[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 92 KB, 759x960, D-C-McYXUAEZqQd.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13452065 No.13452065 [Reply] [Original]

what are some good books about understanding contemporary art in depth? not just normie superficial stuff about abstraction and "how photography changed everything", which i don't really buy, but more engaged texts about the figure of the artist and the point of art when it gets to weird and meaningless without lengthy explanations

no books about money laundering please

>> No.13452069

>>13452065
start point: don't read books about books
end point: don't read books about books

>> No.13452070

>>13452065
Can you not use google. I searched "list of aesthetics books" and got plenty of good results.

>> No.13452121

>>13452069
i mean art as in drawn pictures or sculpture, not art as in literature
>>13452070
but i want to know if they are good before purchasing them, i'm afraid google will just give me some normie establishment garbage to be uncritically consumed by people who want to fit in

>> No.13452164

>>13452121
>i'm afraid google will just give me some normie establishment garbage to be uncritically consumed by people who want to fit in

why are you afraid of that? it's exactly what you are asking for. You want to fit in and be told what art to like, so you should be reading exactly that sort of book.

>> No.13452169

>>13452164
i don't want that at all, i think contemporary art is garbage, i just want to be told about the other side from an intellectually solid position, not read literature that is already preaching to the converted

>> No.13452182
File: 348 KB, 1920x1278, y019.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13452182

>>13452169
>i just want to be told about the other side from an intellectually solid position

Alright mister, if it is your staunch desire to be told what to think, I can do so, as a favour to you. Go to wal-mart, and get this image printed out, blown up, and framed, and then place it on your wall.

>> No.13452220

>>13452182
>be told what to think
what

>> No.13452222

>>13452065
Contemporary art is completely fucked and so is the language they use talking and writing about it. Noone can say anything substantial about it, because there's nothing to talk about.

>> No.13452224

>>13452222
yes, to me contemporary art looks like shitposting in a museum, and it should carry the same prestige as internet shitposting, but it would be nice to read the other side to see if i'm missing something

>> No.13452230

>>13452224
But you're not missing anything. And it's not shitposting, because everyone in the artworld, including the artists, take the art seriously.

>> No.13452269

>>13452230
so more like cringeposting?

>> No.13452370

>>13452269
I'd say something in between cringe and yikes posting

>> No.13452527

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tMtV5p0s4E

>> No.13452679

>>13452527
This is such bullshit. The negation of "beauty" isn't anything new. Even artist like Rembrandt already challenged the conventional idea of beauty and instead embraced the reality and ugliness of the world and even in his lifetime people admired his art. 20th century art is by no means as original as it claims to be.

>> No.13452699

>>13452679
what

>> No.13452705
File: 19 KB, 394x450, 618IzCTe2+L._SY450_.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13452705

>>13452679

>> No.13452731

>>13452679
What what? Traditional beauty has always been challenged through art history. It's not something new that came up in the 20th century. The real problem of contemporary art is the disinterest in the object. Thanks to all the concept art bs art has become completely worthless and is pretty much dead by now.

>> No.13452735

>>13452731
Meant for obviously >>13452699
>>13452705
Fuck, how do you know that my teeth are fucked?

>> No.13454001

>>13452069
you would be throwing out like 99% of contemporary literature
actually come to think of it based advice

>> No.13454062
File: 1.51 MB, 425x481, devil pepe 2.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13454062

>>13452065
>Tfw I don't think I will tell Op my super secret genius knowledge on the artistic
>I'll be a famous polymath in a few years just you wait.
>but wait.... I can give you this even if it isn't my super secret big brain genius knowledge it goes into the general nature of art from the Schopenhauerian stance then continues into the modern : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FPdrLlshRA
>but wait.... there is more again this time by the greatest artistic genius to ever of lived Richard Wagner who was himself a Schopenhauerian, the essay goes into the general nature of art and its relation to religion and many many other things. From this it inadvertently branches towards the modern and if you like it read the continuing essay as well as Wagner's other works: http://users.belgacom.net/wagnerlibrary/prose/wlpr0126.htm#d0e1158
>mwahahaahaha but you'll never know my unique super secret genius big brain knowledge that I created myself

>> No.13454153

>>13452679
>thinks beauty is happiness and base pleasure
>doesn't understand there is a defining order for beauty

>> No.13455576

>>13452065
Art by Clive Bell
Art as Device by Viktor Shklovsky
The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction by Walter Benjamin

>> No.13457315

>>13452065
Contemporary art isn’t about what it is, it’s about what you can say about what it is.

>> No.13457333
File: 220 KB, 449x604, 1556628306616.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13457333

>>13452065
This was always one of the worst and most Reddit meme formats. I detest it and you and have ignored your post, thread and their contents aside from the obvious blight aforementioned.

>> No.13457346

Read Umberto Eco's book about Semiotics. Very good, keep an open mind but ultimately bear in mind that modern art can be explained without being validated. Understand what they think, but don't become devoid of purpose down the lane.

>> No.13457593

>>13455576
nice. i forgot about that Benjamin essay. it will be interesting to see somebody argue for the "photography did it" meme

>> No.13457936

>>13457315
Which is more or less nothing

>> No.13457960 [SPOILER] 
File: 414 KB, 900x1146, 1563011002185.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13457960

Literally, what are you talking about when you talk about contemporary art. New trends in figurative painting, conceptualist shenanigans, what?

>> No.13457964

>>13457333
It always was a lousy meme format.
NPC tier.

>> No.13457973

>>13452065
It's really simple and fast read https://b-ok.xyz/book/2069144/19f0a3
Covers art, architecture then philosophy

>> No.13458092

>>13457960
dildos and squares in museums

>> No.13458122

>>13452169
>I want someone more intelligent than me to give me a post-hoc justification for my kneejerk reactionary position

You'll love Roger Scrotum, but just be aware that you'll get one of two reactions when trying to apply his talking points in your own life.

Either people will see right through you and realise that you're just posting copypasta irl and are unable to elaborate when pressed, or you'll exclusively stick to sharing your views with low IQ people who don't really give a shit either way about fine art in order to feel clever

You are now thinking about either claiming I'm projecting or mocking my "reddit spacing", don't be that guy

>> No.13458143

>>13458092
you know black square is over 100 years old yes?

>> No.13458153

>>13452065
read the wiki article

>> No.13458202

>>13458143
yes, just like toilet in museum. doesn't stop them from keeping doing it.

>> No.13458210

>>13458143
>>13458202
when was blank canvas invented though?

>> No.13458240

>>13458122
>he thinks you need to be high iq to understand contemporary art
Fine art these days is completely fucked and it's all just a huge criclejerk. There is very little art with actual substance and the literature about this art is even less substantial.

>> No.13458248

>>13458240
and yet you're still unable to form your own opinion, asking for people to tell you what to think on a Japanese meme sharing hotspot

>> No.13458256

>>13458202
the toilet was rejected from exhibition and duchamp's reasons were far far different from malevich's in creating black square. it's not all connected in an assault on tradition

>> No.13458262

>>13458240
contemporary art suffers because everyone has your shit critical skills

>> No.13458264

The monetary value of modern art is quantified premium on the opinions/perspectives of the upper class vs the rest of society

>> No.13458278

>>13458256
are you sure toilet and square were fundamentally different in their aim? is it not all part of disregard of standards, even if that disregard is supported for different individual whims, the overall direction were they push is the same

>> No.13458289

>>13458256
it may have been rejected from exhibition, but it ended up in art books, so at the end of the day it's part of mainstream art establishment despite how much the mainstream likes to see itself as somehow disruptive and counterculture

>> No.13459421

>>13458256
The black square is a disruptive piece and so is Duchamps toilet or at least they tried to be. Both are meme tier art though.

>> No.13459478

>>13459421
i know you are not arguing for it, but is it even really disruptive if the mainstream is already aligned with being disruptive? wouldn't actual skill be more disruptive in that scenario?

>> No.13459986

>>13459478
I think the black square and also the toilet were genuinely disruptive in their time. However the mainstream taste adjusted fairly quickly and thus the loose their "revolutionary" aspects. And that begs the question what else is there? Is there any other meaning or intent in theses "artworks" beyond their rebellious nature? I think not. Furthermore I believe that the effect followed was pretty much the downfall of the fine arts, which started with abstract art and manifested itself most clearly in concept "art". They claimed they wanted to free art out of the grips of the elite, represented by the museum and thus the art object itself, but it resulted in far more elitism than before. Art only concerned with art itself is of no value whatsoever, which is what we have now. It's either that or some bullshit "political art" that seemingly never heard of subtlety, but hammers your head in with its, oh so important, message.
There are certainly some great, interesting artist still out there, but thats just my take on mainstream "art" .

>> No.13460536

>>13452065
what is the AOC pic story

>> No.13460559

>>13458122
You literally can't even read a simple post, he asked for people defending modern art not attacking it you fucking retard

>> No.13461070

If you're looking for something big, 'Art since 1900' by Hal Foster is very comprehensive and widely regarded as THE encyclopedia of modern art.
If you want something on contemporary art exclusively, try 'Relational Aesthetics' by Nicolas Bourriaud, it's also become somewhat of a standard work among artists, curators and the like

>> No.13461107

>>13458278
no, this is an opinion developed in retrospect of all that happened with art in the 20th century. obviously there is not a disregard for standards if the medium is still the same, for example. the art still functions in the same way as an object

>> No.13461128

>>13458289
this may blow your mind but duchamp was rejected from the modernist canon of greenberg who instead promoted abstract expressionism as the most advanced art, just to show you that modernism isn't united in its aims, let alone tending towards abstraction. neo-dadaists and minimalists in turn rejected academic formalism in the 50s and 60s

the point is about its rejection that yes it is in the mainstream now but only because duchamp was discovered again especially by american artists 50 years later and it is that legacy that lands him in the art history books rather than everyone loving how shocked they were at a toilet when it was first exhibited

>> No.13461142

>>13452224
>but it would be nice to read the other side
Feel free to do so, but be prepared for unironic fartsniffing.

>> No.13461154

>>13452230
>everyone in the artworld, including the artists, take the art seriously
It is mere affectation. There is no depth to their sincerity. Any significant conversation with such types reveals them as frauds. The disdain they exude when they realize that they are being critiqued is hilarious.

>> No.13461156

>>13459986
>Is there any other meaning or intent in theses "artworks" beyond their rebellious nature? I think not.

absolutely yes. if anything ties together the loose threads of modernism it is social revolution. it is a bourgeois art. this kind of shocking rebellion or whatever only becomes mainstream after the second world war when that kind of revolutionary spirit dies down because comfortable consumerism becomes the 'culture' of the west. then we can safely plop mondrian and van gogh in the same room of a museum in some general survey of 'modernism' because it is no longer relevant. contemporary art now doesn't really continue this sequence even though we usually only qualify it by how it engages with this tradition. if you ever go to a gallery on photography for example you will see the most boring, non-revolutionary photography of just people being people at a certain time and in a certain place. dildos by comparison are extremely rare and in most cases these will be by emerging artists in small local galleries not museums 'of contemporary art'

>> No.13461211

>>13452065
You don’t need a book for that, just watch this video

https://youtu.be/vVFasyCvEOg

>> No.13461218
File: 213 KB, 862x1203, 1563029796971.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13461218

>>13452065
I enjoyed the Cremaster tome

>> No.13461563

>>13460536
loss

>> No.13461644

>>13461156
>social revolution ties together modernism
Not really, most art and literature of the time reflects the isolation and disorientation of the individual in a highly technical and rational environment, but very few actually suggest social revolution. Artist like hopper are far more interesting to me than malevich or Duchamp, because he actually says something about the human condition, while the black square and the toilet may have revolutionary qualities, but nothing more

>> No.13462882

>>13461107
standards as in technical standards
>a level of quality