteries! Truly identical in their sinister juxtaposition of bodies that do
not know each other. Public dormitories where you sleep side by side for ever with
beings you hate or do not know. Reciprocal ferocity of the painters and sculptors who
murder each other in the same museum with blows of line and color. To make a visit
once a year, as one goes to see the graves of our dead once a year, that we could
allow! We can even imagine placing flowers once a year at the feet of the Gioconda!
But to take our sadness, our fragile courage and our anxiety to the museum every
day, that we cannot admit! Do you want to poison yourselves? Do you want to rot?
What can you find in an old picture except the painful contortions of the artist trying
to break uncrossable barriers which obstruct the full expression of his dream?

>>15979672
Sounds pretty based to me. Who is the artist?

>>15979678

To admire an old picture is to pour our sensibility into a funeral urn instead of casting
it forward with violent spurts of creation and action. Do you want to waste the best
part of your strength in a useless admiration of the past, from which you will emerge
exhausted, diminished, trampled on?
Indeed daily visits to museums, libraries and academies (those cemeteries of wasted
effort, calvaries of crucified dreams, registers of false starts!) is for artists what
prolonged supervision by the parents is for intelligent young men, drunk with their
own talent and ambition.

For the dying, for invalids and for prisoners it may be all right. It is, perhaps, some
sort of balm for their wounds, the admirable past, at a moment when the future is
denied them. But we will have none of it, we, the young, strong and living Futurists!
Let the good incendiaries with charred fingers come! Here they are! Heap up the fire
to the shelves of the libraries! Divert the canals to flood the cellars of the museums!

Let the glorious canvases swim ashore! Take the picks and hammers! Undermine the
foundation of venerable towns!
The oldest among us are not yet thirty years old: we have therefore at least ten
years to accomplish our task. When we are forty let younger and stronger men than
we throw us in the waste paper basket like useless manuscripts!

But we shall not be there. They will find us at last one winter's night in the depths of
the country in a sad hangar echoing with the notes of the monotonous rain, crouched
near our trembling aeroplanes, warming our hands at the wretched fire which our
books of today will make when they flame gaily beneath the glittering flight of their
pictures.

They will crowd around us, panting with anguish and disappointment, and
exasperated by our proud indefatigable courage, will hurl themselves forward to kill
us, with all the more hatred as their hearts will be drunk with love and admiration for
us. And strong healthy Injustice will shine radiantly from their eyes. For art can only
be violence, cruelty, injustice.
The oldest among us are not yet thirty, and yet we have already wasted treasures,
treasures of strength, love, courage and keen will, hastily, deliriously, without
thinking, with all our might, till we are out of breath.

Look at us! We are not out of breath, our hearts are not in the least tired. For they
are nourished by fire, hatred and speed! Does this surprise you? it is because you do
not even remember being alive! Standing on the world's summit, we launch once
more our challenge to the stars!
Your objections? All right! I know them! Of course! We know just what our beautiful
false intelligence affirms: `We are only the sum and the prolongation of our
ancestors,' it says. Perhaps! All right! What does it matter? But we will not listen!

Standing on the world's summit we launch once again our insolent challenge to the
stars!

>>15979672
Homeboy should have just said he doesn't like it and left it at that. The rest is just cope.

>>15979697
Your reply is the real cope.

>>15979718
Nah dude. I just like what I like and don't like what a don't like. No explanation required.

>>15979639
>It means what it is.
So it's good because people are sometimes interested in other things with a similar subject. Yep, you're baiting.
(26:53)
https://youtu.be/QSCPcXaGxlc?t=1613

>>15979722
What do you like? Shit like this: >>15978834 ?

>>15979733
I like all sorts. Old and new; based and cringe; ugly and beautiful; bluepilled and redpilled.

>>15979430
>What's the right way to view a picture like that?
None, because it has no meaning. It's just a bunch of scribbles. You're all over the thread typing a whole bunch of reasons this shit is supposedly good, but at the end of the day if I got a random preschooler to draw the same kind of shit and posted here saying it's a Twombly painting you wouldn't even be able to tell the difference, probably not even he would. Pic related, an art exhibition?

>>15979775
Contemporary art is INDISTINGUISHABLE from trash

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWG3BuRiFBQ

Reminder that Bakunin wanted to drag the paintings from museums for the barricades.
He tried to save us bros.

I know an artist who has a pretty decent career. He’s a superb classical musician (pianist) as well. Picture related: it’s a painting of his. Far better than any of the contemporary tripe that’s been posted ITT.

>>15975294
The critics are part of the art mafia, though.

>>15979729
I specifically told you that it's interesting if you care about mark-making which isn't in the service of mimetic effect. Think calligraphy or something
>>15979775
The first Twombly picture you're referencing couldn't pass for a children's drawing. It's too layered, children don't work like that. Like that picture you've posted, it's much more one-dimensional. What's "provocative" about Twombly is that it could pass for children's drawings but there are often textural nuances and a sort of deliberateness which normally isn't there when a kid is doing it.
Also I don't dislike children's art but think of Twombly as a curator of childish elements rather than someone emulating a kid. The funny thing about Twombly is that he's working with the elements from kids who haven't begun doing figures yet

Also consider the fact that a painting can be like a smaller composition on a music album. It might be easier to get a sense of what he's doing if you're seeing it as a complete process and an entire mindset rather than *one* painting

>>15975144
mide/east /persia is a great source of ancient art - both abstract, geometric, and figurative

>>15975189
tom is shit. you'll probably love it, op.

>>15975496
aesthetic value is based on aesthetic knowledge and aesthetic experience, not money.

>>15975806
we're practically in our second century of modern bb

>>15979482
interseting but i like sant elia and mario better

>>15979733
that is frankly one of twombly's worst, to be honest.

>>15979775
kek meaning. a scribble has meaning. you dumb fucker.

>>15979894
thats a nice one

>>15979896
>he thinks modern artworks are sold for millions because of their high aesthetic value
top kek, mate.

>>15979894
This looks like what bums sell on the street, are you fucking with us?

>>15979926
I've seen much better bum art. Those protobobblehead cartoon pics they do are better.

>>15979926
KEK

>>15979937

>>15975138
Art by Clive Bell

http://www.denisdutton.com/bell.htm

>>15979937
>>15979946
pbuh

>>15979926
It looks slick as fuck. Chalkboard hypergraphia, like a cube doing open heart surgery on itself. I'd buy it if a bum tried to sell it to me, it has good energy

>>15979627
>dude my canvas diarrhea will be highly regarded hundreds of years from now lmao xD

>>15979992
oh god

>>15979926
not that dude but I think in a few ways we can compare what Twombly is doing sort of analogously to what someone like Park Seo Bo does in his Ecriture series. The ecriture series works to reproduce the effect of writing; inscription for a purpose, organized into what from a distance look like lines. The nasty trick or turn to this series of course is that while it may look like writing, like something pregnant with meaning from a distance, when we approach it we find that it dissolves into waves of information we are unable to parse. Now if you wanna be a brainlet like the rest of the thread and complain about 'political/theoretical context ruining and impoverishing my aestheticized objects' you can leave it there. Of course having some perspective on the censorship politics in south korea that inform the contexts of the work only enriches your reading of it but the disingenuous framework of 'theory or politics makes art bad' precludes this.

in any case, for Twombly you can use this example to produce some sort of reading on his work. there are of course key differences: one way to start is to think of poetry rather than the parsing of political information and its censorship. Twombly is often described as a painterly poet; I think it might be one of the things you see if you google his name. This is of course all contained in the lexical dimensions of these types of work and doesn't begin to talk of other ways (like the aesthetic reading the other dude offers).

>>15980008
>Now if you wanna be a brainlet like the rest of the thread and complain about 'political/theoretical context ruining and impoverishing my aestheticized objects' you can leave it there.
cope

>>15979996
>>dude my canvas diarrhea will be highly regarded hundreds of years from now lmao xD
The rococo painter said to the neoclassicist.

>>15980008
This is marbled paper I could buy at officemax
>>15979992
Very cool bro, very progressive, vibin

>>15979908
at least one of us is thinking

>>15980034
>dude my canvas diarrhea is just as good as rococo painters' artwork even though many modern movements/styles have been rightfully forgotten already lmao xD

>>15980050
Obviously me. You're the one ignoring the art mafia.

>>15980065
who the fuck cares?

>>15980054
>dude my neoclassical canvas diarrhea is just as good as rococo painters' artwork even though many 18th century movements/styles have been rightfully forgotten already lmao xD

>>15980085
Certainly not you, sheep.

>>15980092
Now that's a change of tune. We're making progress here.

>>15980098
Same tune I've been playing this whole time.

>>15980105
Not quite. You have already admitted some things are righfully forgotten at least.

>>15980093
you determine the quality of art by its price, huh cukkles? go suck a norman cockwell.

>>15980147
>you determine the quality of art by its price
No but they do.

>>15980154
who
the
fuck
cares
?

>>15980160
Everyone in the art world.

>>15980117
And you've admitted that some things are rightfully remembered.

>>15980166
I've always said that. That's my point. Worthy things are remembered, unworthy things are forgotten. And most of the art from this era will likely be forgotten hundreds of years from now because it's literally indistinguisable from trash and even from one another.

>>15979217
>Boring. This shit was been done to death.
I think I get what is happening here. Most people only occasionally look at art and only care about the aesthetic value. Maybe because they want to hang it on a wall or because they have to look at it every day in some public place or they just admire beauty. People like you though, you live for art, you study it, you discuss it. So you get bored of the Michelangelos and Da Vincis that you've seen a million times already. You want something completely new, something that can shock you and make you think. So you look at scribbles like something transgressive, new and exciting. Most regular people are still admiring the statue of David though, we want to see more and more like it and don't understand why you guys are changing what already works into something that visually looks worse. But the main difference is that in all those other art movement changes being mentioned in the thread, the common person can still understand the painting without any education:
>That is a drawing of a person looking at the sunset, even if it looks different from how it was being done before I can see how someone could like this, I understand what is happening here, I understand how I couldn't do the same, I get how the painter has talent even if I don't like it
Meanwhile there is no way anyone but a tiny elite understands the abstract shit posted in this thread, which generates anger.

>>15980177
>And most of the art from this era will likely be forgotten hundreds of years from now because it's literally indistinguisable from trash and even from one another.
Yes; just like every single other era of art.

I'm pretty sad this thread has so many replies.

>>15975138
The Decline and Fall of Western Art by Heard

>>15980217
Even more now thanks to the ease of production, population size, and replication.

>>15980220
Contemporary art is shit. Deal with it.

>>15980165
obviously not.

>>15980242
They care. Whether positively or negatively but they care.

>>15980232
That would translate into a increased quantity of good art too.

>>15980197
>Michelangelos and Da Vincis
i love twombly
and im not bored of michelangelo or da vinci and never will be.
twombly and michelangelo are perfect together.

>>15975820
BASED
>>15975845
cringe

>>15975830
You can stop listening to music, you can't stop watching where you walk and be pestered by modern architecture every step you take.

>>15980246
is that all youve got?
fuck off, no one cares

>>15980249
Not necessarily because the art style being pushed by the art mafia (galleries, critics and buyers) is the canvas diarrhea one, not the high quality one. In fact, in most art schools mediocrity is encouraged.

>>15980261
>no one cares waa waa
Yea, no one cares about money, like that's an argument, faggot.

>>15980008
Twombly littered his work with references to antiquity and while I don't see this poetic reading as cheaper I personally view it as "his" material rather than a useful point of entry for me. The Twombly in my mind is much more exciting than someone who merely "establishes a correspondence with his inspirations from the past" which is just cutesy pr talk, making him sound less decadent than he actually is

>btfo's modern art fags
I can appreciate it, but lets not deny most of it is utter garbage, and for that which does have a value it would be more correct to judge it psychologically then artistically, see Picasso.

>>15980266
If one presupposes the low quality of contemporary styles, then yes, that would follow. I don't.

>btfo's modern art fags
I can appreciate it, but lets not deny most of it is utter garbage, and for that which does have a value it would be more correct to judge it psychologically then artistically, see Picasso.

>>15980271
still all you got. money boi?

>>15980296
Sturgeon's law: 90% of everything is trash. It's silly not to presuppose low quality.

>>15980257
Every ten-thousandth building looks like that. Stop being a pussy.

>>15980312
You are yet to present an argument. Threadly reminder.

>>15980254
Bad examples then, but the point is that you said that a painting that would amaze the common man
>Wow, how do people even do realistic paintings like that? (see, all the posts getting on the front page of reddit where someone does a realistic pencil drawing)
and you called it boring because it's been done to death. Most people haven't seen it done to death and they want more like it (see this thread). Yet they see those art galleries with children's scribbles and don't understand why they're doing that instead of showing their talent doing something "harder" like photorealism. There is a massive disconnect between the public in general and people like you. No one in this thread or elsewhere will ever understand where you guys are coming from without studying, but people's understanding of visual media is that you look at it and immediately can tell it's beautiful and therefore good without studying. No other type of visual art need you to "get it", you usually just look at it, but here you look and see a banana taped to a wall.

>>15980303
>posts picture made famous for cherubim and makes stupid statement

>>15980322
coof coof
thems some dusty internet ripostes pal

>>15980315
So I was correct, then? The proportion of good:bad art does not change?

>>15980333
im not the person youre agruing with, pal

michelangelo and da vinci arent 'realists' and no - great shit is inside baseball - tough shit mother fucker if youre stuck with money boi bitching about childrens drawings

>>15980346
>t. nigger

>>15980366
wow
all you got?

>>15980322
>>15980366
CHECKED

>>15979121
>>15979203
these are shit and could only appeal to someone who obtained a visual literacy from marvel movies

overall, disappointing thread, by now I would have expected someone to whip up the "CIA did abstract art" meme, even though the earliest abastract paintings date to 1910s and abstract expressionism itself is one of the later and specific branches
>>15980333
argument per redditum, thats a new one, at least in the sense that most visual art traditionalists ive encountered on 4chan wouldnt even think of defending the kitschy abominations, such as depiction of breaking bad characters in a photorealistic gimmicky manner, that pop up among the most upvoted things on reddit/r/art

but i am fairly sure this populist approach could not backfire against canonical art at all, theres absolutely no way there isnt a significant bunch of contrarian reddit neckbeards who think medieval and renaissance art is a christard propaganda, that in terms of technicality it cannot match someone like Charles Bell, and that the museums should replace the former with the latter, no, I guess everyone who likes reddit kitsch is implicitly on the side of Tradition

>>15975161
Shut up fag. Stop coopting /pol/ memes

>>15980377
HOLY CHECKED

>>15977574
Kys. People's understanding of modern art is what makes them despise it

>>15980418
thats literally the opposite of true

we have moved past the need to display byzantine art, Giotto, and tricento artists in general, which, if you look at it objectively, are like chimp scribbles compared to based and trad maestro Charles Bell

>>15980427
Explain what people don't get about a black square or splashing paint on a canvas

>>15975138
the over interpretation of modern art is the real buzzkill. people try to make it political, sociological, philosophical, etc. is it really such a crime to enjoy something because it looks and makes you feel good?

>>15980427
>>15979600

>>15980443
explain what people get from black squares

>>15980446
>the over interpretation of modern art is the real buzzkill. people try to make it political, sociological, philosophical, etc.
It's the artists themselves who push for this nonsense given that they lack skills and latent to create something that speaks for itself.

>>15980452
da vinci said nature was a book and he spent his whole fucking life observing and writing about it and trying to translate and understand it. a whole life.

and you should be able to insta-get a painting of his?

ok.

Does anyone have the screencap of anon ranting about Bauhaus?

>>15977563
nobody likes modern art, which is why some people like it, and even they don't really like it.

>>15980476
DaVinci was a hack, he couldn't even replicate shiny surfaces as well as Glennray Tutor, and what exactly was his excuse for not bothering with a background for Lady with an Ermine? He was a lazy nigger.

>>15980476
There is no beauty to get from this >>15979423
>>15978834
Whatever the justification is, it's not worth it. Funny how mediocrities immediately jump to Da Vinci and all the greats just for the slightest association but not for technique or style or anything that truly matters.

>>15980375
At least I have something, you subhuman ape lmao

>>15980468
from what I see it's mostly the critics that do it. people like duchamp are obviously political, but in rothko and pollock it's always the critics that are like "well actually it's a Nietzschean exposition of the human condition" when the artists just had an idea/vision that they wanted to put on a canvas. I think it was the critics who pushed the conception of art as some political instrument, save France.

I'm truly shocked at the amount of brainlet, FB-tier normies ITT. I expected more from /lit/

>>15980409
>argument per redditum, thats a new one, at least in the sense that most visual art traditionalists ive encountered on 4chan wouldnt even think of defending the kitschy abominations, such as depiction of breaking bad characters in a photorealistic gimmicky manner, that pop up among the most upvoted things on reddit/r/art
I'm not defending shit, just saying what it is. Either we find a way to make people understand what artfags are trying to do and what is so impressive about it, or people will keep getting mad at you guys for ruining art with ugly scribbles. I guess it's the latter and more threads like these will keep being made.

>>15980476
He finds Da Vinci good because his paintings look good. You can just look at it without context and find it beautiful. Context only enhances it. People are mad at modern art because now you need context to even make basic sense of what you're looking at.

>>15980520
nah bro you are just disconnected from popular aesthetic consciousness, which is based and trad, and youre modern and cringe

>>15980518
Pollock it's an exception, not the norm. But then again his art was made popular by the CIA so he's an outlier in many respects. Galleries from today justify boring and dull hampart with lengthy texts from the artists themselves.

>>15980520
Detesting contemporary art is patrician tier, though. This is your 3rd or so post mentioning facebook. Why don't you go back? You're clearly a sheep already.

>>15980476
What's the correlation between his fixation with nature and his paintings, you fucking gaydittor?
besides that, you are taking the "nature is a book" thing too literally. You'd probably buy a painting of a black square for a million dollars if you had the money