/lit/ - Literature

Its called autism. Youre either born with it or without.

>>19560966
I have autism. How do I get this back? I used to be able to.

>>19560966
Autists are usually terrible artists, in my experience

artists fight over the right to sell you coffin liner
they're warriors
they have to be
they're smart too
you want to tell me your art warehouse isn't a coffin

>>19560974
all artists are, and usually terrible as well

Artists tend to be higher in trait openness to experience. A proven way to increase this trait is through psychedelic drugs, which appear to rewire the brain. Michael Pollan's book "How to Change your Mind" is a good introduction to the field of study.

Also, check out Oliver Sacks' books. He tells some entertaining stories of neurodivergent people succeeding despite all odds. Many of them are artistically inclined.

>>19560940
artists are all mentally ill. creativity is a form of self-therapy. if they were neurotypical they'd be content and busy with their lives and feel no need for "creating". someone do a study comparing schizo brains to "artist" brains please. would love to see the results.

>>19560996
>Michael Pollan
the guy who literally smoked toad venom?

Artists don't exist anymore, this is just talentless petit-bourgeois conformist children who are placed in positions of prominence in the arts so the current elites could retain their influence and conveinience. They're no different than those butt-fucking finance fucks. Look at shit like Jackson Pollock and Ginsberg compared to genuinely talented American artists like Elihu Vedder.

>>19560940
Just spend 90 minutes every day for 4 years drawing still lifes from observation and modelling gothic architecture in cad. Then spend a good chunk of your free time flipping through images of art slowly absorbing the rules of composition and "taste"

Oh great. They're making phrenology mainstream. Well... here we go again.

>>19561034
This is the opposite of what you should do, OP

>>19561014
If I remember correctly, the book recounts his experiences with shrooms, LSD, and DMT. He probably tried toad venom too, but I don't really follow his work. He's mostly a plant journalist/historian.

>>19560940
start doing dream analysis by keeping a diary. make an entry as soon as you wake up. reread a few before you go to bed. for you, and most people, visual acuity is bound to language. you can slowly break yourself out of that heuristic given enough directed focus. don't rush it into your conscious experience.
haven't read picrel, but understanding the foundations behind how we derive meaning from images in the first place might help you develop your own training exercises.
what i'm saying if you aren't born with it, haven't cultivated it through trial and error, or are sane, you'll need to take a roundabout approach.
>>19561003
this too. read kohut

>>19560940
"Functional specialization" paradigm has been superseded by "distributive processing" camp when it comes to higher cognitive faculties. The research you linked means nothing as a consequence. I recommend researching this subject matter more because it's interesting.

>>19561044
>gmi(n)

>>19561028
I Wouldn't Recognise Art If It Slapped My Balls: The Post by Anon

>>19561028
IMO true artisst can never engage with critics but since most artists now are created by critics the looking glass is very very dirty.

>>19561059
>I recommend researching this subject matter more because it's interesting.
Not OP but any directions?

>>19561075
You're just a retard who has fallen for obvious social engineering and marketing. Ah yes, what a brilliant painting in front of me! Good thing Elihu Vedder is forgotten, so culture could be diluted and retards could feel good about themselves, while I put my daughter into an obsequious position of prominence where I market how good of a person I am at a dinner party because of my liberal yet capitalistic beliefs.

>>19561086
Even the great authors of the past we all love, like Defoe or Melville lived lives other than as artists, and are only mostly remembered for one single work.

>>19561053
>for you, and most people, visual acuity is bound to language
I think I read something about this in a painter's biography, can't remember the name

>>19561092
>Ah yes, what a brilliant painting in front of me!
i havent seen this exact one, but a lot of paintings like this can ONLY be appreciated in person. fr only in person can you get a picture of the scale of the painting, the depth of colour and the subtle play or transitions between colour, & the sheer intensity of it all. theyre actually overwhelming, quite beautiful. But ofc you arent an artist with no interest in art who has probs never been to an art museum

>>19561092
Rothko's are actually based

>>19561059
How can you say functional specialization is deboonked? Any neuroscientist worth their salt knows some localities perform specific tasks, such as Broca's and Weirneke's areas (language comprehension and speech).

>>19561145
>theyre actually overwhelming, quite beautiful.
You are so full of shit.

>But ofc you arent an artist with no interest in art who has probs never been to an art museum
Of course I have and you're not an artist you're a retard making ugly garbage.

>>19561092
>forgotten
>paintings are housed in the met

>>19561169
dude you like the most gaudy & cliche pieces lmao. you just have bad taste. if youre gonna coom over old art at least coom over old art that was groundbreaking & of real transcendental quality

>>19560974
The trick is autism with plenty of self awareness and insecurity. That's the differential between any retard who makes art and someone who painstakingly crafts something.

>>19561092
>non hardline
into the trash it goes
the fact that so called "purveyors" of art dip their toes into both worlds proves they are limp wristed navel gazers not willing to uphold their camp. The scholastic feuds of modern art are all encompassing to those in the know, and in the know of the particular medium of which I speak, which so far surpasses all other mediums in the razer sharp precision of its feuds forcing all to pick sides, of everyone else is a diatribe of filth with nothing more to say then the air and sun which soon destroy their works, for we designed the sun and the wind to reach them so

>>19560940
Check out Initiation Into Hermetics by Franz Bardon. The magic system he describes is based on visualization/audiation and there’s a few exercises in there that’ll help you get better at that. It’s pretty easy to find online. Step 2 has most of the exercises but it’s worth reading the rest if you’re interested in hermeticism at all.

>>19561182
>That's the differential
>differential
stop dude why

>>19561176
>cliche
You like actual garbage.

>Rembrandt
Yes, Rembrandt would suffice too

>groundbreaking
Meme buzzword to justify unnaturally relating to a piece of art. NGMI art-critic tranny

>transcendental quality
subjective and meaningless. Nothing you like from post-WW2 would describe that either.

>>19561175
As they should be

>>19561187
what?

>>19560972
>>19560989
dyea (do you even art)
>>19560974
>>19560966
this. most 'artists' you meet are either autists, academics or normies with enough diligence and drive to make the impression. In the sense of the latter especially they construct brilliant works technically but which are aristically flat and unfortunately not enjoyable.
When you look at real art, when you look at Blake for example, you see that both his line and color work are sloppy in a sense but they convey his vision so perfectly. They eidos purely conveyed through writing into painting and poetry.
This is where designers and artists part. A designer will make you a portrait any camera could make while the artist would improve upon the common reality through his own virtuality of ideas overlaid.

>>19561200
That dude is schizoposting

>>19561206
Yeah I have no idea what he's going on about.

>>19561206
>>19561213
I am a modernist rationalist crony who hates avant garde shills who love everything because they are just flaneurs and gallery peddlers

>>19561191
Did you have a stroke?

>>19561028
That's kitsch, everything about it is kitsch, from the style of the painting to the cliché symbology of butterflies, snakes, angels, enclosing wings, etc. You only don't know it because you haven't studied the history of art so those symbols are still somewhat fresh to you, when in reality any student could have instantly thought them up because it's so incredibly overused. It's barely better than videogame art. Utterly predictable, there's no personal vision involved there, only copying, student-tier copying. That painter is a really good student, but nothing else.
Anyway, there are thousands of people doing kitsch, look at Odd Nerdrum and his disciples, classical art academies, Alexander Stoddart, etc.
And Ginsberg is a good poet, you know nothing about poetry if you think he's "shit", you may even dislike him or consider him second or third-rate, but he's a real poet.
If he's shit though, even a non-poet should probably write as well as him, no? After all, it's just shit! Anyone can shit! Then attempt it. Write a poem that's better than Ginsberg's "shit". Write it and post it. Now.
You can't do it. Know why? Because it's not shit.

>>19561192
>Fragonard

Lol. Anti-modernists are really fucking funny. Not even the idiot Scruton would praise that crap.

>>19561028
>complains about the petit bourgeoisie
>while posting this decadent kitsch

Artists are good at pretending to be smart.

based

>>19561259
So you have combusted and have no standards. You are a tasteless impressionable faggot who merely wants to be hip. The rest is meaningless cope to justify going with the ebb of the status quo.


>And Ginsberg is a good poet, you know nothing about poetry if you think he's "shit",
Do you even know who Robert Browning is? What are the depths of your retardation. He is obviously shit and worse than the retard modernists like Cummings and Williams who are also shit; and no he's not a real poet there's no form and it is essentially prosaic shouting pieces speciously derivative of Whitman. Ginsberg was not well-read and it shows by the garbage he attempts to call poetry. It's not my fault you took the journalists who praised Howl seriously, but judging from your hatred of Vedder for esoteric retardation like 'soul' and 'predicatability,' I'm not surprised you like complete garbage that you get to call unique. Free verse is for retards and imbeciles, much like yourself, regardless of how many professors and journalists told you how good and emotionally resonant Howl is. Writing shallow politics, about his cock and genitals is of no interest to me nor anyone, nor remotely beautiful.

Yes, I'd rate a bad poem of mine over Ginsberg's garbage. I'm not posting it on here, yet give me contact information (discord) and I will gladly send it to you.

>>19561292
>>19561274
Post a painting you think is good then

>>19561355
>Robert Browning
The firearms engineer?

have any of you achieved acclaim or success in your artistic pursuits? tell me about it

This thread is amazing.

I've been writing fiction for the first time for a contest and it's been a disorienting and mildly psychedelic experience. Writing 3rd person with multiple characters in a real world situation I know nothing about (from direct experience) to be specific. Something about having to invent a whole setting and running simulations and more simulations about what could happen and selecting the interesting things from it—I feel a bit cracked. I must have triggered some neurogenesis.

>>19561182
I'm sorry, what did you mean?
Autism with self-awareness and insecurity leads to bad artists?

>>19561367

>>19560966

Autists (allegedly) are unable to think abstractly so you would expect them to be bad at making and interpreting art since they cannot think symbolically and make generalizations. But tbf autism probably isn't real, or it's only real in rare off cases>>19560966

>>19561092

Pic is a good decoration but I agree it has zero artistic value

>>19561150

You're a buffoon. But so was Rothko

>>19561467
Yes, that's better than the paintings I shilled, but it doesn't refute my thesis. I think someone like Picasso is ugly, much less the ones derivative of him.

>>19561367
For me? It's alchemical art

>>19561507
I prefer Vedder, still.

Pseuds will say this isn't art. Will they at least try to see why it might be?

>>19561491
This is a good and short book on art and why some modern art is good and not just money laundering. Ok well, it's all money laundering now. But there WAS an underlying form to the early modernist masterworks.

https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/16917

Here are the quote from it I found interesting. They might not be relevant, but they'll give you an idea of the book:

>All artists are religious. All uncompromising belief is religious. A man who so cares for truth that he will go to prison, or death, rather than acknowledge a God whose existence he does not believe, is as religious, and as much a martyr in the cause of religion, as Socrates or Jesus. He has set his criterion of values outside the physical universe.

>The kingdom of neither is of this world. Rightly, therefore, do we regard art and religion as twin manifestations of the spirit; wrongly do some speak of art as a manifestation of religion.

>"Don't waste your time and energy on things that don't matter: concentrate on what does: concentrate on the creation of significant form." Only thus can either give the best that is in him. Formerly because both felt bound to strike a compromise between art and what the public had been taught to expect, the work of one was grievously disfigured, that of the other ruined. Tradition ordered the painter to be photographer, acrobat, archaeologist and litterateur: Post-Impressionism invites him to become and artist.

>The clever fellows [...] were throughout that period for ever setting themselves technical acrostics and solving them.

>(Primitives) Untempted, or incompetent, to create illusions, to the creation of form they devote themselves entirely.

>But the perfect lover, he who can feel the profound significance of form, is raised above the accidents of time and place. [...] If the forms of a work are significant its [[provenance]] is irrelevant.

>The contemplation of pure form leads to a state of extraordinary exaltation and complete detachment from the concerns of life: of so much, speaking for myself, I am sure. [...] the transmitted emotion [...] can be expressed in any sort of form—in pictures, sculptures, buildings, pots, textiles, &c [...]

>>19561526
Different purposes, but thank you for introducing me to Vedder, Anon.
His style reminds me of that almost flat look you see in alot of stainglass works, but on canvas

Haters gonna' hate

why is practically every female an artist, but none can be remembered?

>>19561527
It's bad art.

>>19561555
The dichotomy between the male and female is that the female is better on average, but with almost no variation, while the male is wild and strives for either the best or the worst

>>19561560
What is ~Good~ art?

>>19561567
see
>>19561535

>>19561560
I can see that

Wb this one? >>19561546

>>19561535
>early modernist masterworks.
Well yeah, you could sense tact to it even if I dislike it. I'll check out that book though, thanks a lot. Always looking to learn more about it.

>>19561542
Glad you liked him

>>19561367
from a relatively comparable era (1906) and theme (i.e. fantastic, from Dante)

>>19561575
I think you can tell.

>>19561585
Can I? At worst I'll say it's derivative but many such cases exist where the student outdoes the teacher. I wouldn't approach with pretense

What do you think?

>>19561564
truest gender take I've ever heard

ofc irl it's probably just patriarchy suppressing woman genius

>>19560940
artists have more developed prefrontal cortexes, which is important for emotion.

btw what this study confirms is that the ability is inborn. not that someone with this brain is necessarily going to be a practicing artist, so your brain isn't necessarily any different from the artists in that study.

>>19561583
What do you think of William Morris Hunt? I find him very dull and have yet to find anything I like from him except this Niagara Falls one and this one of a harbor, but I want to like him more.

>>19561596
I think if you're cogitating so much that 'derivative' comes to mind, you're not judging aesthetics.

I like the painting. The background and foreground forms work and I can get lost in it. It essentially arrests me and I can observe it as what it is without my mind running down hallways. I'd put it on the wall.

>>19561145
Shut up you fucking pseud.

>>19561165
Functional and structural plasticity can actually change that.
>>19561087
Miguel Nicolelis

>>19561527
Extremely ugly

>>19561602
Women are geniuses in a way. They find their meaning through a man though, and man finds his meaning through God. The emergence of atheism has sort of reversed the roles and men get their value through women, and women are just nihilistic consumers always unfulfilled. I don't think women are evil, I just think they are mostly simple, and only bad through men's failures. You have to realize society itself along with office-work is inherently feminine, men push and women settle.

>>19561546
better, but not my favorite.

>>19561355
Of course I won't give you my contact. You're afraid to post your poems because you suspect they're crap.

>Do you even know who Robert Browning is?
Yes, and have read some of his poems. Good poet.

>there's no form
>Free verse is for retards and imbeciles
I think we've talked before. Anyway, classical forms have nothing to do with poetry. I know it because I wrote +300 formal poems when I was a younger. What defines poetry are other things (imagery, surprising rhythms, original use of words, concepts etc.) Form, abstractly understood (in practice it's hard to separate from content), is just some pretty clothes with which you dress those things. Here's one of the few sonnets I wrote in English:

In Which the Lover Gives his Woman the Idea of Having a Child

Beneath in the bluish rivers of your skin
I mix my blood with yours and, there, we're one;
Like eerie Bachian tunes that sometimes seem
As hard to split apart as is the sun.
And yet this saraband is not to last,
For, love, we know that codas are a must;
And, like all lover’s loves did in the past,
This love we love must someday come to dust.
So how about we start another theme,
Alone, and independent of us all,
Out of this polyphonic little scheme?
A theme that will sing even as we fall
Into that uneventful final stream -
A theme to resonate within time’s hall?

That's not proper poetry, just rhetoric, the clichés are unbearable (come to dust, codas, time's hall etc.) I wrote it years ago, rather fast, and English is not even my first language, far from it.
Ginsberg is certainly better than THAT, and so is my free verse poetry (I won't post it, one poem is enough).

>you like complete garbage that you get to call unique
Yes, I am interested in original art. I think it's the only objective standard of judgement. The rest is subjective. Beauty? Subjective. Depth? Subjective, as there's so much room for disagreement on what's deep or not, and I personally considered many "deep" authors to be shallow. Pleasurable? Even more subjective. Is it garbage? Well, I'd say that's subjective too, and anyway I consider that painting you posted to be garbage also.

Now post one poem of yours. Let's see how much better than Ginsberg's "shit" your formal poems are.

>>19561627
I think he's right actually. One of the things I found (brace for cringe) moving about Monets and van Goghs in person was that the paintings are 3 dimensional—something totally lost in reproductions.

>>19561650
>beneath the

Fix'd.
Maybe there are other typos, can't be bothered to fix.

>>19561618
This one's pretty good 'Boing' I like it. I'm glad you like it, Dan Seagrave got famous making cover art for death metal bands in the early 90s...talk about standing out, huh?

Guess I was overthinking it a bit. Sometimes my inferiority complex gets the best of me...It takes talent to critique.

>>19561527
>>19561546
The thing is, even if we ignore the unoriginal and bland content, the skill used in producing it is garbage. The whole emotional sentiment is lacking, it's more in the vein of a high-tier comic book poster or video game artwork.

You obviously haven't developed much sensitivity to painting, or knowledge of its styles and methods.

>>19561627
No no I think he's got a fair point.
Most of humanity's body of work was never meant to be experienced in the digital age. Whenever you see the Sistine Chapel online, you will always see an imperfect reproduction by your flawed display. To understand art you have to live it. Art attempts to communicate something that written language cannot represent. It is an untransferable experience that always falters whenever it crosses mediums.

A painting will have different aesthetic values to a sculpture, even if it displays the exact same subject. The film about the book will always feel different, even if all the content is put in the reel.

>>19561651
Texture and depth are a huge part of paintings.

>>19561650
No, I like my poems and my prose.

>I think we've talked before
Yes, you are the Pessoa anti-Shakespeare anon and I would have never responded had I realized it was you I was talking to. Liking Ginsberg has now given me another reason to hate you. Hopefully, you rot in hell.

>>19561670

>>19561651
anon, please don't compare impressionism with that contemporary crap the anon posted.

No art can be truly appreciated when not in person, it's not unique to contemporary stuff. Except, even in this reduced form, one can still judge traditional artworks as great. Just compare the rich simple background color palette of Durer's portraits with these contemporary works, and you can see even just dealing with color and nothing else, they are not special works.

>>19561675
See above.

>>19561617
Nothing. I live in continental Europe and don't know practically anything about American visual arts outside of memetic late modernists such as Pollock and such stuff.
This is one you post is quite unremarkable to me, honestly. I do not see what is artistic about his execution, it's just a nice natural phenomenon. Googling gives much more interesting stuff, such as pic related.

>>19561676
How could you even compare this to this? >>19561617


>>19561651
IDK it just seems ugly to me, sorry.

I think this Vedder painting is ugly, but similar to the ones you've posted.

>>19561700
You really do have to get up close on the veins in baby jebus' foreskin to truly appreciate a Raphael.

>>19561308
I want to agree out of a sense of self-hatred and the opportunity to uphold my grog friends but truthfully behind all the smoke and mirrors of the artist's speech what is usually seated there is real intellectual power. perhaps the only difference between an artist and those with similar types of intellectual power is the emotional turmoil in the artist which creates for a more compulsive, present, spontaneous person.

>>19561703
>This is one you post is quite unremarkable to me, honestly.
I thought it was okay.

>>19561700
>>19561705
nigger, can you please post things without watermarks?

>>19561724
That was the only photo of the Durer painting which didn't change the color and lighting. It was the best I could find. Compare with pic related.

>>19561727
How would you know that the one with the watermark is the correct version?

>>19561663
>It takes talent to critique.
I don't think so. Aesthetics are your nerves. If you have to be talked into liking a painting, it's a bad painting.

Take the painting in your reply as an example. Imagine a worse version. Actually I'll try to whip one up. Wow, what's wrong? Painting critique is a scam.

>>19561192
White women...

>>19561681
>No, I like my poems and my prose.

And you are an ignorant monolingual who likes to pretend he knows more than he does.
How does it feel knowing any Chinese child is better at languages than you, a supposed "poet" who supposedly follows the "tradition"?
Maybe that, your lack of intelligence for language, is the source of your endless insecurity which drove you to spill such hatred on Bloom and now on Ginsberg. You clearly can't perceive nuance, detect clichés, and read poetry, which is why only the SUPERFICIAL aspects, such as meter and rhyme and alliteration or mentions of "deep themes", cause an impact on you.

Anyway, don't be a coward. Post a poem.

>>19561724
They're hard to find unless I take a screenshot

>>19561722
Well again this one's better, has excellent rough brushstrokes that suggest the wet, muddy and wooden surfaces, and the whole subject and mood inspire reflection, because they're not something that you'd naturally pay attention to.

>>19561733
Because I've seen it.

@19561740
No, and this is your last (you). You are severely mentally ill.

>>19561735
Very often if you don't have the technical knowledge your emotional appreciation of a painting will just be much lower. This mostly applies to before the 19th century.

>>19561752
Do you paint?

>>19561767
No. I used to draw and do animation, all amateur, but reading books and going to exhibitions is imo more important.

>>19561784
But do you write?

>>19561740

Grandfather Gear (Read at 60 BPM)
Up and down, sands merge together
Left and right, pendulums tether
Around and around all the wheels turn forever
From the onset of time ‘till the last
Fibres of destiny weathered so fast
The carrion, the profits, and a grave
(12:01AM)
Pedomorphosis happened tonight
A cowardly soul with ambition and greed
Cut meiosis by proving might
Like a child with a costume, confidence grew
Science of nonsense at last at,
The afterlife dimmed as the soul lived again
(12:02AM)
Changed by his freakish reincarnation, memory disdained
But the atavistic prison of his soul discarded
The Golem shall care for his nation, the realization
Polluted his memory which now has delayed
Arhythmic rhymes
(1:02AM)
Fourteen past afternoon glowed lovingly on the corpse
The corpse whose mind still had control walked the Earth unseen
Determined to find the past, reverse death as he could cheat it
Scourge of the universe aspires to be like Vishnu, seek orbs
Obscene!
(2:02AM)
Woven gown on a growth without past
Wakes machines
(2:14AM)
And so it stopped to see his hubris go unpunished
Find that which he had lost in the divorce regained
Protecting his one child through crises and thus gain
A newfound sense of immortality
Going beyond, the nominality of his wish
(2:15AM)
How science and the occult bide each other
That a driven man give shape to his own body
As a ghost with iron skin onto his legacy
That now among ghouls he was once revered
And now lives on as God and saviour
By indignant covens was this fire’s fate to meet overseers
(2:16AM)
And so the mind forgot
(2:16:7AM)
To see himself a mech fighting wars,
Blocking threats on every generation
The centuries now flashed before him
What shall they eat? Robot stock?
His force increased as every minute
Spelled technologic innovation
Every circle on the clock
(3:16:7AM)
Spiralling, the genius admits his madness
Yes
No
Yes
No
(3:30:7AM)
Every century, his massive killing capacity
Enslaved the planet with his weapons
Even Mephistopheles bowed before the Godhead
Elapsed until he was devoured was when,
With his own strength could no longer fight the sadness
(3:31:7AM)
The descent of the sterile machine, annihilated
His gonadal grey-goo devoured itself and now in retrospect accepted destiny as the
omega forever estranged from the alpha
Now alone in the universe, with his body fulfilling destiny
Loving and forcing his dynasty’s bloodline, the wielder of doomsday inverted the
prophecy, asymptotically approaching perfection
Tick
In the end there is nothing forevermore
Talk, singularity
(3:33:3AM)

>>19561761
I think this is sorta correct. I don't think you need the technical knowledge beyond having tried doing it yourself to see how complicated it is. If even that. You'd have to be a dick to not appreciate technical skill, even if the painting doesn't come together.

>>19561754
Monolingual coward. You know nothing about poetry, and you probably haven't even mastered the classical forms that you praise so much.
Can you write a proper canzone? I wrote quite a few in my teenage years... Have you ever even read a real one?
No wonder a good-but-minor poet like Browning is the first name that you mention. A properly cultured person would have mentioned Dante or, if they're fanatic about form, specially Horace, but you have no Italian, no Latin, and are stuck with Browning.

>>19561796
>quite a few in my teenage years.
so last week?

>>19561794
I don't think you need to try it yourself , I just mean even without knowledge of how light was used in certain traditions of painting the untrained eye might not notice it and hence have a far rougher and bland understanding of a painting.

>>19561818
You know little about meter, nothing about Latin poetry, nothing about actually ingenious literary forms such as those invented by the troubadours and fin de siècle metrical virtuosi like Darío. It's incredible to me that you consider yourself apt to judge poetry. Back in the 19th century, you wouldn't even be admitted into any self-respecting college.
It's amazing how "traditionalists" know so little of the traditions they claim to admire, how little effort they put into their artistic endeavors, how everything they write or think reeks of amateurism. But anyway, I suppose if they did put any effort, most of them would soon stop being traditionalists altogether.
Good night.

>>19561790
A bit, but I've only ever published some film (including animation) criticism.

>>19561794
Technical skill is to be respected, sure, but appreciation should be saved for the actual art.
The problem is that people indeed try to draw, as kids, and they suck, they don't spontaneously show talent and don't have guidance. But when a person goes through a classical artistic school, they will make realistic-enough stuff regardless of their initial shittiness, unless they have shit motor skills. It's only a matter of effort and guidance to make things passable to uncritical eyes. But that's the lowest threshold, it's like being impressed by a musician that hits the notes correctly or an actor who has memorised his lines.

>But that picture of Raphael's shews us the final consummation of the miracle, the virgin mother transfigured and ascending with the new-born son: here we are taken by a beauty which the ancient world, for all its gifts, could not so much as dream of; for here is not the ice of chastity that made an Artemis seem unapproachable, but Love divine beyond all knowledge of unchastity, Love which of innermost denial of the world has born the affirmation of redemption. And this unspeakable wonder we see with our eyes, distinct and tangible, in sweetest concord with the noblest truths of our own inner being, yet lifted high above conceivable experience. If the Greek statue held to Nature her unattained ideal, the painter now unveiled the unseizable and therefore indefinable mystery of the religious dogmas, no longer to the plodding reason, but to enraptured sight.

>>19561852
You are ESL and coping, sounds like nonsense Ezra Pound would say. Have fun tossing all night from the lies you feed yourself every day.

>>19561890
>Now, in respect of plastic art it is palpable that its ideally creative force diminished in exact proportion as it withdrew from contact with religion. Betwixt those sublimest revelations of religious art, in the godlike birth of the Redeemer and the last fulfilment of the work of the Judge of the world, the saddest of all pictures, that of the Saviour suffering on the cross, had likewise attained to its height of perfection; and this remained the archetype of the countless representations of martyred saints, their agonies illumined by the bliss of transport. Here the portrayal of bodily pain, with the instruments of torture and their wielders, already led the artists down to the common actual world, whose types of human wickedness and cruelty surrounded them beyond escape. And then came "Characteristique," with its multiple attraction for the artist; the consummate "portrait" of even the vulgarest criminal, such as might be found among the temporal and spiritual princes of that remarkable time, became the painter's most rewarding task; as on the other hand, he early enough had taken his motives for the Beautiful from the physical charms of the women in his voluptuous surroundings.
>The last sunset flush of artistic idealising of the Christian dogma had been kissed by the morning glow of the reviving Grecian art-ideal: but what could now be borrowed from the ancient world, was no longer that unity of Greek art with Antique religion whereby alone had the former blossomed and attained fruition. We have only to compare an antique statue of the goddess Venus with an Italian painting of the women chosen to impersonate this Venus, to perceive the difference between religious ideal and worldly reality. Greek art could only teach its sense of form, not lend its ideal content; whilst the Christian ideal had passed out of range of this sense-of-form, to which the actual world alone seemed henceforth visible. What shape this actual world at last took on, and what types alone it offered to the plastic arts, we will still exclude from our inquiry; suffice it to say that that art which was destined to reach its apogee in its affinity with religion, completely severing itself from this communion—as no one can deny—has fallen into utter ruin.

>>19561028
You don’t know shit

>>19561028
But this painting is awful and soulless.

>>19561555
As a female I can confirm >>19561564
The shit I draw is literally just me looking at a painting and recreating it stroke for stroke. I can copy technique all day but I am completely bankrupt when it comes to the generation of ideas. I think women a) overthink things to a degree that prevents any sense of soul to flourish in artwork and b) don’t have the same depth of experience or thought to draw from creatively. To be a man is to suffer through life more profoundly than a woman, imo, which expands their artistic/expressive horizons. One of my favorite artists is Szukalski who learned human anatomy after he dissected his father’s body when he got hit by a car and died. I’m not sure any woman could ever do something so metal

>>19561648
Based take

>>19561944
>Based take
let's fuck then

>>19561982
Happily dating a /tg/ anon already but thanks for the offer

>>19562012
doesn't sound that trad if you're posting here

>>19562025
Agreed, we’re both too centrist to be truly trad

>>19562052
>we’re both too centrist
so he's your bitch?

>>19561028
>paints angel
>angels are holy therefore the painting is now good

>>19562062
Off the charts level of based.

>>19562062
Not in the slightest. He’s way too smart for me and I’m too neurotic to be, ah, the more dominant. I guess I meant that if trad is my being barefoot and pregnant/religious/overtly modest or conservative, then the both of us are too attached to modern luxury/social dynamics to achieve a truly trad life

Derail the thread further, guys. Comes to show what wonderful artistic minds exist here, truly the paragon if intellectual discussion. With wit you destroy snobbery, you innovate, every constraint that exists on the creativity of the collective unconscious is crushed by the level of discussion here. Fuckin WOW!
>>19561792
Exhibit A

>>19562107
>He’s way too smart for me
>I’m too neurotic
lol, poor guy doesn't know what he got himself into. I presume you have/will cheat on him, and he will cope either way. Oof.

>>19561555
the key to understanding women is through exhibitionism

>>19561602
here's my thought on the matter
>women have historically been give affirmative action esque time and money to become great, but they become spoilt with attention and thus never create great art.

>>19561602
>>19561944
I's a principle in philosophical alchemy.
It goes into a good level of depth on how men and women are fundamentally with little variation. Hellish to decode, though

Artists are window-licking retards and so is everyone ITT except me.

when will people stop being paid to produce worthless studies like this

Since I have read Tolstoy's "what is art" I couldn't draw a single thing. I'm terrified that I will never make art again.

>>19561092
>liberal yet capitalistic beliefs
redundant

>>19561761
>Very often if you don't have the technical knowledge your emotional appreciation of a painting will just be much lower
Not him but I've been drawing and painting for 12 years and I hate this kind of meaningless art more every year. I am fully convinced that this is something artists say to suck up to institutions because dislike of modernism usually also means you dislike leftism and that in the arts is suicide. In fact I fully endorse this:
>>19561735
>If you have to be talked into liking a painting, it's a bad painting.
Actually the more I go on, the less I can appreciate art in general. People would think>>19561192 is good art as opposed to modernism, looks like crappy pornography to me. There is almost no real art whatsoever, and I definitely haven't made any.

>>19562535
I'm saying from experience that the emotional depth of my appreciation for art increased rapidly with my technical knowledge of it. I thought this would be self evident.

>>19562550
How long have you been painting?

>>19562535
maybe you have trouble identifying religion in your painting

>>19562624
I don't think so, it's just that I was celerating the wrong things. I have this hellenistic bent and really love figurative art, but I refused to believe that was I was doing was nothing but self-serving eroticism, not very different from pornography which I always despised for exciting the most vile instincts in people. I always thought that art was meant to elevate mankind but I never considered that "religious" calling, if you intend religion as Tolstoy means it. Certainly all this modernist abstraction only appeals to urbanites: "well, *I* can understand what it says, because I am smart". It appeals to such a degree of individualism that you are invited to make up your own meaning for it. It is art that is divisive by nature, because no two people will have the same interpretation of an abstract piece; most likely, one of them will have an averse reaction to it, or will be forced to feign appreciation for it for fear of appearing stupid and uncultured. Then you have unpretentious pornography and other prostitution that is just meant to rile up people's worst instincts like anger or fear or sexual desire, all of which are divisive feelings. Almost none of the art that is being made today is capable of uniting people, which in the end is the actual goal of the art as I always imagined. How do you elevate mankind if not through communion? It's practically impossible to make art as a product and art as a vehicle for human communion at the same time, but I have unwittingly trained myself to make the former and not the latter, even if I thought I was working in opposition to commodity culture and divisiveness. All these years were a huge lie I've told to myself.

Y'know what, I am but an amateur who does not have the skill to produce anything equaling 'art', but I enjoy painting enough to post at least once

>>19560966
>Youre either born with it or without.
That's what they want you to believe.

>>19561028
I have an artist friend, his stuff is pretty abstract but he's not a trust-fundie or elite. He lives with his mom but only because he wants to be drawing all day every day. I cheer for him.

>>19562725
Nobody in his right mind would make abstract art unless 1) he's a gigantic autist (literally) who fell for the meme wholesale and follows the trends dictated by launderkikes dogmatically because he cannot think on his own and has no mobility of thought to realize it 2) he's hoping to "make it" as a famous artist one day
It's literally impossible that he is actually doing the stuff out of a serious desire to make art. Literally no artist who makes this kind of art is driven by good motives. I assume he spends half his day shilling his shit on Instagram.

>>19561145
based Artanon but you're arguing with retards

>>19561145
Blatantly false, most of the modernist shit looks much better in photo because all the horrible gross texture of paint squeezed directly on the canvas and mashed with the artist's dick isn't visible. In real life these look even more like the crusty garbage they are. And yes, I can appreciate a good impasto technique when it's done by someone who can paint.
All of this art looks worse IRL, whereas in photo it is presented in the best possibile way, often portraying some hot sophisticated city-dwelling girl looking at it in awe so your lizard brain associates it with getting pussy (pretty much the #1 reason why soibois say they like modernism).

>>19561145
THEY HATED HIM BECAUSE HE TOLD THEM THE TRUTH

>>19561145
>only in person can you get a picture of the scale
>OH WOW IT'S SO HECKIN' BIGGERINO, THE ARTIST SURE HAD TO DIP THAT PAINT ROLLER A FEW TIMES

>HOLY HECKIN' REDDITINO THE PAINTING IS AS BIG AS THE WHOLE HECKIN' WALLERINO

Drawing On The Right Side of the Brain by Betty Edwards. It's been saving autists like you since the seventies and it regularly updates with new studies on brain plasticity and language development etc.

Fixed the typo

>>19560940
Practice imagining basic 2d geometry, then 3d geometry in your mind. Change the color, size, move them around, etc.
Practice lots of imagining, different locations, people, scenes, etc.
Also practicing drawing can help.

>>19561145
this

>>19560940
imagine believing that garbage

>>19563405
why would it be a garbage? artists are different than uneducated masses.

>>19563241

>>19560940
uh oh! he making an assumption about the direction of causation! let’s refresh: maybe working on art increases grey matter, creating the study’s results? didn’t think of that, did you retard

hello anon,
there's lots of different kinds of art, there's people who veer towards hyper-realism and there's people who veer towards imminently commercial art. I like the sort of rock and roll, dada/junk art, finished the surface of my stratocaster today.
I'm sure there are vague relationships between your tastes. From what I gather people who listen to Beethoven often are likely to be pretty smart, but I think that has more to do with the pastimes that's made you as a person. There was a book called Daily Rituals by Mason Currey and it listed a couple of recurring things that artists did that could have influenced them. Commonly; working hours in the day/nighttime, drinking such and such, going on long walks, eccentric rituals, where they worked etc. To be honest it's a mystery to me even though I'm often tussling between moping around and finding some kind of stability.

>>19561028
This. Disregard the cope.

>>19562805
I don’t think you realize how much of art is abstraction. Abstracting reality and using abstract forms in art has always been done and it always will be.

You guys are so caught up in your snobbery that you entirely forgot this is the literature board. Now get the fuck out of my board.

>>19560940

Unironically this. Might be too late for OP though.

Is this true for musical artists too?