/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.6788309]

So /lit/, explain to me why exactly I should appreciate contemporary art?

[Anonymous No.6788314]

>>6788309
To get mad pussy.

[Anonymous No.6788321]

No
If you're dumb enough and bias enough to ask this question you don't deserve to appreciate modern art

[Anonymous No.6788325]

>>6788309
It's what plebs prefer, they can't think for themselves so they need to be spoon fed actions and stories.

[Anonymous No.6788328]

>he didn't read the republic
>he doesn't know than imitative art is tantamount to tyranny
>he doesn't understand how the forms are more pricesly approximated through abstract art

[Anonymous No.6788329]

>>6788314

You don't need to be into contemporary art to get liberal arts chicks.
In fact, most of those are dumb and dense as fuck and just a bit of edge in your taste in music, clothing and here and there a reference to an artist you like and you're in.

[Anonymous No.6788333]

Read EH Gombrich - Story of Art

Art isn't about hyperrealistic representation.

Also, you don't have to appreciate it, you know. Whether you do or do not doesn't affect me at all.

[Anonymous No.6788344]

>>6788325

will anyone else ever be this gifted?

[Anonymous No.6788346]

>>6788321
>Hey everyone, Im part of this secret club that's actually not secret and which consist of looking at stuff

[Anonymous No.6788350]

Contemporary art thinks that the more indecipherable a piece, the better.
Which leads to "Interior Semiotics" tier crap.

[Anonymous No.6788354]

>>6788344

[Anonymous No.6788362]

The crucial difference is the lack of sublimity nowadays.

[Anonymous No.6788366]

>>6788350
Not really.
Contemporary art is just more worried about questions internal to itself than to it's place and function in the world.

Therefore, you have to know what are the questions to understand the answers the artists are proposing, or, alternatively, know the answers to know what the artists are questioning.

>>6788346
A lot of art has been AGAINST "looking at stuff" for a good 50 years now, if not more.

[Anonymous No.6788369]

>>6788362
>

[Anonymous No.6788370]

>UR 2 DUMB 2 GET IT

Contemporary art confirmed for classist.

[Anonymous No.6788372]

why
why would anyone explain it to you
why do you think you should 'appreciate' it
why do you think it matters at all whether you do or not

if you like old paintings and sculptures so much why don't you go READ something about them

[Anonymous No.6788377]

>>6788366

So art for art's sake. Still an air of mystery and removal, but mostly a sign of the times where artist are individualized entities pandering to the immanence of the third estate.

[Anonymous No.6788379]

>>6788354

[Anonymous No.6788387]

>>6788377
Well, the biggest problem, for me, is how modernist projects never managed to be concluded, which lead us to the static, self-absorbed state we've been left since the 70s.

Then again, a lot of people call me a reactionary with my head up my arse who fantasizes about absurd utopias of german opium smokers and french degenerates, and they might be right.

[Anonymous No.6788392]

>>6788369
>implying there's anything sublime about this
there's not a single noble quality at hand here

[Anonymous No.6788393]

Who /symbolism/ here?

[Anonymous No.6788402]

>>6788377
If art for art's sake is bad, what would you suggest?

[Anonymous No.6788403]

Common people started liking art. This made artists feel like commercial sell-outs, so they raced to make the worst shit imaginable so the populace could reject them and they could go back to feeling elite.

It's all about ego.

[Anonymous No.6788413]

>>6788403

But that would assume that all artists of an entire generation got together and planned to do all that stuff which is absolute bullshit. The reality is that were are simply viewing this generation of art from within, whereas we view older generations of art based on the stuff which has stood the test of time.

[Anonymous No.6788422]

>>6788402

Art should be didactic again. Not only that function though, but it would be welcome.
People look for guidance and I don't find it that much in a self-referential piece or some grad student's attempt at asking the same "lol what is art tho?" question.
I guess everyone's inner eagle will scream "Goebbels!" at the thought.

But what the hell.. I'm sure I'm talking to a professional class of art connoisseurs who whip their saggy titted hooked nose gf's while quoting Lautréamont.

[Anonymous No.6788427]

>>6788403

Funny how the same people will hate the GOP for screwing the working man, while consistently denying him access to their special events.

[Anonymous No.6788430]

>art
>art
>art
>art
>art

bravo, good productive and insightful discussion

[Anonymous No.6788433]

You shouldn't, just as you should disregard contemporary literature and contemporary music.
>>6788333
>Art isn't about hyperrealistic representation.
It really never has been, other than commissioned portraits, stop talking out of your ass.

[Anonymous No.6788435]

/lit/ - literature

[Anonymous No.6788446]

>>6788413
>an entire generation got together and planned
It's more like a few of them independently came to the same solution to their "problem" at around the same time, and when everyone else saw how successful they were they got on board.

[Anonymous No.6788455]

>>6788328

PSA to all retards living in 2000 BC:

The universe is inherently meaningless. Value is something human minds impose upon it.

Have fun.

[Anonymous No.6788461]

>>6788309
I don't know if you're familiar with the MBTI, but if you are, you can think like this:

Old art was done and appreciated by S people. Now, N can do it too. Actually, the only good contemporary S artist I can think of is Kubrick. And he wasn't that good anyway.

[Anonymous No.6788466]

Because you're supposed to make your body the form of old art and your mind the form of contemporary art for pussy gains

Pic related- I'm 6 months from Greek sculpture

[Anonymous No.6788472]

>>6788466
You have a misconception with the phrase "start with the Greeks" apparently.

[Anonymous No.6788479]

>>6788461
jesus christ this board is at an all time low

[Anonymous No.6788481]

>>6788433
>he only reads classics
You are what is wrong with /lit/. Please die

[Anonymous No.6788485]

>>6788479
Have problem with Jung, others, or me? I'm eager to be schooled.

[Anonymous No.6788487]

>>6788481
>classics
Meaningless buzzword.

>death threats
Typical commie

[Anonymous No.6788489]

>>6788472
What's funny is I'm consistently one of the postmodernist shitposters here. I'm totally caught up in the absurdly abstract contemporary philosophy and I listen to Philip Glass and house music, but I worship Laocoön.

[Anonymous No.6788491]

>>6788455
That changes nothing
beaity is beautiful to us with or without "meaning", whatever that means

[Anonymous No.6788497]

>>6788487
Well what would you call them since you don't read contemporary.
>he only reads classics
>he's above buzzwords

[Anonymous No.6788527]

>>6788309
>that pic
Wrong.

[Anonymous No.6788542]

>>6788309
you don't have to. Its like trying to get someone who listens to classical to listen to hip hop, everyone has preference

[Anonymous No.6788545]

>>6788309
>art, then
Poor imitations of things I can see in reality on daily basis. Serves the artists goals, but viewers don't get much.

>art, now
Abstract things that are designed to evoke emotions and actually serve me somehow, and not only the artist

[Anonymous No.6788551]

>>6788527
What are those...are those videogames? They are not art you silly boy.

[Anonymous No.6788555]

>>6788545
apply yourself dude

[Anonymous No.6788559]

>>6788344
reminds me of this

[Anonymous No.6788560]

>>6788551
Those specific games are artworks, but not very good in my opinion. Maybe Mirror's Edge is somewhat better. Your art concept is outdated.

[Anonymous No.6788562]

>ITT: people who know nothing about todays art scene/industry

Plenty of amazing artist out there.
Educate yourself, pleb.

[Anonymous No.6788571]

>>6788562
Not being sarcastic. Educate us. Give us some examples

[Anonymous No.6788577]

>>6788562
Not even just "plenty," I'd say right now there is as big an art boom as there was in ancient Greece when shit was at its peak.

[Anonymous No.6788590]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HON4AswPVk

[Anonymous No.6788598]

>>6788344
Bernini

[Anonymous No.6788603]

>>6788560
>implying Alien, Far Cry, Dying Light, and Crysis are bad
The rest are alright, still better than the majority of what comes out game-wise. Except maybe HAWKEN, and Hellraid got canceled.

[Anonymous No.6788610]

>>6788560
>your art concept
Minorities often try to break the boundaries of established definitions by claiming none exist.

[Anonymous No.6788614]

>>6788560
Not Dishonored?

[Anonymous No.6788617]

>>6788603
They may be good as games - and I have no opposition to "simple hedonistic aesthetics" theory. It's only that I find Mirror's Edge more refined and more structurally solid than the rest, according to what it's trying to accomplish.

[Anonymous No.6788621]

>>6788610
Yes, but my concern is not that. Anyone who denies "vidya" as a valid form of text (that can be artistic) has some morbid prejudices.

[Anonymous No.6788623]

https://youtu.be/lNI07egoefc

[Anonymous No.6788624]

>>6788527
One of these is a masterpiece of modern art, sold for 43.8 million dollars, that at one point had Coca Cola spilled on it

The other is the insignificant menu screen of a game that was made 18 years ago, something that you blank out of your mind unless you're looking for a rare drop

[Anonymous No.6788628]

>>6788527
Is your point that video games are art, or that modern art is more focused on the self

[Anonymous No.6788636]

>>6788617
>according to what it's trying to accomplish
Sounds like you're injecting more "meaning" bullshit into things like the abstract faggots do. Stop it. All those games set out to achieve something and accomplish that accordingly, while being the most technologically and artistically advanced creations currently at our delight.

[Anonymous No.6788642]

>>6788628
Both, and they're heavily related.

[Anonymous No.6788647]

>>6788636
No, I'm not talking about meaning at all. There are experiences and feelings Mirror's Edge tries to induce and I think its textual structure fits those ends well enough. Am I clear now?

[Anonymous No.6788655]

>>6788485
Jung and the Myers Briggs test is pseudoscience at best.
By all means take the test to use it for some introspection, but don't take it as hard facts or go around using the terms like they can be locally applied with accuracy.

[Anonymous No.6788656]

>>6788621
>yes but my concern is not that
oh thats nice but I didnt give you permission to change topic

[Anonymous No.6788657]

>>6788527
>>6788560
that's not helping you at all. If I sat for hours staring at the Mona Lisa each day I'd be fucking lifeless loser

[Anonymous No.6788662]

>>6788647
>There are experiences and feelings Mirror's Edge tries to induce and I think its textual structure fits those ends well enough
None of those games DON'T do this.

[Anonymous No.6788682]

Everyone: >>>/v/

[Anonymous No.6788686]

>>6788662
>enough
We could discuss about why I consider Mirror's Edge slightly superior than the rest that I've played. If you make me agree, I can say that it's not too. Not a big issue.

>>6788657
Pragmatist artistic theory? That's new.

>>6788656
I have nothing to say to your statement. I agree with the thing you said. What do you want me to speak about?

>>6788655
Alright, thanks for the response. I wasn't serious anyway - spouting theoretical things without actual basis is not a very good thing. I wondered how people would react.

[Anonymous No.6788702]

>>6788657
that's cause the mona lisa is a painting and not particularly good

[Anonymous No.6788709]

>>6788682
As long as its related to art discussion there's nothing wrong with discussing video games here. If that's a problem the /lit/ mods should really consider taking art discussions away completely.

[Anonymous No.6788720]

One of these is a painting sold for over 1 million dollars

The other is an image generated (essentially on accident) by image recognition software when an image of static -- and its output -- was continually fed through the program

[Anonymous No.6788728]

>>6788309
You shouldn't have to. All post ~1900 art has been garbage, complete and utter garbage. Everyone does the exact same "cutting edge, new, fresh, cool, underground" shit over and over again. Someone will paint a bunch of blocks and claim its "the oppression of post colonial western goverments toward the unconstructed social enigmas of past truths". Or carve a big block of rotten wood into a skull or a spin off of pink Floyds dark side of the moon album cover. Then theres the complete retards who litterally shit and piss allover the place and do all kinds of disgusting acts on a stage or in public--for art. Ever notice how modern art never creates anything? It simply destroys or critiques others. Maybe its because its not art, but some "post modernist" bullshit.

Art of yesteryear's goal was to show any given philosophical thought . It took years of practice and hard study to acheive their levels, to become a painter famous for painting or a musician famous for music. Not a "artist" famous-ish for bitching about stuff and claiming it to be the purpose of their "build a blocks masterpiece".

Tl;dr: Modern art bitches about other art in the form of piss poor "art". Older art would create, scenes, structures, ideas and ideals.

[Anonymous No.6788744]

>>6788720
>>6788624
Art prices are inflated because it's a money laundering scheme. There's no point in worrying about how much they sell for, because the art isn't actually for sale. It's like complaining that a mafia front pizza is stale and greasy.

[Anonymous No.6788766]

>>6788728
You're completely right, but you should stop looking at what the art galleries are calling art. They've always been a joke. The issue pretty much evaporates the moment you do.

[Anonymous No.6788788]

>>6788744
My point is that people see that this shit has sold for insane prices, is retardedly easy to replicate, and has spawned a generation of liberal arts majors who think that if they drip their leftover paint down a canvas that they "understand" true art and will hold themselves above those who "just don't get it"

Even if it's only a front for some other business (which I had no idea of), the money thrown at it causes it to be influential.

There are "artists" out there who can't even properly convey an idea through pictionary who have sold globs on paint on a canvas for more money than the paint + canvas cost. It's atrocious.

I guess it's useful for weeding out shitty people though. I had a girl drag me through an art gallery where everything displayed was differently colored squares and she was eating it up so I never talked to her again.

[Anonymous No.6788806]

>>6788744
this

[Anonymous No.6788817]

>>6788788
http://nytimes.com/2013/05/13/arts/design/art-proves-attractive-refuge-for-money-launderers.html
The art itself is actively worthless, and is designed to make you angry that such a thing is being "sold" for so much. That misdirects your outrage and attention away from what is actually going on, which is the money laundering. Art is just another casualty of trying to avoid taxes.

[Anonymous No.6788833]

>>6788657
can you explain the link between being a fucking lifeless loser and looking at art? Isn't it just your opinion, we are spending hours staring at a Russian Tapestry guild site

[Anonymous No.6788840]

>>6788377
>>6788346


But why do you think his art is bad? You arn't some allmighty god who can judge on the matters of such arbitrary matters! Much more to art! You cry about the past, idealising it and claiming it to be truth, but you are only falling into a perpetual state of degeneracy by craving some long forgotten past! There is no objective arguments against today's art, it's simply an evolution, natural and self-explanatory! and it's beautiful!


>this is what postmodernists actually believe

[Anonymous No.6788875]

There's plenty of non-shit art being made. Almost certainly the majority of art today is representational, and it's often pretty good.

>>6788744 is correct about "high" art. For those of you who aren't in on the scam:

Shlomo Shekelberg and Moishe Goldstein are businessmen interested in buying some cutting-edge art for financial reasons. They contact their art-dealer buddy, Chaim Cohen.

Chaim shows them some works from a certain artist who, in the opinion of Chaim and his circle of critics, is the hot new thing right now. Shlomo and Moishe both buy a painting for $2mil, for which Chaim gets a commission.

A few years later, Shlomo has just closed a major deal, but he's on the hook for a $10mil tax bill. He donates the painting to a public gallery--which Chaim, an expert on paintings by this artist, appraises at $10mil, citing some recent sales to private buyers such as Ho Lee Fuk, Obongo Sabibi, and other wealthy men who have almost unaccountable urges to buy real assets in certain First World countries. Shlomo donates the painting, effectively making an $8mil ROI.

Meanwhile, Moishe is having some trouble and needs some cash. He could sell the painting, but he's not stupid. Instead, he takes out a $40mil loan putting up $10mil in assets as collateral: that's right, the painting. $40mil money in his pocket for a $2mil investment. Not bad.

[Anonymous No.6788922]

>>6788489
You listen to garbage music.
>>6788497
Older literature that isn't trying to be lolsorandumb for the sake of being novel.

[Anonymous No.6788934]

>>6788922
Yes I do. Leaning away from Viennese classical that I used to listen to because I think it just doesn't relate to the modern man. Beethoven and cocaine was an amazing combination though.

[Anonymous No.6788937]

>>6788309
you appreciate whatever you want my son, DO YOU HEAR ME BOY? YOU CAN DO ANYTHING YOU WANT! YOU JUST WAIT TO BE DONE WITH SCHOOL AND YOU CAN HAVE EVERYTHING YOU WANT YOU MAGNIFICENT LITTLE SHIT

[Anonymous No.6788950]

>>6788435
it's aesthetic philosophy which is /lit/

[Anonymous No.6788961]

>>6788934
>modern man
So you're a progressivist manchild.
>cocaine
Yup

[Anonymous No.6789269]

>>6788455
>Plato
>2000bc

[Anonymous No.6789281]

>>6788344
>implying bernini wasn't better

[Anonymous No.6789323]

>>6788344
A computer.

[Anonymous No.6789863]

>>6789323
Only if a human brain was controlling it, otherwise that will never happen.

[Anonymous No.6789938]

>>6788309
anyone can cherrypick asshole

[Anonymous No.6790178]

>>6788728
0 AD - art began
600 AD - byzantine icons, people got better at painting
1400 AD - artists finally learned to paint realistically like da vinci, titian, raphael, michaelangelo. all the best artworks more weird
1800 AD - money started corrupting art, more people started painting weird because "Cutting edge new fresh cool" stuff sells (impressionism)
1900 AD - art ended, people started calling toilets and blank canvases art
2000 AD - videogames began like crysis, mirrors edge, call of duty, etc. the rebirth of art

[Anonymous No.6790187]

>>6790178
>no art before 0 A.D.

Fuckin top muthafuckin kek

[Anonymous No.6790190]

>>6788392
obvi bait
rothko is sublime as in sublimate
>>6788393
moreau was a pimp

[Anonymous No.6790194]

>>6790178
>art began

[Anonymous No.6790199]

>>6790178
>2000 AD - videogames began like crysis, mirrors edge, call of duty, etc. the rebirth of art

[Anonymous No.6790205]

>>6788422
some art is didactic, Jenny Holzer does aphoristic stuff. Lots of it is pretty bad though, which is one problem with didactic art, who has the authority to make it?

pluralism is pretty dope. people do whatever

[Anonymous No.6790218]

>>6790178
thats a fucking yugioh card

[Anonymous No.6790233]

>>6790178
I feel stupid but I'm laughing really hard at this, also the combination of text and image, I think it's because the text triggers anyone in this board. 10/10

[Anonymous No.6790282]

>>6790178

[Anonymous No.6790289]

>>6790187
There's no art before the Renaissance, tbh

Everything else are images and representations we recognize as art due to vague conceptions of what art should be.

Two great books are Likeness and Presence: A History of the Image before the Era of Art and The End of Art History, both by Hans Belting, with The Story of Art by Gombrich in between.

[Anonymous No.6790294]

>>6788309
will these threads never end?

[Anonymous No.6790313]

because it's interesting

[Anonymous No.6790393]

>>6788720
money reflects value, yes it does

[Anonymous No.6790399]

>>6790294
no, this place is a shithole, but it's where I belong since I am a piece of shit too

[Anonymous No.6790507]

>>6788344
already surpassed

[Anonymous No.6790520]

>>6790178
>1910=music began

[Anonymous No.6790657]

>browbeating, sweeping statetements, ebin infographics : the thread