File: Why is Modern Art Terrible.swf-(9.64 MB, 464x256, Other)
[_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)14:16 No.

Marked for deletion (old).
>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)14:23 No.

  this post is an art

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)14:24 No.

  This guy knows what's up. You don't have to have an art degree or be some kind of aficionado to
  know that all these cocksucking faggots who smear their own shit on a canvas and call it art are
  just degenerate morons.

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)14:25 No.

  reposting is an artform

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)14:25 No.

  I'd welcome more like this on /f/

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)14:36 No.

  Seems like to me modern art is about trying not to offending the artist instead of critiquing or
  actually liking what they see.

  There's no way anyone with a straight face can say "I like and enjoy painting smeared in shit."

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)14:37 No.

  >>2512471
  I like and enjoy painting smeared in shit

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)14:43 No.

  Coming from a former art student, I really appreciate what this guy has to say. Most of my art
  classes didn't teach me how to discipline myself or go very in depth into technique, they were
  all mostly excercises into how to bullshit your way through critiques with half baked premises
  and by challenging authority. I understand being simplistic, and experimentive, but you can't
  challenge conventions when you have no idea what you're challenging. it's the equivilent of some
  teenager on deviantart saying "I don't need to know anatomy, My work is stylized!"

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)14:45 No.

  I'm not a fan of modern art, but this is incredibly biased.

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)14:47 No.

  >>2512481
  Guy still has a point though.

  Some forms of modern arts can be really good, but there's way too many faggots taking advantage
  of the lack of standards.

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)14:48 No.

  Nobody remembers bad painters. There are many examples of good classical art, but for every
  Remberant there were countless bob the painters. The fact that we have had history trim away all
  but the best and then demand that EVERY artist stand up to their work is unreasonable.

  Shock value art will not stand the test of time. What he is bitching about is rebellion against
  his view point, and the fact that other people like what he doesn't like.

  In 100 years, we will know what was actually GOOD from this generation, as it was what was
  remembered,

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)14:52 No.

  >>2512453
  what the fuck? why did you repost it again? 100+ shitposts wasn't enough for you in one day? you
  think something will be different this time?

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)14:53 No.

  >>2512488
  But that's true of anything at any time.

  I'm sure there were a million shitty artists during the Renaissance just as there are today, with
  as many people talking about how amazing their shit was at the time as well.

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)14:56 No.

  glad to know i wasn't to only one finding modern art shitty and childish looking

  now if you'll excuse me, i have to go and sell rocks on ebay

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)14:58 No.

  The reason why modern art is terrible is because of the invention of the camera.

  Back In The Day, if you wanted to capture an image, you had to paint a picture. Then, cameras
  were invented and artists became obsolete. Thus, "art" had to be reinvented from "pictures of
  stuff" to "pretentious shit we can trick rich people into buying so they can feel profound."

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)15:08 No.

  >>2512459
  I'd welcome some more actual vector graphic flash files

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)15:10 No.

  Wow. Okay, well... the character limit is going to prevent me from saying this properly but:

  1) Saying that art is not defined by the viewer is a fallacy, as art has always been defined by
  the viewer. Only the ability to interpret and value art has changed.

  2) Modern art does not lessen classical art.

  3) Art that is provocative like Piss Christ, or The Virgin Mary, are provocative for a reason.
  They send a message, and are intended to. Which is why...

  4) ... His statement about throwing yourself across the ice is pure idiocy. An artist, even a
  modern artist, does not simply throw himself across the ice. Doing that does not send a
  message... if it does, then it is indeed art. If an accomplished, skilled artist were to come
  out, lay down on the ice, make a snow angel and walk off... I would consider it art, and it would
  be such. Is he protesting the event? Does his action have meaning?

  contd...

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)15:11 No.

  >>2512506

  5) I would argue that his statement about his apron and jackson pollock are a good example of
  forcing a response. This is the genuine problem with modern art, however... people who are
  blinded by the artist's fame, and attribute value to it because of that without looking more
  deeply. Despite this, I would argue that his canvas smock, in that it is representative of every
  painting he has ever done is, were it to be framed, art.

  In short, this man is correct... but for all the wrong reasons.

>> [_] sage 09/02/14(Tue)15:15 No.

  this repost.... such form... such art

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)15:27 No.

  >>2512507
  can we just agree that if humans make something great, that they'll inevitably shit it up some
  how, then vice versa?

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)15:36 No.

  What a snob cunt. The examples he gave were shit, and when someone uses words like 'trashy' and
  'pornographic' it's obvious they have their heads up their asses.

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)15:53 No.

  I guess he has a point. Modern art is sometimes shit. That urinating police woman is amazing,
  though, and so are many other pieces. Likewise, there's some absolute shit among classical and
  renaissance art. So you know, maybe it's not modern art that's shit, maybe it's just shit art
  that's shit.

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)15:54 No.

  >>2512506
  >>2512507

  I don't care what meaning something has. If you put no effort into something then I'm going to
  continue to call it shit.

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)16:09 No.

  Painting a can of soup is also art.

  Maybe art is just fucking gay.

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)16:14 No.

  >>2512506
  >>2512507
  >>2512521
  This

  He seems to think art is some secret club that he and a group of limp dick snobs who wasted their
  life on an art degree should be in charge of.

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)16:32 No.

  >>2512453
  looks like /pol/ is right again.

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)16:48 No.

  I agree that alll Rothko paintings need to go. That's about it, though. Can it with all this
  pretentious talk about the dutch masters and how modern art is shit. Art is supposed to speak to
  you, not merely be really good at mimicing things that physically exist. To me, that's the
  high-art equivalent of comic book "tracers". Great art acts as an interpretive mirror for the
  soul. I've been to many galleries, over and over again, groaning as I walk past the monotony of
  darkly-painted portraits, but just once I had the priviledge of seeing works from a private
  collection. It was an abstract-impressionist piece, and I stood there for half an hour, weeping
  at how beautiful it was.

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)16:49 No.

  >>2512521
  the "pornographic" virgin mary had clippings from smut magazines in it. trashy means poor
  quality, and there were no artistic elements in these words, no vision is put into them, no
  imagination is put into them, no image was in mind when these works were created. they're not
  just trashy, they're trash.
  believing the aesthetic value of art is relative is equatable to believing all people are equally
  beautiful, or "healthy at all sizes."

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)16:51 No.

  >>2512573
  if you can emotionally identify with anything "abstract" more than you can with human features,
  you're some kind of retarded.

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)16:56 No.

  >>2512576
  So insightful, wow. You should be an art critic.

>> [_] DarkThSloThArT !yxBVFEewfI 09/02/14(Tue)16:57 No.

  I'd ask that guy, why does art have to be competitive? Quality and high standards have to do with
  it, but its our value system that speaks for this teacher. That said, some art is just too
  "obscure" to be logically understood.

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)16:58 No.

  >>2512493
  >I'm sure there were a million shitty artists during the Renaissance just as there are today,
  with as many people talking about how amazing their shit was at the time as well.

  No my friend the teaching of art was only reserved for a few privileged individuals. Either you
  had to have amazing natural talent or high standing in society. At least that's how it worked
  back in Italy's day.

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)17:02 No.

  >new
  >different
  >ugly
  Ugly like Hieronymus Bosch?
  Oooh burn!

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)17:04 No.

  >>2512554
  You don't need an art degree to recognize that art is heading in a terrible direction.
  The guy in the video just explains how turning back the knob to a less modern style could benefit
  us all.

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)17:04 No.

  >>2512546
  The industry was very different back then. He became famous because he was such an incredible
  worker and made new ways to develop new methods of design that enabled him to not only produce
  quickly, but also to make changes on the fly in a wink. He was an amazing person in that way.
  Shit I hate his art, but his work ethic is what makes me respect him.

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)17:06 No.

  >>2512521
  Let me guess, you like modern arts just because you want to watch eggs fall out of vaginas?
  Or paintings made with menstrual blood? Something must tingle your fancy since you defend modern
  arts, what's the point otherwise.

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)17:07 No.

  >>2512588
  #REKT
  >>2512590
  Dude no, we should be laughing at this guy. Did you like that movie Zeitgeist too? The shit they
  are saying isn't even backed up or a flat lie. Pretty pictures and a confident tone are good
  tools for making people believe bullshit.

  All I should say is there IS a standard to art. People still try to tone technique. People still
  try to be great. I just hate the other shit he brings into his statement

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)17:08 No.

  >>2512590
  The nazis believed the same thing, calling many great artists "degenerate". They burned those
  paintings and smashed sculptures, classical and modern alike.

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)17:12 No.

  >>2512592
  That era of art is still there but it I don't think it exists anymore in our current galleries.
  If I saw anything like that I would simply avoid it at all costs

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)17:15 No.

  >>2512594
  reducto ad hitlerum.
  what's your point? is it bad because the nazis did it? the nazis also built roads and had public
  education. should we stop doing those things too? OOH, they also ate food to live. i suggest you
  stop eating right now, if you don't want to be like the nazis.

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)17:16 No.

  >>2512602
  The Russians did the same under Marxist-Leninist regimes. Do they have a latin term for that?
  Suck it.

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)17:22 No.

  >>2512604
  association fallacy.

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)17:23 No.

  >>2512616
  fallacy fallacy

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)17:23 No.

  THE UNIVERSE IS FAKE SO THEREFORE YOUR ALL FAKE THEREFORE THE ART YOU MAKE IS JUST A FALLACY CUZ
  UR GAY

>> [_] Anonymous 09/02/14(Tue)17:28 No.

  >>2512506
  >Art that is provocative like Piss Christ, or The Virgin Mary, are provocative for a reason
  What bother the guy is that only the message is important, not the form.
  Modern artists forget that the most important thing in art is the form, not the message.

  Have you seen Le radeau de la Méduse or Porrait d'une négresse? Those works are impresive and
  shocking. Not like Merda d'artista.

  The only modern painter I know and that I consider good is Giger. He creates a new genre, his
  works are impressive and are provocative.
  It didn't paint with his shit a spot, sold a empty box or piss on a cross.