How do you feel about the fact that 4chan users have been leaning

>>2360167
Maybe some. I mean, some good artists today, especially ones that make primarily environments use very abstract shapes as a base for their stuff. But straight up piles of garbage that janitors accidentally throw away at museums. That need to fucking go.

I'm all for a resurgence though. Those who didn't put hard work into their skills should be at the bottom of the barrel, not making thousands, if not millions.

>>2360167
I'd respond to this more thoughtfully, but you have misused almost every term in your post, it would be more effort than I can summon to correct you then address anything else.

>>2360173
English isn't my first language, feel free to correct me but I hope you understand the gist of it.

File: 1422608853302.jpg (513KB, 1280x1135px) Image search: [Google]

513KB, 1280x1135px

bump

Why should it matter how an artist reaches his desired conclusion?

He is not morally obligated to follow any sort of rule unless he himself chooses to.

lol the right hated fine arts that didn't fit their agenda

franco, mussollini, hitler, but also stalin and mao destroyed countless art pieces

you really, really have no idea what you're talking about from the point you talk about 'modern art'

go back to /pol/ you fucking braindead cunt

>>2361293
>the right hated art
>but so did the left lol

Have you considered that maybe it's just totalitarian regimes that don't care for subversive art you literal retarded person?

>>2361298
did you even read op's post? he said that the right has a taste for fine art, which is a completely idiotic statement. art is something so big that it has nothing to do with your politics spectrum. right, left, totalitarians, anarchists, no one has a set frame of art they're identified with

besides the wrong idea of what 'modern art' is, or implying that classicism is the opposite to abstract concepts. does op even know that for example romanticists are neither abstract nor classicists. we can all agree that he should go back to /pol/

>>2361308
This. OP is a faggot.

>>2360167
Modern art is a result of capitalism. America just made it seem like classical art represents fascism and communism. It's a result of cultural warfare with Russia.

>>2360167
Most of the artists I know lean left, so I'm not sure what you mean....

>>2361378
not so fast, anon. Those factors may have consolidated the process, but modern art was born in Europe around 1900, and lifted into dominance by the apparent bankruptcy of western tradition brought about by WWI. The American-Soviet divide over art was late in the game.

And even then, the cause was more on the soviet side, since they adopted socialist realism well before america took up abstraction.

Likewise, America didn't need to make it seem like "classical art" corresponded to Nazism. The nazis did that on their own.

btw, classical art doesn't mean what you think it means.

>>2361419
most artists everywhere in the developed world lean left, and have for a century or more.

It's not surprising, in America: pro-business & industry types consider art a waste of time or money (just as in the 19th c); the Right's religious wing considers art irrelevant, except in very specific contexts. The "real america" Palin-loving wing thinks art is an elite taste (and historically, they're correct).

There does seem to be an individualist wing of the american right where art does okay, but they're drowned out by the others.

>>2361308
>The right has a taste for fine art
>Which is a completely idiotic statement
Thinking innovation is superior to quality is left wing thought.
Thinking quality is superior to innovation is right wing though.
Guess which one /ic/ thinks
Guess which one /trash/... I mean modern art creators think.
That is what OP means, whether he's correct in his assumption of modern art or not.