/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.6131444]

Is Dadaism the endgame of art?

[Anonymous No.6131448]

>>6131444

It's full retard.
Never go full retard.

[Anonymous No.6131449]

No, classification is.

[Anonymous No.6131455]

>>6131448
Half of those are expressionist though

Dadaism is more like anti art

It is the tim and eric of the art world

[Anonymous No.6131456]

>>6131455
if tim and eric is anti-comedy then why is it so funny

[Anonymous No.6131458]

>>6131448
>...Ms Papajewski told AP.

[Anonymous No.6131459]

>>6131444
Dadaism is a reaction to WWI.

The perception of many Dadaists was that responsibility for the war and the suffering conflict caused was modern capitalist bourgeois for whom the majority of art, modern and otherwise, was created. These capitalist cold rational ideas which permeate modern art, were seen as having lead to horrifying conclusions.

Their response was to create this anti-art which was meant to purposefully destroy bourgeois aesthetic values.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.6131463]

>>6131444
It's a branch, a rather fun branch. Another "end" would be the abstract nonsense like Rothko and Malevich. Boring shit.

>Full retard
It was a great art movement.

[Anonymous No.6131467]

>>6131463
Woah, butters, don't shit talk Rothko. That motherfucker went through a lot more than you.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.6131470]

>>6131459
Y'know. When I was studying Dada I hadn't been properly introduced to Marxism. All the books I read on it dutifully avoided ever mentioning its socialist leanings. Makes so much sense now.
Thank man

[Anonymous No.6131474]

>>6131444
No, but it is woefully underestimated.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.6131475]

>>6131467
Who was the guy who did these black lines, looks like a zoom in of section of calligraphy?
Some Russian sounding name as I recall. Super boring body of work.

[Anonymous No.6131479]

>>6131470
Glad I could help

>>6131475
You don't mean Kandinsky, do you?

This is Rothko

[Anonymous No.6131486]

>>6131456
Ring ring a ding ding ring a ding

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.6131497]

Dadaism is sickness...I don't mean degeneracy, I mean it is meant to express a feeling of sickness toward the upper class that felt more emotion toward teacup art than toward all the people dying in WWI. It's not the final boss of art, it was never meant to be; it is very political shit that is intended to be the artistic equivalent of vomit in response to fine food. Anyone who says they like Dada who isn't very familiar with its context is probably a moron who thinks being lolrandom is some sort of genius inspiration. It's not great, inspired art, it's fucking hideous and barren, and that is the point, because Dadaists saw upper class art lovers as hideous and barren in substance à la American Psycho.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.6131498]

>>6131479
Naw, Kandinsky is colourful and looks like a representation of jazz or something.

Oh geez. Bad typos everywhere. Sorry.

[Anonymous No.6131500]

>>6131497
Christ, just fucking read you twat.
>>6131459

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.6131503]

>>6131497
>in response to fine food.

[Anonymous No.6131504]

>>6131498
If you like Kandinsky, there's not really a reason to dislike Malevich. Sure, he did the black and white sqares but he also did stuff like this.

[Anonymous No.6131506]

>>6131497
What about people who were inspired by Dada, like Beefheart and Jodorowsky?

[Anonymous No.6131516]

>>6131506
Don't mind him, he's just a traditionalist that likes to shit on influential and important artistic movements in a bengali tiger poaching camp.

[Anonymous No.6131519]

>>6131497
>it's fucking hideous and barren
nah, it's pretty fun

not as fun as surrealism but pretty fun still

[Anonymous No.6131522]

>>6131516
All I'm saying is I understand Dadaism was a product and reaction of the times, but how do you classify people directly influenced by them who are contemporary?

[Anonymous No.6131526]

>>6131519
There's some Dada out there that you can see an obnoxious contempt and it really ruins the work

But then there's stuff like OP's pic that's sort of terrifying and stuff like Dadaphone which is fun and goofy as hell

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.6131529]

>>6131504
Not a real big fan.
Oskar Fischinger is cool
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=they7m6YePo

[Anonymous No.6131534]

>>6131522
They are part of postmodernism which is still largely doing the same things but I doubt that a significant portion actually understand the political rationale of their fore-bearers.

Just like how stuckism, remodernism, and anti-anti-art are all somehow even worse than postmodernism becuase they are purely reactionary.

[Anonymous No.6131540]

>>6131534
There is literally nothing wrong with postmodernism

[Anonymous No.6131545]

>>6131444
>the berlin notgeld stabbing the man in the back
top kek dadaists top kek

[Anonymous No.6131558]

>>6131540
I'm not saying there is something wrong with postmodernism as an art movement, I think it is an important conceptual step. My problem is just that a lot of what is being produced is very inward looking. Most of it is self referential and very much concerned with the question of what art is.

Personally, I think that this is bad because that is a very limiting goal to work under. It may open the playing field so that literally anything could be called art but too many pieces are overly concerned with further stretching that boundary which is a really artificial and useless goal.

The the three reactions come along and try to create these artificial boundaries to art. It's like both camps are just fundamentally looking at art as only definition instead of as expression of a point of view.

[Anonymous No.6131559]

>>6131444
Art has an endgame?

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.6131562]

>>6131519
Kurt Schwitters is pretty fun, but he was ostracized from the group for being more of an active artistic than a reaction against art culture.

>>6131516
wut. I'm not a traditionalist at all. I can appreciate traditional art, but I as something that's run it's course, not something that should be brought back anymore than art without perspective should be brought back

>>6131506
What about them? I never said Dadaism wasn't art, just that it is impossible to actually grasp the point of unless you understand the context. Dadaism, and some of its principles, heavily influenced later art, they paved the way for breaking down many of art's rules and conveying emotions conventional art was incapable of. But it's also attached to its context in the same way some picture of a a teddy bear next to oven from a death camp would require context to comprehend.

[Anonymous No.6132779]

>>6131448
>Muh traditional art vs Contemporary art

You're the only full retard here dumbass.

[Anonymous No.6132795]

Is late fifties to mid sixties experimental jazz the endgame of popular music?

[Anonymous No.6132802]

>>6131444
>Is this historical thing the end of history?

[Anonymous No.6132805]

>>6131534
Dadaism is modernist. Expressionism is modernist. Primitivism - modernist. Cubism - modernist. Surrealism - modernist. Futurism - modernist.

[Anonymous No.6132806]

Do you think romanticism will return after robots begin to do more and AIs come into play?

[Anonymous No.6132814]

>>6132805
Dadaism arrived at the same time as the modernist movement but is not itself modernist. It is distinct in goal and artistic methodology.

[Anonymous No.6132816]

>>6132806
Stop saying what my book is about.

[Anonymous No.6132847]

>>6132814
>modernist movement

No such thing.

[Anonymous No.6132863]

>>6132847
Suck a cock, you pedantic faggot.

[Anonymous No.6133097]

>>6132863
die of aids faggot

[Anonymous No.6133845]

no, that'd be
weird facebook.

[Anonymous No.6133868]

>>6131470
How old are you?

[Anonymous No.6133884]

>>6131463
>abstract nonsense like Rothko
pleb detected. rothko is glorious.

[Anonymous No.6133914]

>>6133884
>he thinks rothko is good

[Anonymous No.6134245]

>>6131444
Shit posting is the new art now.

[Anonymous No.6134253]

>>6131448
Didn't Napoleon knock down part of The Last Supper to make a doorway?

[Anonymous No.6134258]

>>6131459
>EPATER LA BOURGEOISIE
right on, mon cherie

[Anonymous No.6134303]

>>6131456
anti- as a prefix does not mean "the opposite of" but rather "in opposition to." tim and eric, then, could be said to be in opposition to comedy, but not comedy in the sense of anything that is funny, but /the state of comedy as an artf orm/. similarly, anti-art is not "not art," but art in opposition to the state of art.

[Anonymous No.6134421]

>>6134245
shut up faggot

[Anonymous No.6134456]

>>6133914
>he has never seen a rothko painting irl

[Anonymous No.6134538]

Yes, it is.

Too bad motherfuckers never realized based Dada ruined it all. There's no point in doing anything - not only art - thanks to it.

Also, for the shit/pol/sters and muh real art that arise whenever there is such a thread, here's a quick reminder in the form of a friendly meemee :^)

[Anonymous No.6134544]

>>6131470
Dada wasn socialist, the only political (at their time) that would even come close to Dada was Stirner or any other form of anarchist nihilism.

[Anonymous No.6134555]

>>6131497
While you're on track, A) there is no dadaist B) it's not supposed to be ugly either, since there can be ugly / bad / etc. art. It's meant to be completely detached from whatever notions of "art" or "good" or "bad" - or any bourgeois ideal whatsoever - there is.

In a sense, it is "lolsorandom", only it's also much more than that.

[Anonymous No.6134562]

This website is the endgame of Dada, actually

[Anonymous No.6134563]

>>6131534
Man, Thomson did ruin Stuckism.

It sounds like he's mad the big boys didn't let him play with them, and that's all he wants.

Billy Childish, on the other hand, keeps painting his beautiful expressionist stuff better and better, while caring just enough to not sound like a cunt.

[Anonymous No.6134603]

>>6131444
There is no "endgame of art." People still value things that were valued in the centuries before Christ as art, and productive inclinations won't change that.

[Anonymous No.6134637]

In any decent universe post-modernism would be a thought-crime.

[Anonymous No.6134654]

>>6131448
Is there more modern art mockery pics?

[Anonymous No.6134658]

>>6132779
>muh modern art

[Anonymous No.6134663]

>>6134654
>>6134658
the weird thing that people miss is that most modern artists would probably love both of these stories.

[Anonymous No.6134690]

>>6134538
Didn't Evola leave dada? Not that he's even a fascist.

[Anonymous No.6134702]

>>6134658
That's not even modern.

[Anonymous No.6134705]

>>6134663
>the weird thing that people miss is that most modern artists would probably love both of these stories.

And? I don't think it's that "people miss" it, it's that it doesn't even matter if they like it or not.

[Anonymous No.6134730]

this reminds me of a gallery i went to a while back. they told me that there was a piece installed in the backyard and basement as well and in the backyard there was this little treehouse thing where people drank alcohol in and everyone flocked to it thinking it was an installation and they were talking about it, "I suppose it's a comment on the sociality of art events, the superficiality". But the actual sculpture was a piece of wire and metal hanging from a clothesline beside it that no one took notice of, which I only found out after I looked up the artist on the Internet. and this was part of a major art event in the city. the basement installation was even more stupid.
contemporary art is so bad, I don't even know why I bother to go to galleries other than to be pretentious.

[Anonymous No.6134751]

>>6134663
Not an artists, though doing my best to get a PhD in aesthethics (going for my masters this year), but I do love those stories, for showing the vacuity of part of the art public and how detached art has come from reality (I do think this is good, to some degree)

>>6134690
He was a futurist, and shit/pol/sters love him stil

>>6134705
People are detached from art. That is a problem, as far as modernism (and parts of PoMo) are concerned

>>6134730
This whole situation is a beautiful piece of art, which means something has been achieved, be it within the author's intentions or not.

[Anonymous No.6134771]

>>6134751
how is it going w/ your masters? you in the states?
I'm interested going into graduate school for art theory

[Anonymous No.6134797]

>>6131458
Of all sad words of tongue and pen,
The saddest are these: /pol/ was right again.

[Anonymous No.6134816]

>>6134771
I'm brazillian.
Tbh, things took a bit of a downturn, had to delay college thanks to a broken foot, and up until a couple of years ago, you didn't need to quote the original work in your masters, but they've since changed that (for the public universities, at least, and contrary to the US, they're the best schools here), and I don't really speak italian (though I can understand lots of it), so I've been mostly preparing, reading some of Eco's semiotics and aesthethics (which I intend to base my master's on) and studying some italian with my gf

[Anonymous No.6134951]

>>6134690
>conflating fascist aesthetics and futurism with Nazi aesthetics and oldmanism

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.6135396]

>>6133884
I like different shades of red too, I'm just not going to give credit to him for inventing them.

>>6134544
>the only political (at their time) that would even come close to Dada was Stirner
Socialistic leanings, as the poster pointed out, I don't mean they were red spouting Marxists, but they were not down to fight WWI. and yes, socialism was very big around that time. You could look at them as more anarchist now that I think about it.

[Anonymous No.6135416]

>>6131448
>>6134654

I tried to warn you guys...

[Anonymous No.6135439]

>>6131444
No, that's suprematism.

[Anonymous No.6135447]

>>6131463
>the abstract nonsense like Rothko and Malevich. Boring shit.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.6135524]

>>6135416
>I tried to warn you guys...
Who cares?
Seen Who the Fuck Is Jackson Pollock?
If that film doesn't put the art world into perspective for ya, I just give up.

>>6135447
It's just my opinion, dude. Nothing to be afraid of.

[Anonymous No.6135592]

>>6135524
>Jackson Pollock?

Even Zizek hates Pollock and thinks hes trash...and he thinks Rothko has "skills"

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.6135601]

>>6135592
You don't even have to be a fan to appreciate the film. Found on youtube if you're interested

[Anonymous No.6136702]

>>6135592
>.and he thinks Rothko has "skills"
how can people not see the skill in rothko?

if he wasn't especially skillful, how come no one seems to be able to imitate him properly?

[Anonymous No.6136713]

>>6131448
>classical art
>in museums

the real problem is the museum, not modernist art

[Anonymous No.6136715]

>>6131459
i really like the modernist idea of the purest art destroying itself. totally true and it only took like 30,000 years

[Anonymous No.6136716]

>>6135592
>>6136702

Most people have never seen a Rothko, just a print.

Close up, Rothko's work is breathtakingly good.

There's an exhibition in my town at the moment, I've been three times, and I'll probably go again before it leaves at the end of the month.

[Anonymous No.6136718]

>>6131558
museums are the limiting goal

[Anonymous No.6136723]

>>6133097
that's pretty mean when a lot of gay artists in 80s ny died of aids :(

[Anonymous No.6136748]

>>6134658
or maybe nobody is stepping on the glove because in civilized society you don't step on other people's belongings

[Anonymous No.6136766]

>>6136716
I hope these VR glasses and such will make digital viewings of art more true to life in the future and accessible for more people. Staring at a little jpeg really doesn't compare.

[Anonymous No.6136788]

>>6131444
No, dadaism was meant as a short term movement that wanted to escape meaning and probably some form of intellectualism but was also very political. Then the surrealists came and were all about intellectualism and some more about pedantry and politics.

[Anonymous No.6136853]

Was dada basically the punk of the interbellum?

[Anonymous No.6136864]

>>6131448
If they want to this kind of stuff to express something, they can do it, they can expose it, they can even sell it, but not for millions dollars.

The cynical me is certain that it is money washing.

[Anonymous No.6136897]

>>6136864
>but not for millions dollars.
Why not? People spend fortunes on useless shit all the time. It's the driving force behind our economy.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.6137377]

>>6136853
Punk/skinheads came from the counter-culture movement of the 20th century that was pretty much kicked off in Zurich with these folks reaction to the madness of The Great War.

[Anonymous No.6138348]

>>6131455
>trash
>expressionist

also you and
>>6131444
>>6131459
>>6131497
>>6131522
>>6131562
>>6132805
>>6132814
>>6136788
please note that dada is a name that isn't supposed to be "ism-ed"

>>6131463
>abstract nonsense like Rothko and Malevich
>boring shit
filtered

>>6131504
>implying the black and white squares aren't his best works
When I read you all post about art I wonder why you even pretend to like books if you can't into spirituality.

Dada wasn't spiritual, either an access ramp for Breton to start at being a subversive fa, a way to make collages classy or a way for them to get some girls. Some of you said it was a reaction to WWI, but the members of Dada were pretty young at the time and avoided the conflicts by going to Switzerland. Dada was one the less politically engaged movement ever, which made Breton leave and ruin surrealism with marxism.

>tfw the fin de siècle utopia was ruined by the two world wars and will never happen again
>tfw art is either cynical or so deep nobody gets it

anyway guys, stop acting like you know a shit about it and go back to la fondation Louis Vuitton pour l'art contemporain or something.

[Anonymous No.6138352]

>>6131444
The problem is that you are looking at art as if it is some kind of linear progression.

Why should art have an "endgame"?
How would that even be defined?

[Anonymous No.6138402]

>>6138352
hegel

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.6140504]

>>6138348
A wild pedant appears!

>>6138352
It's his way of looking at it. Not the best way, I agree with you. I offered the tree branch metaphor