Does anyone get art?

[Jack Stevonovich]

You could ask yourself though does all "dialog" carry equal worth? personally I would say that "what is art" is a question that has been dwelt on far too much, maybe worthy of discussion but thaty discussion has been drawn out for decades because it provides cheap media attension and justification for carrying on creating a certain kind of work who's merits are otherwise questionable.

Beyond that I think the question also becomes who is art having a dialog with and to what end? a small group of very wealthy/educated people making very on the nose social/political points to each other via art is something I can see many questioning the worth of. Personally I think the dismissal of romanticism/pictorialism is the dismissal of much of human nature, removing much of the emotional response to art in favour of purely intellectualising it. Meanwhile other forms such as photography and cinema that haven't done this have taken its place as the art forms that have cultural relevance.

I wouldn't relate impressionism or even some post impressionism directly to modern art personally, I mean the former took some time to be accepted but not THAT long and by the time of Picasso and Dali those artists were very significant cultural figures in their lifetimes. Within modern art I don't think nearly the same is true, you maybe have someone like Banksy but I think he's very atypical in style where as many of the most praised modern artists are totally unknown to 99% of the public.

Cinema is a form of art. Cinema and advertising are probably the dominant forms of art today other than industrial design and graphic design. These are all commercial forms of art so the 'art world' ideally serves as a counter point to the commercial where new ideas spring from. I would say this is probably most strongly the case as far as graphic design and industrial design are concerned today.

 

[Jack Stevonovich]

Well,
I will decide what art I like
And you decide what you like

Because in the end it does not matter,
for at the end we die.

But we can have discussions and be friends in the meantime.

cool.

I think most of the art world is a bunch of pretentious mimetic hacks which is why I tend to really love modern performance artists that troll the status quo.

 

[Luminosity]

You could ask yourself though does all "dialog" carry equal worth? personally I would say that "what is art" is a question that has been dwelt on far too much, maybe worthy of discussion but thaty discussion has been drawn out for decades because it provides cheap media attension and justification for carrying on creating a certain kind of work who's merits are otherwise questionable.

Beyond that I think the question also becomes who is art having a dialog with and to what end? a small group of very wealthy/educated people making very on the nose social/political points to each other via art is something I can see many questioning the worth of. Personally I think the dismissal of romanticism/pictorialism is the dismissal of much of human nature, removing much of the emotional response to art in favour of purely intellectualising it. Meanwhile other forms such as photography and cinema that haven't done this have taken its place as the art forms that have cultural relevance.

I wouldn't relate impressionism or even some post impressionism directly to modern art personally, I mean the former took some time to be accepted but not THAT long and by the time of Picasso and Dali those artists were very significant cultural figures in their lifetimes. Within modern art I don't think nearly the same is true, you maybe have someone like Banksy but I think he's very atypical in style where as many of the most praised modern artists are totally unknown to 99% of the public.

I think with postmodernism it has opened up the dialogue so much more than modernism and asks many different question, actually as many questions as artists I would argue. Remember modernism ended 50 years ago. There is an art for everyone in postmodermism from painting with period blood to graphic novels to folks making furry suits. I think a lot of the barriers to art have been broken down in the last 20 years or so and we are experiencing a much more democratic landscape of art. There is always going to be stuff you like and don't like but even the stuff that you hate probably appeals to someone. However, I think there is going to always be an education element to a lot of the high end stuff that deviates from the traditional but I think the same goes for any art form such as music. Most folks don't dive into death metal but need to first educate themselves on other heavy music and work their way in, same with some contemporary art, you need to learn the language to see what is really being said.

 

[Jack Stevonovich]

Most folks don't dive into death metal but need to first educate themselves on other heavy music and work their way in, same with some contemporary art, you need to learn the language to see what is really being said.

Yeah, I think that is largely the case. It takes a while to adapt ones palate but then it grows and before you know it you look at the stuff you used to think was cool and realize your tastes have changed.

 

[Mastoness]

 

[irish_thug]

If it ain't painted on black velvet, I ain't interested.

 

[moreorless87]

I think with postmodernism it has opened up the dialogue so much more than modernism and asks many different question, actually as many questions as artists I would argue. Remember modernism ended 50 years ago. There is an art for everyone in postmodermism from painting with period blood to graphic novels to folks making furry suits. I think a lot of the barriers to art have been broken down in the last 20 years or so and we are experiencing a much more democratic landscape of art. There is always going to be stuff you like and don't like but even the stuff that you hate probably appeals to someone. However, I think there is going to always be an education element to a lot of the high end stuff that deviates from the traditional but I think the same goes for any art form such as music. Most folks don't dive into death metal but need to first educate themselves on other heavy music and work their way in, same with some contemporary art, you need to learn the language to see what is really being said.

Your talking about a very broad concept with post modernism that be be related across art as a whole but the discussion was much more based on the world of "high art" and I would argue that this world hasn't "broken down barriers" at all but actually become much more elitist over the past 50+ years. Its become a world dominated by the intelligentsia to a much greater degree IMHO artists and credits who come from small higher and area of academia working with rich gallery owners.

My point would be exactly that this art can often only communicate in some kind of hidden meaning in which you need understanding of the artists background and critical discourse rather than directly with the viewer, I think this shift towards pure intellectualism is a highly questionable "improvement".

Cinema is a form of art. Cinema and advertising are probably the dominant forms of art today other than industrial design and graphic design. These are all commercial forms of art so the 'art world' ideally serves as a counter point to the commercial where new ideas spring from. I would say this is probably most strongly the case as far as graphic design and industrial design are concerned today.

Again though this is taking a wider view of art as opposed to the kind of modern "high art" that's in question. I do agree though that a lot of work from modernism onwards actually feels like more of an ideas pool for commercial design than anything.

 

[Jack Stevonovich]

Your talking about a very broad concept with post modernism that be be related across art as a whole but the discussion was much more based on the world of "high art" and I would argue that this world hasn't "broken down barriers" at all but actually become much more elitist over the past 50+ years. Its become a world dominated by the intelligentsia to a much greater degree IMHO artists and credits who come from small higher and area of academia working with rich gallery owners.

My point would be exactly that this art can often only communicate in some kind of hidden meaning in which you need understanding of the artists background and critical discourse rather than directly with the viewer, I think this shift towards pure intellectualism is a highly questionable "improvement".


Again though this is taking a wider view of art as opposed to the kind of modern "high art" that's in question. I do agree though that a lot of work from modernism onwards actually feels like more of an ideas pool for commercial design than anything.

the 'Art world' or high art or what ever isn't just a pool of ideas for commercial design either it can serve the same purpose as a reference point and source of inspiration for a bunch of other cultural movements as well. Studying it gives people a lot of tools towards creating an aesthetic and thus manufacturing culture. That 'Zef' culture out of south Africa comes to mind that the group Die Antwoord comes out of. It can serve as a reference point for all kinds of culture where aspects of that culture have already been explored and refined.

 

[IDL]

My city spent a bunch of money for a large art piece to stand outside of our Arena.

It's a bland and ugly formless piece where metal shapes were welded together. Quite an eye sore and I don't know anyone who actually likes it.

I don't know who makes these decisions.

 

[Jack Stevonovich]

My city spent a bunch of money for a large art piece to stand outside of our Arena.

It's a bland and ugly formless piece where metal shapes were welded together. Quite an eye sore and I don't know anyone who actually likes it.

I don't know who makes these decisions.

Probably someone not very knowledgeable about art. I've met someone who was tasked with something like that before and they had zero art background and terrible taste.