Pleb Thread

>>2962002
cause its a meme boi

>>2962002
*So Famous

>>2962002
Nobody gave a shit about it until 1911, when it got stolen from the Louvre. It was missing for 2 years, and became legendary because of it. It was an easy topic to gossip about.

Literally one of the world's biggest memes

its a pioneer thing. davoovoo made it with bat guano and egg yolk, it has very smooth face and a bit translucent skin (not really visible on a photo) because of how many strokes he used, which was rather novel

and it looked much better ages ago and before retards started to slober all over it. there was quite a number of idiots who "made out" with that portrait. If you look at reproductions etc. it turns out it was a rather colorful vivid painting. kind of like the crayion portrait we found a couole years back

its also an ancient meme

Why do people like jackson pollock? Or clifford still?

I think these two artists are trash. My teacher tried to defend the latter during a tour of the clifford still museum but even the early works they show of his before it gets into the "surrealist" shit (His shit is NOT surrealist) and it's garbage, boring, brown, and ugly.


But everyone in my class ate that shit up, looking at this giantass black canvas he panting black with a red period smudge in the middle. Fucking. Stupid.

If I could afford a canvas as big as my apartment i'm sure people would come look at my shitty painting too.

File: garbage.jpg (183KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 1024x683px

>>2962516
I think in terms of materials used it's a great impressive painting personally. I'll always be a little more forgiving of a painting if someone used unconventional materials to create it, thus fighting against the not-paint substance to make their piece.

>>2962984
Here i meant to post an example with it. These paintings are massive and it's the only thing i find impressive about them.

>>2962984
Couldn't you say the same thing about any kind of abstract art? If you don't like it fine. But if it's because you're looking for some deep meaning or representational thing, then you're not "getting" it.

Just turn your analytic side off, and enjoy the aesthetic experience, the shapes, the colors, lines etc. See if it stirs any emotion in you.

I don't know if it's a thing where you look at it and you are supposed to be impressed by the artist's technical skill. It's just supposed to have an interesting look and be an enjoyable aesthetic experience. After all, it's not like you could see a combination of colors and shapes like that in nature, it's something new and unique created by a human.

File: header_42-62371123-rothko-2.jpg (283KB, 2000x1252px) Image search: [Google]

283KB, 2000x1252px

>>2962990
Look at them in real life sometime if you can. A computer screen doesn't really do it justice. I think people who over intellectualize it are being kind of silly, too. But looking at a giant Rothko or something in real life, well it's definitely an emotional experience for me. And I guess I'm impressed with how the artist was able to inspire those feelings in me using just basic things we take for granted like colors, splatters, shapes, etc.

>>2963033

You're so full of shit. Emperor's new clothes.

File: Got my BFA did, fam!.jpg (374KB, 703x1227px) Image search: [Google]

374KB, 703x1227px

>>2963027
>>2963033
(you)

>>2963044
>stop liking what I don't like

>>2962002
The Mona Lisa Curse

just look at her hands anon

they're fucking perfect

>>2963033
i have been to the museum in denver retard. its garbage