/lit/ - Literature

>>7098557

Good choice, comrade.

>>7098557
FUCK BLAKE

>>7098564
BASED

>>7098564
this has to be one of the best ever, agree

>>7098544
not literature, get fucked

>>7098586

You're a bore and a cunt.

>>7098557
>>7098559
>>7098564
Oh, look some one posted the THREE SAME PAINTINGS THAT ARE POSTED IN ANY THREAD OF THIS NATURE EVER.

Is this /lit/?

>>7098649
Another trip
Another filter

>>7098649

write a poem about her
any of you

>>7098714
no we hate you fuck off

The one with them roman dudes where he's holding all those swords

>>7098598
Truth be told (not the above troll): Blake does sort of suck, but I still love and stare at his shit like a mongoloid. Weird.

>>7098734
>people who disagree with me are trolls

Blake is awful

the picaresque view of the dapper comrade in a frock coat standing atop the tumultuous mount whilst holding his cane in one hand, his fedora doffed held ceremoniously in the other.

>>7098578
This is when they killed Caligula?

>>7098740

No you are

>>7098586
Okay then what is your favorite Penguin Books cover painting?

>inb4 ima britbong with boring penguin cover art.

>>7098754
I wish I could find a good hi-resolution version of this painting.

>>7098735

Shortly after doesn't he lose six people? How does he do this with only five members in his crew?

>>7099316
let's say for example the painting doesn't show the whole boat, and let's say for example there were people outside the frame.

Repin is the most based.

>>7098544

>>7098754
I wonder if this inspired the artist who did 2666 cover

>>7099478

>he wouldnt kill a man for a real Bouguereau

>>7099474
What do you mean? It's the same painting.

>>7099422

The boat wouldn't be long enough still.

>>7099474

It's uncanny

>>7098544
That's incredibly beautiful

>posting a painting without any sort of context
Terrible. Have a painting of Sam, Frodo, and Smeagol in the gorge.

>>7099578
wow cool

>>7098564
That is not a face one merely dreams up. That is an experience put into art.

>>7099670
I like Donato Giancola, but this is like a rule 34 pic.

>>7099810
He got his painter friend to pose for the study but it's very different from the finished piece

>>7098743
wow, that's outright pornographic

>>7099670
Jesus wept.

>>7099865
I want to see his detailed studies of goat dicks

>>7099410

Legitimately the most erotic painting I've ever seen.

>>7098743

>>7099410
What canto was this? My memory is failing me, apparently

I stared at it a long while the first time I saw it

>>7098544

>>7100080
That ain't what a pussy look like

>>7100154
I assure you it's quite realistic.

>>7100039
>you grabbed my penis.jpg

>>7099307
>no girls allowed.jpg

>>7100186
Fuck off retard. You're the same dumb butch that complains about muh off topic shitposting every time it's something you don't like yet here you are shitposting as usual

Pure cancer, when are you leaving

>>7098564
those carpets are so based

>>7100288
Did I say something about a post of yours?
So sensitive.

matisse doesn't have many 'masterpieces' but he's one of my favourite painters regardless

>>7098544

>>7100692
Woah cool as fuck man

>>7100531

>>7100693

my 1st fav

>>7100723

and 2nd

>>7100896
holy shit, this is awesome

>>7100896
There's something so fantastical about this painting. Maybe it's just Richelieu's battle armor

From the Iliad

>>7098749
No, it's Caesar's death

Ophelia

>>7101265
why is there a halo around her head, thought she was gonna burn in hell.

>>7101366
Ophelia didn do nuffin though

>>7099952
It's normal fam, this canto doesn't exist

>>7101442
Okay apparently I talked too fast.
It's supposed to be a short episode from the 8th circle, where Capocchio and Gianna Schicchi fight and stuff
Shit painting tho

What does /lit/ think? : )

>>7101534
aesthetic tbh lad

>>7099307
Jezebel did nothing wrong.

>>7101437
she killed herself.

>>7101216

>>7101932
>not recognizing the beauty of sacred Flemish painting

>>7100474
I always appreciate art twice as much when tits are in it. I'm appreciating the skill and a free look at some boobs. two birds one stone.

>>7100692
i wonder if a certain area in Zelda the wind waker was inspired by this.

>>7100186
can you show me yours)))))

Just saw this 3 hours ago.

>>7099410
Vergil looks like Napoleon

>>7100474
>women aint shit but hoes and tricks

>>7103434
wow what a meaningful deconstruction of composition and aesthetic and primary color usage

>>7103434
I'm going to vomit.

>>7103434
The staaaaaaleness

>>7103500
>>7103505
>>7103510
Lol

Forgot where i was for a moment

Pardon me, gentlemen

>>7100039
Oh god, why are all the nymphs the same girl?

That's fucking creepy.

>>7103722'
I think it's hot. You never wanted to bang a pair of twins? What about a gang of twins?

>>7103772
Don't they drown him like five minutes later, though?

>>7103799
Doesn't change the fact that it's hot.

>>7098564
Not really literature related, though.

Still cool.

>>7103722
They're all disgusting too

Fish eyes

Odilon Redon, "The Cyclops"

>>7098573

>FUCK BLAKE

STEM major detected

>120 replies and 69 images omitted
>no golden bough

STEP
IT
UP
LADS

>you will never behead John the Baptist so you can tap this ass

>>7098544
>that feel when this thread's full of terrible art

>>7103569

hat's legitimately beautiful

>>7104039
What's wrong with that tit?

>>7104039
Most people (you included) have objectively bad taste.
It's okay though you're all coping just fine.

>>7104069
The 1400s are what's wrong with it. European art didn't really get good for another century.

>>7098649
thats geologist

>>7101534
Pretty but not art. It makes me feel nothing.

>>7102051

This is good.

>>7098544
>>7098557
>>7098559
Pretty but not art.
>>7098564
good.
>>7098578
good
>>7098583
good
>>7098598
pretty but not art
>>7098714
not bad
>>7098735
pretty but not art
>>7098741
pretty but not art
>>7098754
shit
>>7098988
shit
>>7099307
shit
>>7099410
pretty but not art
>>7099440
not bad
>>7099478
not particularly pretty and definitely not art.
>>7099492
pretty but not art
>>7099848
good
>>7099670
pretty but not art
>>7099578
shit
>>7100039
pretty but not art
>>7100066
not bad
>>7100080
trash
>>7100186
erotica but has a a few redeeming features.
>>7100474
more fanfiction
>>7100531
absolutely boring, not art
>>7100581
good
>>7100692
pretty but not art
>>7100693
junk
>>7100697
junk
>>7100723
good
>>7100725
not bad
>>7100896
ok

>>7104457

>>7100918
not bad
>>7100982
shit
>>7101155
shit
>>7101162
shit
>>7101183
pretty fanfiction again
>>7101236
and again
>>7101341
and again
>>7101351
and again
>>7101417
meh
>>7101534
nice scenery, not art
>>7102051
not bad
>>7102057
shit
>>7102073
not bad
>>7103321
not bad
>>7103434
this is not art
>>7103569
not art but A for effort
>>7103892
not art
>>7103926
more pointless fanfiction
>>7104021
fanfiction with redeeming qualities
>>7104039
not bad but why not post the full picture?
>>7104048
beautiful indeed but not art

>>7104457
>>7104462
Why would you do this?

>>7104457
shit

>>7104462
not art

>>7104457
>>7104462
>art is objective

>>7104508
Cause experimental paintings where a painter tests some novel technique or erotica or just painting some crap from a known story is not art.
Beautiful does not mean art. Art is what allows us to translate emotions not what is pretty or what makes your dick stand or what shocks you.
Art is the translation of emotions to another through external means while including at the same the negation if its own role.
Like a poetry negating the communicative role of language. A poem communicates emotion through its use of language but not in the usual practical use of language.
On top of that it has to be completely sincere and thus completely original, not recycling the emotions of some well known story or tale.

>>7104546

>he thinks its not
>Everything is art!!

Why are you even using the word art?

>>7104552
Did you notice that the OP doesn't even mention art?

>>7104561
BTFO

>>7104552
Art is something sincere that comes from your heart.
Most of what has been posted here is either a work that is not complete(priding itself simply in a novel technique it is experimenting with as oppose to being a complete work), is insincere cause it recycles the emotional impact of some other work which it uses or confuses the beautiful with the artistic(well the poster is the one confused).

>>7104561

Most likely because the OP assumed all the old paintings people on /lit/ usually post are all "art".

>>7104552
>>7104552
Interesting categorization method. Though it would be useful I cannot use it because I think some of the paintings that fall into your "not art" category actually are art.

Consider that you disqualified a painting for being based on the illiad, but would you disqualify the illiad, a work of "art" likely based on oral tradition? You've definitely already tossed Shakespeare out.


Wait, what's this:

>>7098583
>good

>>7104457
>pretty but not art

How the fuck is >>7100692 "not art"?

Your opinion is shit and you should just kill yourself.

>>7104719

No, the Iliad is indeed not a masterpiece of the highest order.
For that it would had to have been original.

Unfortunately much art has been appropriated by privileged people that were good at improving the technique of their favorite medium.
We now do not know now at what point true art turned into fake art or entertainment when talking about many of the older paintings and stories.
We are flooded with so much garbage that even trying to sort it out becomes a full time occupation.
True art has to be virginal and clear. Technique must be hidden to not obstruct the communication of emotions.
Art is not mathematics where one requires previous knowledge to gain mastery over the material.
True art resonates even with someone who has no education at all.

>>7104741
Cause it communicates no emotion. It is simply pretty.
Art is there to communicate emotions.
It is the difference between staring at a neutral symmetrical face and a face that communicates emotion.

>>7104766
But the Illiad is art, right? And Ophelia is art, right?

>>7104790
Obviously the question of whether something is art or not does not have a binary answer but when something clearly burrows and uses the material of others it cannot be great work.

>>7104803
Okay, but your earlier posts made it seem like you were drawing a pretty solid line.

>>7104457
>>7104462
Read a book you fucking pleb

How embarrassing

>>7104828
Whats embarrassing is your shitposting.

>>7104778
Hahahaha no emotion, are you serious?

Maybe you should do some research about that painting, pal.

>>7100896
I like it. I need to see this in real life

>>7100982
He knew how to look

>>7100982
I love Cezanne, and I love you

>>7102073
This is fantastic. Thanks for introducing me, anon

>>7101502
Ah, I think I know it
Maybe

>>7104955
Aw

I feel like he understood vision more than any artist before or after him. He is eerie at times

If you have any good ones post em, I'm scrounging for more

Who is the Matisse of literature?

>>7104457
you have the worst taste in art

are you dilettantes physically unable to like art outside the 19th century or something? pick up a book

>>7105006
>I feel like he understood vision more than any artist before or after him.

lol?

>>7104778
>Art is there to communicate emotions.

not true at all. commissioned portraits have nothing to do with emotion

>>7099492
That's the whitest Jesus I've ever seen.

>>7100723
What's the story here? It's obviously an execution, but who's being killed? Looks French due to the mountains/soldier uniforms.

>>7105056
What's funny?

>>7105021

Someone extremely talented who instead decides to use his skills painting a bunch of offbeat abstract art?

>>7105108

Pynchon then.

>>7104361
>MUH FEEEEELS XDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
Normies, I swear.

>>7100896
>CHECK OUT THOSE REFUGEES. LOL

>>7105091
Fusilamiento de Torrijos. It's from Spain.

>>7105205
I always feel the urge to see Rothko paintings in person when I come across them on the internet. I imagine they're amazing in their full size.

>>7105058
And nothing to do with art.

>>7105255
The examination of technique made to be perceived as art by a whole conglomeration of critics and culture.

Do any of you have any conception of what art is except what you are suppose to think is good and what you think looks pretty?
You are behaving like someone in /tv/ starting a thread about IMDB's top 250 movies, claiming they are art.

/lit/ should keep to literature, this entire thread is embarrassing.

>>7105255
>>7105292

Liking Rothko is like thinking Avatar is art cause it used a new motion capturing technique.

Supermatism and avstract paintings are not art, they are examinations of techniques, experiments turned into "art" by worthless critics and wanna be art connesuirs.
These paintings are simply testing the limits to be then reintroduced as elements into actual art.

You are all the equivalent of braindead plebs drooling over preliminary sketches of some "famous artist".
Gross.

>>7098977
I did, two weeks ago.

Looks much better IRL

>>7105296
>>7105292
cool story bru

>>7104361
But it makes me feel comfortable.

>>7098564
I was going to post this.
Any good Ivan The Terrible books, or books that give the same horror and despair that's in Ivan's eyes

>>7104508
Autism.

>>7104021

>>7104457
>Hating on Turner and Mondrian
>Even just to elicit a reaction
These are some of the worst opinions I have ever seen

>>7105882

>part of the dumb majority
>perplexed at the opposite opinions of the select few

>>7105948
>Having this amateurish a grasp of the art of implication arrows
>Taking so much time to post such poor quality material
I'm just disappointed for you more than anything anon

>>7100918
best mystic-inspired painting of all time

>>7105994
Please explain to us what you think is art oh wise one.

>>7098670
very nice

>>7100896
best in this thread IMO

although it's shopped

>>7101351
Herc'd

I reccomend reading this "review" and then reading the short books yourselves. It is unlike most of what has been written about art before and SINCE.

>>7106669

forgot the link : http://mileswmathis.com/tols.html

The book itself is called "what is art".

>>7106669
>>7106673

It would certainly cause some of you plebs to at laest look more critically at the pretty crap you adore so much.

>>7106790

Tarkosvky would later add that experimental technique and a desire to be contemporary should already be within the artist not outside of him.
He should not pretend he is making art when he is simply studying new techniques. That is for him to do as part of the preperation for the making of art, as oppose to stamping out experimental pieces cause someone(some clueless fashinable critic) put a high price tag on them and they are in demand.

>>7106129
Any creation that is designed to provoke an emotional response through an abstract simulation of the senses. Of course. I'm not going to lie anon but your definition of art seems entirely arbitrary and I suspect you don't have a clue as too your own definition. But I may be wrong

>>7107025

he made the best looking girls for fantasy/scifi, i'm not talking the boobies either.

>>7098544

>>7107008
i.e. beauty for beauty's sake.
And this is not an arbitary definition? Not only is it arbitrary but it is also less moral and ethical.
You want art to be a tripe.
The definition of art i argue for is also "arbitrary" but unlike yours its moral and serves a greater good, meaning the brining of people together and furthering their commonalities and mutual understanding.
A true artist's goal is the elucudation of the human existence not through scientific means and the intellect but through emotional infection.
Your "art" is merely a useless toy for the bored. A curiosity that should only be a stepping stone, a playing ground where a true artist hones his skills in preperation for the creation of true art. That true art serves as beacon and a connection between all people, pulling them, by way of understanding and emotional infection, towards greater goodnes.

>>7107154
Just remember(If you in your entire life ever experienced true art) that strong emotional feeling and understanding of the point of view and emotionality of the artist.
People here seem to like Dostoievksy and that emotioanl infection exists in some of his works.
If you read his works remember the intense deep and clear emotions about the state of existence Dostievky managed to share with you.
Taht is what art is, not simply playing with words to perfect one's technique.
Such tripe is the equivalent of training your muscles in order to be able to quicky reach the cords and notes you want to play on the piano.
It is not art, it is merely excercise.

>>7107167
There should be no confusing superior technique with actual art. If you make that mistake you are simply a dilletante, liking what one was told to like by opinion makers.
Technique has its place in the helping of an artist to make his appeal more clear and relevant to the times but it is only a tool not the goal of an artist.
Much like the goal of the programmer is not the knowledge of programming language or their effective use but the writing of programs.

>>7102076
You mean the one where you get one of the triforce pieces?

>>7107091
high test goddess.

>>7107185
I apologise if you're not memeing on me anon but if you are then I would thank you to stop. 'Art' in the most literal sense is not meant to be a compliment anon. Food is food if it fulfills the test of edibility, regardless of whether you enjoy it or not. My definition is in no way arbitrary as it permits a simple method of identifying all art. Yours requires a learned connoisseur such as yourself to help the plebian public out with it. You seem to be using a definition of 'art' at odds to the rest of the world and I thought I would simply point it out. I don't suspect you care though. In case you were not aware your original posts served little purpose apart from rustling feathers of those whose works you disparaged. I hope you will reconsider before indulging in these actions in future anon

Any love for Demuth?

Among the rain
and lights
I saw the figure 5
in gold
on a red
firetruck
moving
tense
unheeded
to gong clangs
siren howls
and wheels rumbling
through the dark city

>>7107235
Im sorry but your defintiion does not in fact cover all art but only what you condier art. There is nothing "objective" about it.
Your definition is on the one hand already too general and on the other not general enough to cover all that some can claim is art.
These useless definitions, such as yours, only become more and more general, since their purpose is to serve the goal of making everything claimed by someone to be art, fit within the definition.
It is pointless and vague. When one will dig into it it will become unsustainable needing one to make it even more general.
For you art is everything that the majority of society says is art.
Of course, due to modern circumctances, more and more people in our times who do not understand art and who in the past would not understand what the attraction was of this fake art, are brainwashed by modern culture into accepting fake art - immitation and technique as something of value.
You do have any definition of art. You just pulled it out of your ass and i have seen this so called definition or similair version of it espoused here countless times.
What usually follows are arguments where people post different "art" that seems to not fit even the very general and vague definitions some of the pseudo intellectuals here give.
Eventually the discussion fizzels into "art" is subjective or there is no such thing as art yada yada.

Sorry but you are not even a simple idiot, since such a person can distinguish art from non art much better, you are a pseudo intelelctual poseur who espouses nonesense he heard from other poseurs.

>>7107281
My definition fits perfectely what a person who is not not interested in "art" but can easily feel and recognize the true emotions in actual works of art.
It is only people like you who awnt to pretend they know something while actually knowing nothing that have a hard time to understand what art and finding a workable definition for it.
A person who has had no time of desire to experiecne art would find it very easy toexperience the artists emotions as are conveyed in proper works of art.
Your brain is blocked by pseudo bullshit invented by other bullshitters and pseudo intellctuals to make money off of the industry of fake art.