What is Art?

isonomicjedi

isonomicjedi

isonomicjedi

Associate
Joined
30 Dec 2012
Posts
1,153
Location
midlands
I have just watched the third episode of Artists: In Their Own Words (having watched the other 2 episodes last night) that I had recorded in May and have once again got the sudden urge to start doing some drawing or painting.

I have randomly throughout my life picked up some paper and drawn anything from figures to abstract interconnecting shapes but have decided to take a drawing pad with me on holiday and restart again; with the hope of giving it a decent go for a year. (its not like I spend my life doing anything useful other than trading the stock-market for myself)

With my background of severe mental health problems I think I am well suited to art and see my figures as a bit Lucien Freud-ish and my weird doodles as a cross between Max Ernst and early Mondrian.

I find most art critics I have seen on TV as pompous idiots as they try to explain the meaning behind a painting or sculpture but I'm pretty sure I could come up with something that would please at least someone out there so am going to give it a go.

Though in no way do I expect to make a living out of this I am pretty sure that before I die I could produce something worthy of someone else's eyes and thoughts.

In my view anything that the creator calls art is art but wondered if any of you on GD on the merits of Pop-Art versus The Great Masters or Lowry versus Hirst

Will post anything I think of as decent in the show us your picture/drawing thread.
 
As an example

Marcel Duchamp's Fountain
duchamp_zps44f464f6.jpg


Carl Andre's Equivalent VIII
andre_zpsdf1afd9f.jpg
 
I remember once seeing a completely blue textured canvas in the Tate modern, it was called the White Horse or something like this. It was a blue painting with not even an outline of a horse. The only thing it got me thinking was where is the flipping horse at.
 
ShaolinDreams said:
I remember once seeing a completely blue textured canvas in the Tate modern, it was called the White Horse or something like this. It was a blue painting with not even an outline of a horse. The only thing it got me thinking was where is the flipping horse at.
Click to expand...

But it made you think!

A lot of modern art is like that, love it or loath it but it is almost the point of it, if you stop and think or if it provokes a reaction or start a discussion, that practically gives it a meaning and reason for existence.
 
But if the reaction is "That's meaningless and terrible" then surely it cannot count.

I come from a very creative, arty family (Dad made his living as an artist for a time, Mum studied art and so on) but I would probably be branded a Neanderthal for my views on modern art. Of course it is extremely subjective, but, to pull the obvious artists out, Emin and Hurst do not produce art, for me. If anyone can describe how My Bed is masterly, please do so.
 
Last edited:
Edrof said:
But if the reaction is "That's meaningless and terrible" then surely it cannot count.

I come from a very creative, arty family (Dad made his living as an artist for a time, Mum studied art and so on) but I would probably be branded a Neanderthal for my views on modern art. Of course it is extremely subjective, but, to pull the obvious artists out, Emin and Hurst do not produce art, for me. If anyone can describe how Unmade Bed is masterly, please do so.
Click to expand...

I don'#t get that either but I do see most of Hirst's work as contemplative
 
isonomicjedi said:
I find most art critics I have seen on TV as pompous idiots as they try to explain the meaning behind a painting or sculpture but I'm pretty sure I could come up with something that would please at least someone out there so am going to give it a go.
Click to expand...

Critics being pompous idiots isn't just exclusive to art. I remember an episode of QI where they mentioned a film which went from glorious technicolor to black and white half way through the film and some critic waffled on about how this was the directors vision blah blah blah but it turns out they just ran out to money for the colour film! :p
 
It is almost like do you want to create something middle of the road that everyone likes but it is plain Jane that nobody remembers or do you want to create something that 99/100 don't understand or get but of those 1 out of 100 who gets it will love it and that almost everyone will talk about it regardless and remember it.

If it were me, I choose the latter.

I remember that messy bed, I don't get it really or like it but some people do clearly.
 
Raymond Lin said:
It is almost like do you want to create something middle of the road that everyone likes but it is plain Jane that nobody remembers or do you want to create something that 99/100 don't understand or get but of those 1 out of 100 who gets it will love it and that almost everyone will talk about it regardless and remember it.

If it were me, I choose the latter.

I remember that messy bed, I don't get it really or like it but some people do clearly.
Click to expand...

My drawings are largely abstract so I think they are more likely to appeal to a few rather than the many.
 
I went into a sculpture gallery in Wakefield with a bird who was a little common, and i think it was henry Moore stuff, I wasn't really taken by any of it, but she was clomping round the echoey rooms loudly proclaiming "it's just a bunch of big pebbles with holes in 'em"

Slightly embarrassing!
 
Modern Art is all that stuff that no one ever did ages ago, because if they did, people would think they were stupid and talentless. Painters painted beautiful and thoughtful pictures (mainly realistic depictions of actual things as that is difficult to do). Composers composed complex and interesting compositions using a variety of different instruments that sounded great to the ear. These were things that not many people could do and took a lot of hard work and a lot of talent.

Modern Art is basically all the stuff that no one did before, because it was ****. Now, instead of mostly being crafted by talented and hard working individuals it is done by people so up their own bottoms, they can see out of their mouths. Unfortunately equally pretentious people lap it up and give absurd meaning to meaningless and boring things.
 
I went to the tate modern last month, and whilst I thought most of it was rubbish, there's some very cool exhibits in there.

As someone above said, what one person thinks is amazing, the next person will just be like "what?" much like different styles of music really.. Some jazz styles are just plain waky and don't conform to the expected intro, verse, chorus etc.

I used to think cubism was nonsense and silly, and still do to an extent, but i do have an appreciation of it.
But then I've always liked turner and constable, again two very contrasting styles.. Whatever floats your boat really..
 
Last edited:
I have often asked myself the same question, OP. I usually come to the conclusion that in essence, everything is art, depending on one's perspective.

I often see the art form in computer systems and technological design.

I however, view things such as a clear sky at night as a masterpiece in the sky! Yet, from what I know, no sentient being had created - does this make it not art?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom