What the fuck even is Art?

>>3393145
I like paintings like this, can you guys post more?

File: Marie Bashkirtseff.jpg (560KB, 960x1228px) Image search: [Google]

560KB, 960x1228px

>>3393188

Marie Bashkirtseff?

Yeah, she's alright, even if she was a dirty carpet muncher.

>>3393217
I mean, Renaissance art
Landscapes, rome, greece, etc

>>3393145
This kind of question is why art turns to shit

>>3393280

You say that as if there's an easy answer that only you can see?

File: 876890.jpg (107KB, 756x627px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 756x627px

This thread

File: miyfrnnA8H1ra3thco3_1280.png (377KB, 716x413px) Image search: [Google]

377KB, 716x413px

Art is nudity you're allowed to post on a blue board

File: kMuv3I2spEuve0Q5W60HJ0xbnTw=.gif (2MB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 480x360px

>>3393726

>>3393230
Please, don't...

Are you willing to have an argument over whether it's art?

Then it's art.

>>3393799

Even if my argument is "It's not Art"?

>>3393801

Why isn't it art?

>>3393145
cool ideas that make people go hmm &
something that serves no purpose but is put in the spotlight &
circlejerk for the rich who prop up some person cause (s)he was original once and then they pretend to know what things are what

>>3393812

Why isn't what art?

File: Alfonso Ossorio - Rescue.jpg (305KB, 1500x776px) Image search: [Google]

305KB, 1500x776px

Art is Experience, it is not an object.

>>3393812
Because it's literally some cunt's messy bed.

>>3393827

Then no thought was put into it?

>>3393825
took him like 20 minutes tops to spew all that shit together

>>3393188
Just look up realist paintings. This isn't "renaissance" you philistine

>>3393835

Case in point.

> muh romanticism
> muh realism
> muh expressionism
> muh Renaissance
etc, etc.

Modern art is the litmus test for people with taste.

File: 1497182908275.jpg (482KB, 1032x1600px) Image search: [Google]

482KB, 1032x1600px

>>3393145
You think they all molested him afterward?

A tool for change

http://avecaves.bigcartel.com/product/weapon

File: Paul Gauguin_036.jpg (876KB, 3176x2490px) Image search: [Google]

876KB, 3176x2490px

>>3393866
There is modern art that isn't flagrantly terrible

>>3393145
The dude from Coast to Coast AM.

File: Alexander Porfirevich Archipenko - In the Boudoir (Before the Mirror).jpg (249KB, 899x1500px) Image search: [Google]

249KB, 899x1500px

>>3393890

See:

> muh expressionism

e.g. fodder for grandmother's coffee table and kitschy trinkets. If you really understood expressionism you'd know that it's aesthetic appeal is because it was blindingly modern at the time and broke out of the realist form, where art is not literal interpretation of the world but ephemeral flashes of it, the emotional response. Modernism is merely an extension of that. Your exact same criticisms were made at Gauguin's paintings because they were counter to the popular trends at the time. And don't try to bullshit your way out of this because of "subjectivism". That's been thoroughly debunked since Kant and Dewey.

Congrats on knowing fuckall about art history and being completely hypocritical.

File: threatening young man with steak knife.jpg (102KB, 508x337px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 508x337px

This shit was in a thread that got bumped off this morning, will &Humanities queers ever fuck OFF.

>>3393935

>WHY IS THERE A HUMANITIES THREAD ON THE HUMANITIES BOARD

heh

>>3393940
>why is there &Humanities on the history board
ftfy

>>3393947

> why is there /pol/ on the &Humanities board?

ftfy

>>3393959
Literally what are you even talking about you mongoloid

File: Jeanne_Hébuterne_-_Autoportrait.jpg (56KB, 328x500px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 328x500px

>>3393913
I don't judge movements, I judge artists.
This >>3393825 just sucks, and so does shitty, dirty bed. Also, the Dinner Party-terrible.

I do like Preserved Shark in a Vat, presented with an inanely long, pretentious title, though.

>>3393947

>History isn't a Humanities

File: 1495944627150.jpg (2MB, 1920x1195px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1195px

This

>>3394516
Post the rest of the set

File: DianeDucruet.png (83KB, 537x448px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 537x448px

Is this art?

Why?

File: 1502008354023.jpg (43KB, 546x440px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 546x440px

>>3394545
>White "people"

File: IMG_1604.jpg (193KB, 800x846px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 800x846px

>>3394545
The progenitor of modern art photography like this is (((Alfred Stieglitz)))

This is such an idiotic question. Why do people pretend the word doesn't have a clear definition when it does?
>art (n.)
>early 13c., "skill as a result of learning or practice," from Old French art (10c.), from Latin artem (nominative ars) "work of art; practical skill; a business, craft," from PIE *ar(ə)-ti- (source also of Sanskrit rtih "manner, mode;" Greek artizein "to prepare"), suffixed form of root *ar- "to fit together." Etymologically akin to Latin arma "weapons."
There, art is something made with skill. That wasn't that hard, was it?