Deskilling is a fucking disease. In cultural production today

>>9468447
I find upper right appealing

This is honest to god degenerate.

>>9468454
That's because its style mimicks great works of the past with some accuracy.

>>9468459
Maybe, but it is head and shoulders above the rest there.

>>9468447
thanks capitalism

File: co.jpg (1MB, 1059x2368px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1059x2368px

>>9468468
More like fucking thanks Duchamp

>>9468463
Yes. And the color scheme in the bottom left could be interesting, I think.

My feminist sister got a master's in film and now she only likes foreign black and white movies.

>>9468475
Duchamp provided a scathing critique of capitalism through his works. He was a genius

>>9468468
Yes, the barter system slightly altered to allow paper money to serve as a proxy for goods and services is to blame for mediocre art.

Definitely not all those participation trophy Marxist academics.

>>9468475
Duchamp was great, you just didn't look at the work enough to find out. Truth is even artists don't understand what he did and banked on appearances, making the public even more confused.

Don't confuse hard-to-master techniques with skill. Some art is hard to do but not compelling. Some art is relatively "easy" to create but is compelling. It takes skill to make any art - technically difficult or not - that is compelling and evokes feeling.

I say this as someone who is not an artist and enjoys art that is outside of the box that didn't necessarily take a lot of technical skill. Maybe I'd feel differently if I dedicated my life to learning specific techniques and then other people were getting attention for doing something that seems pretty easy.

I feel like the modern world is kind of absurd sometimes, or at least seems that way. Sometimes throwing some shit together in a way that is weird but kind of interesting feels like the best response.

>>9468479
What do you like?

>>9468480
Stop viewing art through your political views. Through his work he disrupted centuries of thinking about what the artist's role and about what the nature of art is. That was his genius, and gave 100 years of the conceptual in art.
However, we are living in 2017. Duchamp's influence was a bitter harvest - he made the deskilled not only acceptable but prevalent. People painting like shit and shamelessly making terrible objects. It's not all his fault but it's time the pendulum swung back.

>>9468498
I'm not claiming Duchamp's work was worthless, I'm only saying that deskilling and focus only on the conceptual has greatly damaged art.

>>9468447
>>9468447
I bet you have never painted with oil in your life and couldn't replicate upper right.
I also bet you only praise classical works based on your subjective perception of ther technique and other spooks like "expressiveness" and "emotion" while completely disregarding the actual criteria these works were built upon.
The deskilling of the artist is much more forgivable (interesting even) than the deskilling of the spectator, the true ruin of contemporary art, both the reader who hates and the one who loves the text do it for reasons completely separated from any actual worth in critiquing the work.

>>9468524
A+

>>9468475
>>9468519

I'm not exactly an excellent source of knowledge regarding visual art, but wouldn't Cézanne's The Bathers technically be considered an earlier (and fairly inspirational) attempt at deskilling? I don't know why the indictment falls solely on Duchamp here, is all.

>>9468519
What you don't realize is that Duchamp (like Kossuth, like Nouveau Realisme, like the Situationists) want to situate art in a conceptual frame, they make cosa mentalle, not optical art. To dismiss him as a mere denier of technique is assuming art is a purely mechanical action, devoid of any mental skill whatsoever. What a work like The Fountain (or LHOOQ, or his chess problems and most of all, Etant Donnes and the Bride, not sculptures or installations, but enigmas, built like Finnegans Wake, to have so much internal games that deciphering the work itself has become an actual game) is to be a poor viewer, a children fascinated by smoke and mirrors, by illusions (both Pollock and Delacroix are just pigments on a screen, after all). You'd rather go to a Chriss Angel show or Guardians of the Galaxy, the illusion in these works far surpasses DaVinci.
I'm not saying every conceptual artist or every artist which works with found objects, anti-art, expressionism or that sort of thing is necessarily good, bad art has always been a problem. All i'm saying is that if you refuse to enter the game these artists are playing, you can't possibly expect to find any wonder in them.

OP, search for Icy Calm's art essay and read enough to get the gist of it.

Do you want to impress others with your drawings? Go back in time 2500 years.

Do you want to impress others, right now in 2017, with art? Learn programming and make a video game. Or be one person out of 200 who works on a big budget movie or big name game.

Oh, that doesn't fit in to cliched and romantic notions of art? Too bad

>>9468524
I understand what you are saying, yes, deskilling used to be a palliative, a tonic, a medicine to cure what ills art. My problem is with the schism between the "conceptual" and material/formal, and I think the deskilled object especially exemplifies this. The fact is that so many artists and designers hide their lack of discipline, dedication to their craft, and their lack of ability, behind the canard that those issues are passe. I'm more than ready to admit in 1912 that characterization may have fit. In 1970 that may have fit. We live in a unique cultural condition. It's become the default position ("skill, craft, mastery discipline... I don't need that..."). This is a problem.

>>9468475
Duchamp was a genius with a deep understanding of art, but his influence might have been negative. Every piece of contemporary art seems so kitschy to me, and I sometimes get the felling that we're not capable of producing anything more right now.

>>9468550
>Cézanne's The Bathers
>deskilling

might as well say van Gogh was deskilling

>>9468484
>being this much of a pleb

>>9468552
Why would a Delacroix painting be just optical art?You think you dont need a conceptual frame to understand his works?That everything he made is self evident and requires 0 brainpower to process?

File: p15-110720-330[1].jpg (17KB, 375x254px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 375x254px

I wouldn't mind conceptual art if the concepts themselves weren't always so banal and predictable:

>muh capitalism is wicked
>the public are all consumerist drones
>consider the poor and the blacks yeah?

Every exhibition is the same shit, like a visual Guardian editorial.
I remember reading the Chapman Bros. book 'Bad art for Bad people' and realising it boiled down to:

>we use cliched Nazi imagery
>if you find it banal, or cliched, it's because you are too blase, not that we lack imagination
>maybe you are the real Nazi for finding Nazi imagery cliched instead of brilliant

File: bc_lm17221_self_portrait_with_daughter_hr0.jpg (1MB, 1797x3000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1797x3000px

>>9468554
>>9468554
The thing is: I've been part of a research project in studying modernism in my city (Belo Horizonte, landmark of the 7x1, the best of the second class capitals in Brazil, which amounts to shit in the end). It's a pretty insignificant town, most of the writers and artists from my state who have any influence only do so because they moved to São Paulo or Rio de Janeiro, and even then, our research gathered something like 200 modernist groups acting here between 1922 and 1949. These people would get awards, even national ones, would publish their manifestos that would make the public go mad and so on, but in the end, we couldn't even find works beyond catalog reproductions and similar stuff from most artists.
You want contemporary art to solve itself for you, but you don't realize that the only reason why older art did is because time has passed. You'd rather go to every showing, performance, audiction and exhibition you have in the hopes of finding great art that's worth following (and I did, living in a shit city, as I've said) than sitting home and complaining about muh skill (just another way of saying muh beauty, the most pathetic thing a man can do in two thousand and seventen anno domini).
Here, have my favourite living artist, a true retrograde who refuses to change but still manageds to produce fresh and vibrant stuff or the past 40 years while also intentionally avoiding every shred of success he could. His poetry is also probably the only thing I pay any attention in the medium.

>>9468574
That is precisely my point: If you remove intellectual skill for art you're left with nothing but pretty pictures. Intellectually speaking, a lot of conceptual artists are giants. You willfully neglect that because it wouldn't fit into how you choose to see (and frame) a tiny parcel of art as the main reason for the problems of the whole.

>>9468578
what a glib facsimile

>>9468576
Spoken like someone who only gets his contemporary art news from his facebook timeline.

>>9468586
>I'll just call anything that disagrees with me insincere
Calm down, DFW, we don't want you to get all hung up again.

>>9468582
>Intellectually speaking, a lot of conceptual artists are giants.

Intellectually speaking, MOST of conceptual artists are midgets. The environment where they aren't even expected to produce pretty pictures fosters this much more, the interest of the general public (as a place where artists originate from) is minimal.
You can't say these are positive things, I'm not saying all is shit, I'm saying it's not healthy.

>>9468589
>Spoken like someone who only gets his contemporary art news from his facebook timeline.

Have you read 'Bad art for bad people'?
Have you ever even been to a Chapman Bros. installation?

>>9468597
>>9468597
But most artists are midgets. That's what you don't get. You only think they don't because only the masters survive, but vor every Rembrandt there was a million Netherfuck Von Autistborg who might have even been a rising star in his days but fell completely out of the radar for whatever reason. There are already works from artists from the 60s that are completely unaccessible and unimportant despite the polemics we can see they caused in newspapers and magazines from the era.

>>9468598
No but you're proving my point. You wanna take people who work with shocking material and imagine the whole of contemporary art is that, because that's what non-specialized media focus on. Francis Alÿs for example has beautiful works dealing with political themes and beautiful works who don't, Thomas Hirschenhorn uses gore in his works and I also consider him good, Polly Morgan does extremely baroque and detached works and she's probably the artists I've been thinking and seeing the most in the last months, I'm starting to study digital art now and there are great things going on which talk more about what means to be human than capitalism or whatever, blah blah blah

>>9468617
I also forgot to mention that if you abhor politics in art so much, I must recommend you people like the above mentioned Billy Childish, Antonin Artaud, Genesis P-Orridge or even Duchamp himself, the kind of guy that is just at pure war, you can't possibly situate anything they do aesthetically or politically because they're in a constant ressituation of themselves, even if they never change places at a first glance.

Also, remember that one of the biggest conclusions of contemporary art is that the body itself is political, so, if every art seems like politically charged is because the way things are seen by artists and academics is that there really is no way to escape politics.

File: art.png (125KB, 480x347px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 480x347px

>tfw nobody here has mentioned the highest form of art there is

>>9468617
>But most artists are midgets.

This is your response? That it was always shit therefore it's okay?
You are wholly indoctrinated, see art exactly as OP was criticizing it. Pathetic.

>>9468570
Nice counterpoint. Really enjoyed this one!

File: 41163846.jpg (54KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 500x375px

>>9468640

File: vuuonv8ygc7fuu7f1lhh.jpg (71KB, 400x536px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 400x536px

>>9468639
You still don't get my point, do you. For every old master that you know of, there are hundreds of artists whose work simply didn't last. Are you seriously denying this? Think of all the texts no one cared to preserve in literature history, since we're in /lit/.
My point is the OPPOSITE of "it was always shit". I'm telling you to go and engage yourself with most contemporary art you can consume, because there is a lot of shit out there, always has, always will, but every now and then you will come across great artists, and getting in contact with good art is always great. Open yourself to the possibility of good art and you will find it, keep sitting around letting other people form your view of such an abrangent topic and you will never get it.

>>9468658
Of course I understand this rather obvious point you presented. Instead of engaging in a discussion you treat everyone as if they were complete dilettantes. Assume people in this thread have at least a basic understanding of art (which your posts never go beyond), and reread the thread. Further discussion with you is pointless.

>>9468668
What, I'm addressing your points, while also posting a bunch of artists still producing which I find interesting while all you do is ignore a lot of what I said to focus on vague nothings instead of at least providing examples as to what you consider good, you fucking dolt. If I'm not going above basic understanding is because you haven't sent any question my way which can't be easily explained.
For example, explain to me why that painting I posted is bad and I'll tell you why it's not.

>>9468617
You aren't very good at understanding what other people are saying.
The contemporary London art scene is the ideologically conformist to a ridiculous extent. You always know exactly what you will see and exactly what the artists will be saying before you enter the exhibition. And that goes even for Childish and the rest of the stuckists as it does for the others. It's boring.
Can I name drop too? Tacita Dean! Sophie Hoyle!

>>9468589
>Spoken like someone who only gets his contemporary art news from his facebook timeline.
not the anon you are replying to but I'm genuinely interested to know good online places to hear about contemporary art

>>9468690
Go to other cities then. I've done this, you can do it too. I mean, it's not like we have a way to check catalogues, exhibits and magazines from literally anywhere in the world without leaving our anime-doll infested dens.

>>9468695
Art magazines, facebook groups, I barely read any magazines anymore so I don't know which ones are trendy, but there's always Art Forum which is like the mainstream, from there start to see who's having a exhibit with who and that sort of thing. It's a lot like searching for music, really.

File: infinity-mirrored-room-yayoi-kusama-1.jpg (336KB, 880x586px) Image search: [Google]

336KB, 880x586px

>>9468658

Here's the issue with this argument: a mediocre or even bad painting by an artist who is aiming for traditional achievement through craft still has plenty to offer us. Whatever level of craft it offers is enjoyable to that level. Traditional art is accessible.

Contemporary, deskilled art, is much more binary. Either it's clever or affecting it is a pile of random objects or a splatter of paint. OF course there is work that is successful in this mode, but the mode being the DOMINANT mode means that we are drowning in shit that literally offers no value to anybody but people who are making it, the people highly educated in abstract intellectual/ideological games that use these artworks as points of departure.

The big mistake is the shift in focus, not the creation of a new artistic vocabulary. I'm all for specialist artworks that are studies in texture or color or are pure concept, but the problem is that this art is presented as non-specialist, as art-in-general.

>>9468550
cezanne is brilliant

t. philadelphian with free access to the barnes

>>9468705
>Art magazines, facebook groups
>Art Forum

All places completely devoid of critique, it's like joining a reddit circle-jerk group

>>9468705
>Art magazines, facebook groups, I barely read any magazines anymore so I don't know which ones are trendy, but there's always Art Forum which is like the mainstream, from there start to see who's having a exhibit with who and that sort of thing. It's a lot like searching for music, really
What if I don't relate to art as a consumer product?

>>9468715
you get shot in the chest

>>9468708
>>9468708
You're accessing value to craft, and not only to craft, but to what your perception of what's craft. You pretend there isn't a flood of ridiculously bad traditional art being made but a quick trip to your local community college night painting class will show you piles and piles of 60 year old ladies' awful portraits of their husbands or a little house in a idillic prairie, and these things get exhibitions too, a shitload of them, I don't know how it is where you live but there's a whole circuit with people becoming actual millionaires in dealing these waterfall and fruit basket paintings, not to mention odontology clinic abstractions, mental ward expressionism and etc.

>>9468727
By an artist, I presume?

File: 17980.jpg (136KB, 300x444px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 300x444px

>>9468732
far from it

>>9468731
I'm literally saying I'd rather have the fruit baskets than girls putting spaghetti on a canvas because there is actually some minor value in the fruit baskets because of the craft.

Contemporary art is either great or shit, that's my point.

I live in Los Angeles. I've been to all the big museums and to many of the local colleges.

>>9468738
How is Solanas not an artist? How did I become Warhol? This is getting pretty interesting.

>>9468741
But there's nothing that separates fruit baskets and spaghetti in vagina, both are absolute shit as far as I care. You liking one more than the other has much more to do with your personal opinions than to any values the works themselves might have, if accessibility is important to a work, Kevin Feige is the biggest living artist just for the sheer amount of accessibility in the Marvel movies.

>>9468744
I just went with the first name that came to mind in the realm of "Artists who challenged thoughts on consumerism" that I might be able to make a joke out of.

>>9468447
I don't agree with your dismissal of art that is not based on the mastery of one's craft, but at the same time the academization of these kind of avant-gards truly disgust me.

I get what Stockhausen was doing, and I know that he was honest in his pursuit: at the same time I'm 100% sure that there are maybe 10 people every 1 million who could wctually do this type of art sincerely.
Since this kind of free spirit is, after all, very rare, the academization of these notions end up training thousands of people in being downright bad in what they're doing. Very few people are profound, deep and truly creative, and even fewer people can adopt these criterias without corrupting their entire artistic sense.
It's heartbreaking, really, to know that these people won't believe me when I'll tell them that their art is worthless because they have already memorized a string of arguments made by actual avantgardist geniuses in defence of the lack of craft. No, you fucking retard, Xenakis died 16 years ago and your art would have been considered stale 50 years ago: your rebellion is meaningless.

I'm specifically talking about Western conservatories (the only kind of artistic institution I'm truly familiar with), by the way. Sorry for the rant, but I think it's reasonable to get so mad at the systematic corruption of 10 generations of composer through composition (compose this kind of music or we won't ever consider you) contests and tenured positions requirements.

The problem with a lot of modern art is that the conceptual aspect takes preference over the aesthetical

File: 1492715919001.jpg (111KB, 467x470px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 467x470px

Its not the skill thats lacking but concentration and conviction.

>>9468768
I did not mean a complete dismissal of deskilled art, only a proposition that it has a negative influence on art.

>>9468769
Not really, its that the concept is not very interesting or challenging.
Most conceptual artists still take loads of aesthetic decisions.

>>9468630
>those artists
Cringe

>>9468760
It's an ok joke, I guess, but I was hoping for an actual answer and did not expect any life-threatening scenario.
Could you name more artists who challenged thoughts on consumerism, I'd be very interested.

>>9468773
Skill is also lacking

nah

File: 1492385293001.jpg (12KB, 292x350px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 292x350px

>>9468790
You can apply skill afterwards if necessary.

>>9468658
The difference is, old masters lived in a world that encouraged tried and tested classical values that resulted in good art. No one was allowed to question Raphael or Michalangelo, and for good reason, because rejection of standards is anarchy.

In any case, modernist and post-modernist visual art (with the exception of Cubism) is mainly descended from Romanticism. Romantic preoccupations with the individuality of the artist, the beauty of strangeness, and untaught spontaneity find it's most extreme expression in modern and post-modern art. To return to good art, we need to debunk artistic and political Romanticism wherever we find it, which necessitates anti-liberalism among other things.

>>9468789
Well I'll be straightforward with ya and say:
I don't know shit about art. I only know that Warhol was clowning ideas on consumerism.

File: 1475347239667.jpg (220KB, 900x1122px) Image search: [Google]

220KB, 900x1122px

>>9468804
no skill available afterwards, no mastery to draw from

File: 1493690170001.jpg (31KB, 406x418px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 406x418px

>>9468823
boy can learn

>>9468809
there can never be a return to classical art

File: 1473376676523.jpg (41KB, 480x631px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 480x631px

>>9468837
good boy

>>9468844
If artists can't return to classical art, the public will just turn to popular entertainment as a replacement, forms that are produced and sold by those with agendas to push and profits to make.

Enjoy.

File: k3jVJzb.jpg (58KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 600x600px

>>9468844
let's talk again after the nuclear apocalypse

>>9468844
there can never be a return to art, even

File: tintoretto_head_vitelius.jpg (2MB, 1879x2500px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1879x2500px

>>9468844
why not

>>9468857
Are you the idiot who wrote that the overman can't be born because of a nuclear holocaust in the other thread?

>>9468865
what a glib facsimile

Never give a sucker an even break, libs love to pay to virtue signal.

Conning people is an art too.

>>9468868
no, but that sounds hilarious - can you link me to it?

>>9468870
is this some new epic mene?

>>9468880
>new
congratulations you got yourself caught!

File: 1493512473497.jpg (15KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 500x375px

>>9468889
>tfw still called a newfag after 10 years

>>9468552
tell me the significance of a urinal stood differently, you, who is a supposed knowledgeable spectator, that is able to critique "works" such as that

>>9468904
>tell me the significance of a urinal stood differently
what did he mean by this

>>9468898
>he discovered 4chan in 2007

newfag? Damn straight

>>9468454
That's because you are an idiot. It's shit.

>>9469004
What do you like?

>>9468865
>>9468854
there can be no return to classical art because one cannot return to the conditions of the classical age. what you seek would merely be kitsch replicas of classical art, and already exists in the form of neoclassical art, which is rightly derided by the art community

>>9469037
>the art community
Do you mean former classmates?

>>9469037
Yeah man, us moderns are just fundamentally different from people in the past. Like pass the bong dude

"Kitsch" is just a vague term for bad art and/or art that makes MFAs insecure about their own lack of technical talent. It's meaningless.

>>9469025
SeX

>>9469054
>us moderns are just fundamentally different from people in the past.
in terms of culture, yes, very much so

>It's meaningless
read adorno

>>9469057
And your sister, do you like her?

>>9469066
i only fuck virgins

>>9469068
then go fuck yourself

>>9468484

Capitalism goes much deeper than a barter system with monopoly money lol. If you think the Capital has nothing to do with the direction art has taken (and basically everything else) it just goes to show the genius of capitalism: people don't even realize their precious concepts have become commodities. And even Duchamp and the many trophy Marxists knew/know of this.

>>9469060
>in terms of culture, yes, very much so
Humans are fundamentally the same everywhere. That's why we can still understand and relate to the works of Shakespeare and Homer.

>read adorno
Post-WW2 cynicism is irrelevant now. This is a new century.

File: iq_by_country.png (28KB, 1357x800px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 1357x800px

>>9469079
>Humans are fundamentally the same everywhere.
Think again, bloody postmodernist.

>>9469074
the irony is that the current state of art is the fault of Duchamp and those like him

>>9468904
>>9468904
>>9468904
Come on abstract art connoisseurs, tell me the FUCKING SIGNIFICANT OF A FUCKING URINAL

>>9469120
It must be cozy to have such a child-like mind. Never stop dreaming, anon.

>>9469132
>tell me the FUCKING SIGNIFICANT OF A FUCKING URINAL
what did he man by this

>>9469132
It was a comment on how art had become open to nonsense like pre-made objects recontextualised as "art". Literally the same point you're trying to make.

>>9469138
A Marxist says "Never stop dreaming"? how ironic

>>9469152
please don't

>>9469157
A marxist? lol
Have fun witch hunting, dumbo.

>>9469162
Contemporary art isn't about "skill", at painting or at sculpture, it's about ideas and commenting on things, in particular on our reality and often on contemporary art itself. If you're interested in talented painters and sculptors, there are more of them than ever before, they're just doing concept art for vidya and CGI for movies. Complaining that modern art isn't pretty is missing the point.

>>9469176
What I meant is that your comment was ridiculous.

why hasn't anybody talked about picasso since deskilling was one of is greater concern ?

>>9469176
>Contemporary art isn't about "skill", at painting or at sculpture, it's about ideas and commenting on things
For most of history, art did both.

>>9469179
because he actually had some skills

>>9468447
i got more life changing ideas from my organic chemistry courses than any of my literary courses

except maybe my critical theory class, that got me to think differently.

>>9469179
>Picasso
>deskilling
He didn't have anything to do with it. Picasso's works required a huge amount of skill and attention to form to paint. He was the last classical painter.

>>9469179
Because Duchamp used the Fountain to show him up - that was deskilling

>>9469176
Why would you want to make a comment about a thing instead of the thing?

>>9469196
>Duchamp used the Fountain to show him up
citation needed

>>9469199
Why would you want to make a comment about society instead of making society? You can't make a society with a paintbrush.

>>9469207
I found a perfect link for you

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonathonkeats/2013/02/28/picasso-vs-duchamp-what-every-ceo-and-politico-should-know-about-the-art-rivalry-of-the-century/#2dea40fe17da

File: 1493595061001.jpg (446KB, 1000x718px) Image search: [Google]

446KB, 1000x718px

>>9469208
No one cares about some faggy comments though.

>>9469211
That's an incredibly superficial piece that doesn't even support what you were saying, written by an "experimental philosopher". Discarded.

>>9469233
What I'm saying is quite well known, I frankly don't care if you want to stay ignorant

>>9469226
That would explain why popular contemporary artists are always so poor and people who simply refine their talents at photo-realistic renderings of mecha-battles make so much money.

>>9469074
>people don't even realize their precious concepts have become commodities.
how are they (we) supposed to realise that when it's been the case their (our) whole lives

>>9468447

Hmm, so you're saying that there's some widescale problem with Art in general that only you seem to be aware of?

Let's just think statistically: isn't it more likely that there is a shit ton of interesting art you haven't encountered because you're a plebe?

>>9469243
What are you even saying? That Duchamp's Fountain was a dig at Picasso? This doesn't hold up to art history, it's just plain wrong. That he is to blame for art as we know it now? Which would ber childish and impossibly reductive.

>>9469244
It has a lot to do with luck
t. your hero Duchamp

>>9469274
Not in any relevant way at this point.

>>9469271
I think most of the general public seems to be aware that there is some problem in art
But be my guest, stay in your art echo chamber - if you form an opinion of your own... no, no we simply can't have that, art is perfect as it is and to deny that is unintellectual

>>9469243
>I tout clichés like a smart person would

if anybody wants to read something serious about it in terms of art history
http://platypus1917.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/robertsjohn_artafterdeskilling2010.pdf

File: quad.jpg (2MB, 1600x1155px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1600x1155px

>>9468447

Oh, hey, my school is on /lit/. Neat.

Nah, UCL is a horrid, Marxist shithole. Can't wait to be done here.

>>9469285
>It's can't be true if lots of people agree!

>>9469318
Agree on what? That Duchamp is the big Satan, responsible for the ills of today?

>>9468447
>Deskilling
Lmao boii

>>9469318
It's not only clichés but falsehoods that could be easily contradicted by a little research.

>>9469324
That is a different issue and not the one you were complaining about, as I am easily contradicting.

>>9469328
What issue is it, then? I'm sure I could agree if it was presented plainly.

>>9469328
>I am easily contradicting
Are you saying you are a contrarian?

>>9469334
You were complaining about people spouting cliché, and not about repeating falsehoods. While sometimes these things overlap, they are not the same. As should be obvious.

>>9469342
>avoidance strategy

>>9469352
>irrelevant buzzwords masquerading as rebuttal

>>9469376
My only claim is Duchamp using the Fountain to show up Picasso is wrong and that can be easily researched. What I'm trying to do is make you state plainly the knowledge you mentioned you had, which was widely accepted, that would make me less ignorant. At this point I'm not sure you can even write down what you were referring to.

>>9468479
she seems cool

>>9468479
>My feminist sister got a master's in film and now she only likes foreign black
stopped reading there

>>9469556
seems about right

>>9468878
>>9468217

File: Artistic_view_of_how_the_world_feels_like_with_schizophrenia_-_journal.pmed.0020146.g001.jpg (176KB, 1010x1013px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 1010x1013px

>>9468447
anyone else getting strong schizo vibes from all this ?

>>9468479
>Needs a master's degree to stop watching Hollywood dreck
LOL, your whole bourgeois family should be put in front of a firing squad

>>9468447
The top three aren't too bad, honestly. And the bottom right is also okay.

It's not really fair to use university fine arts program people as something you're decrying.

Most of the work of university undergraduates is shit. Do you honestly think most undergraduates in science or humanities produce publishable papers? They don't. And neither do most fine arts undergraduates produce art that will make it in the real world. But, hopefully, they are developing and experimenting with creative skills and processes that they can build on in the future.

>>9468447
Art is about composition and aesthetic. Not muh " how hard to make" meme.

MUH TWO YR OLD COULD PAINT THAT.

But could your two year old work out the best composition to make something aesthetically interesting? Engaging with the aesthetics and palettes of the era and of past eras? No.

The physical capacity to do something is only a trivial matter. It's the ability to COMPOSE that matters.

Some of the images in the OP actually show some skill at composition and aesthetic manipulation.

You chimps arguing about the degeneracy of postmodern art and abstract paintings are like genre fags arguing that people who like Lolita or Shakespeare are pretentious fags because "its borng and hard to read and there's no plot!"

You're the art equivalents of people who read for plot only and can't appreciate prose.

Look at the artworks in terms of their composition, aesthetic engagement, and how they act in conversation with their lineage and the history of art practice.

Yes, a lot of conceptual art is rubbish, but not all.

>>9470695
>Art is about composition and aesthetic.

These two terms are kind of meaningless unless you qualify them with reference to pre-modern, modern, and post-modern 'aesthetics'. Also most post-modernists specifically moved away from ideas of 'composition'.

>>9468447
UCL graduate here, not from Slate but know 2 who went there.

UCL among many other schools pander to the rich foreigners (hell who am I kidding I was one of them barely got my "merit") Therefer a lot of the art school fags are just in it due to money and have shitty art. If they were based on merit they wouldn't be in there.

As a point, I was not able to getinto any phd at was in top 100 in USA. MA in UCL is easy you just pay for it, gettting yourself funded with PhD is hard. (I'm sure there were ucl fags who went to oxbridge/ivy for their phd but thats not my point, there are plenty of failures who managed to get in to UCL, you pay about 30k pounds for a year if you are an international student)

>>9470715
slade*
pardon the brainfart, just butthurt about that place

>>9469280
The problem in art is that everyone is visually illiterate. People aren't taught how to read images the way we're taught to read language or film or what have you.

It's not the art community's fault. It's the public's fault. All they care about is the reputation of the artwork and the brand identity of the artist, hoping they conform to archetypes of "the artist" personality so they can gain cultural/social capital by "knowing art"

There's plenty of good postmodern art. There's plenty of good conceptual art. It's just that it has to rub up against the piles of absolute shit trash that most people can't distinguish between.

It doesn't help that people who don't have any clue about art, that wouldn't even appreciate classical art apart from "gosh, what illustrative skill" bemoan what they don't understand. Most people who think art has lost something, who look to classical or Romantic artworks as what art should be, don't actually care about those old artworks anyway, and have probably never visited a gallery in their life.

>>9470695

>Art is about composition and aesthetic. Not muh " how hard to make" meme.

Why not both? Why can't you be a skilled draughtsman and also have a good sense of colour and composition? If it's so trivial why don't people just spend a few minutes every day learning to fucking draw?

I mean I understand what you're saying but you have to understand that the fine arts are becoming as irrelevant and esoteric to the average person as high modernist literature. Are tomorrow's plutocrats still going to pay for smeary vagina paintings?

>>9469287
Pretty interesting from the abstract. Thanks.

Most of those are shit but top right is patrician as fuck. I would buy that.

>>9469120
Funny then that Duchamp has been influential longer than even Michelangelo. Must be the most influential artist in Western art history.

>>9470732
Not him but draughtsmanship and composition only end with the commodified art object. There was a lot of art from around the 50s and 60s onwards that was directly concerned with escaping that very fate. Mechanics are honestly not that important to art anymore, except the average public still likes technically-competent film, photography, even video games, etc.; a bizarre hold-out for formalism without the mystical woo-woo universalism.

>>9468447
I feel about the woman in the middle with the cans on her head, whoever made that image probably had a fantastic idea in their head, like a really good idea, but had no where near the ability needed to adequately pull it off.

File: 1427781191801.jpg (366KB, 2250x4505px) Image search: [Google]

366KB, 2250x4505px

>>9470754

Contemporary art just seems so. . .sterile. Why should I care about the no doubt profound philosophical underpinnings of a painting like this? Why should I put in the effort? Do people really find it rewarding?

Seems like a culture in decline my man.

>>9470797
That's actually a comfy image, honestly.

>Seems like a culture in decline my man.

Post an art you like then.

File: Mucha - Le Pater.jpg (387KB, 1054x1600px) Image search: [Google]

387KB, 1054x1600px

>>9470811

File: 3d238e0adc-1486760970326.jpg (71KB, 512x512px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 512x512px

>>9470815
absolute kitsch
I honesty prefer >>9470797

>>9471135
I have to agree with this.

The second image is like movie-poster art-tier.

>>9470797
Contemporary art is as wide and varied as anything, I don't see how it is sterile. There is no limit to materials, ideas, media, etc. Modernism was sterile (it was the end of painting, as in the highest achievement of its medium, supposedly), so you get works like the one you posted as an artistic 'reaction' to Ab Ex. It shows the process of its own creation and its material 'objectness', with paint from one canvas ending up on the other when they were painted side-by-side. I don't think it has profound philosophical underpinnings. It's quite literally a dumb painting -- it just simply is what it is -- and that's what is good about it. It's as dumb as photography, which eclipsed painting by the 60s and is now probably the most prolific form of contemporary art.

After modernism artists moved from the transcedent universal art object to explorations or interrogations of processes and systems, including the art world and galleries themselves. Because that is the basis of our current society, knowing how systems operate is knowing how society functions. It's a kind of anti-ideological art. You come up with an idea and you run the idea, and the end result speaks for itself. It's a different kind of 'autonomous art' because it doesn't rely on the sophisticated theory like Greenberg and 'pure' painting to make sense. It also makes interesting play between the frame of the (descriptive) title and the work itself.

And if you agree with the idea of Apollonian and Dionysian in art, the allowance of chaos and random chance in an otherwise rationalised system makes postmodern art the most artistically 'complete' art since Romanticism.

>>9470721
>Having this much bad faith
If I prefer Mahler to Taylor Swift, do you attribute it to be not 'getting' Tay-Tay and being ignorant about music? Maybe I've heard both and genuinely prefer Mahler

>>9471354
How do I get into Mahler?

>>9471377
Mahler is pretty easy to get into, as he has a small body of work, just the symphonies and a few choral things.
They're all about an hour or longer though, so no obvious easy pick for newbies. Try 1st or 4th Symphony and go from there.

>>9468553
>Video Games
>Art

>creating art to impress

It is like you wish the death of art.

>>9468447

>desk killing

Those sick fucks.
A good desk is worth a thousand men.

>>9471135
Thats just a picture I took of the wall of my school bathroom wall.

File: 5165439_orig.jpg (347KB, 1100x539px) Image search: [Google]

347KB, 1100x539px

>>9468524
>>9468552
These are the only good posts, the argument devolves above either art student's conceptual pay grade at an obvious point

>>9468558
>>9471135
This isn't what kitsch means.
>>9471170
Anachronism

What a lot of the 'muh conceptual' conversation is missing is it's necessary point in reacting to social-economic and political change in their respective countries timelines. Looking at countries who 'arrived to Modernism late', it's easy to say they're copying Western trendsetters, but it fails to recognize that art achieved the de-contextualization, abstraction, eventual concreteism, even the full blown conceptual works (that are now notably de-culturalized and made for a Biennelle market more than anything, lot of EuroAm economic politics to drill into as much as self-exploitation by nonWestern artists) is that these works arrived at their place when they were /necessary/ modernism wasn't a part of a natural art evolution, just like the realism that most deluded muh masterpieces cling to wasn't. It was a response to a climate that made it necessary.

>>9469287
Fellow Art Historian here. Will check this out, thanks.

>>9471882
Who decides what kind of direction contemporary art takes? Or what is necessary?
Also doesnt the art shown in galleries and musea already have a stamp of approval rendering it uncontroversial?

This very thread proves there can be reasonable discussion about art in this board and that plebbiters complain about their inability to grasp banter and about not having their dicks uplicked because of anonymity.
Remain e/lit/ists friendos

>>9471512
yeah, and it's still better

>>9468475

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khewra_Salt_Mine

It all makes sense now! I never had it figured out before! WOW!

>>9472042
what... are you on about

>>9471882
This is precisely what kitsch means. I know you read the wikipedia definition and think it's only cats with really big eyes, but consult any dictionary and you will know what I meant.

>>9471354
Being visually literate isn't about 'getting'.

You're only able to make a judgement based on what music you like because you're musically literate. Taste is another matter entirely.

>>9468561
anon is right about Cézanne tho

>>9468447
You just don't get it.

>>9472042
'this upsets me but i'm too cowardly to make a cogent point'

File: smug racist.webm (439KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

439KB, 640x360px

>>9471135

Oh well, eventually the department of art history will lose its funding and we can go back to real art.

File: 98455_509015.jpg (100KB, 574x768px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 574x768px

>>9468690
>You always know exactly what you will see and exactly what the artists will be saying before you enter the exhibition.

"So what?"

Innovation is a modernist game. It's not critical to art production.

>>9471882
What is 'natural art evolution'?

>>9468709
same want to meet up?

What to paint in the age of memes?

>>9468636
you're not wrong
>dallas salad
is pure artistic genius

File: 1477885332741.jpg (100KB, 570x713px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 570x713px

>>9474139

File: 1493321600001.png (528KB, 984x655px) Image search: [Google]

528KB, 984x655px

>>9474220
hehehe

>>9468668
this shitty fucking attitude is killing this website

your underhanded way of talking, as if everyone in the thread is smarter than him, except of course you're the smartest person in the thread and anyone else you disagree with is also a baboon. You're 10x more concerned with sounding smart than you are with contributing anything to the thread (which you haven't) so you just shit it the fuck up.

Can you be fuckin' civil? Because literally every other corner of the internet has shit quality posters like yourself.

>>9469100
In a "if lions could talk..." sense, you fucking sperg

File: monika-rostvold.jpg (184KB, 576x1024px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 576x1024px

>Modern """""""""""Art"""""""""""

>>9468484
>capitalism is a barter system

>>9468447

We are all equal. The authoritarian, racist, misogynistic and increasingly intersectionally inappropriate dichotomy of "skilled" and "unskilled" is an artifact of Western bias, colonial legitimation, and the irrationality of the authoritarian mind. We are in the 21st century, which is the best century in human history, since we have liberty, equality, and progressivism. Unfortunately, there are still signs of regressive and social evil in our world, just look at the joke of a "president" Drumpf. Art now must uplift and cherish the people who have been rendered historically subaltern, colonized, racialized, and sexualized (as well as denied racial and sexual identity [occasionally at the same time, in extreme instances]). Your aesthetic "sensibilities" are mere vestiges of a history that we would do well not only to move past, but destroy (namely by destroying those people who have shaped that history: 'white'* people).

*Even the dialectic of racial oppressor and oppressed requires the falling back on such terms as 'white' (which does not exist), showing how much our language has been systematically wielded to create, maintain, and legitimate oppression.

>>9474315
Haha I get it

>>9474269

I love how nigs always give an honest reaction to everything

Watch Roger's Scruton's On Beauty.

>>9474404
Its a terrible documentary and the art he promotes isnt anything special.

>>9474315
I'm a reactionary now

>>9474269
That's not modern art tho. It's postmodern art. And it isn't good art at all.

>>9474423
this
Scruton is a hack

>>9468447
>As a result people are making straight up garbage and try to pretend it's conceptual, because they have no skill and no discipline.

I don't believe artists with mechanical skill would make very good conceptualists. Conceptualism isn't a 'base art' that people are stuck at if they don't have the skill and discipline to make a great object.

File: original.jpg (143KB, 828x628px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 828x628px

>>9474494

*Postmodern """""""""""Art""""""""""

>>9474722
Ewwwww is that a naked lady?

File: jani hotpockets.png (64KB, 167x298px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 167x298px

>>9474730

Technically no, she's wearing pasties and a flesh coloured thong. You hear that mods? Don't ban me.

>>9474722
>Judging something by its worst examples.

My macaroni and cheese with blue cheese instead of regular cheese is bad, therefore all pasta is equally as bad.

>>9468447
>Real criticism is key to art

and what pray tell does a faggot like op think 'real criticism' is

>>9468475
the boy's name? Albert Einstein

>>9468515
Marvel cinematic universe
Star Wars
Black mirror
Sherlock
Dr Who
Supernatural
Pretty Little Liars
Xavier Renegade Angel
Lars von Trier's Riget

>>9474928
Cool taste, my epic dude!

>>9468709
If I'd ever walk in the museum of fine arts of Boston at first I'd gonna go to the room were they keep the Cezanne

>>9469100

you are out of your motherfucking mind if you think this is accurate with china in the purple

>>9475052
that map looks like a map of carbon emissions or something that someone labeled iq lol

>>9469100
Lol southern Ireland.

This map is obv. bullshit.

File: PHale-Gue.jpg (99KB, 650x658px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 650x658px

>>9468480
>He criticized capitalism therefore he's good.
Is this the only criteria Marxists have for art?

>>9468514
There's an either/or fallacy that people who defend conceptual art use regarding technical skill vs. concept. As if the two shouldn't be working together in tandem to create an artwork.

>>9468558
His influence has been entirely negative. The art object itself is no longer the focus, but rather the context in which the art object exists. This means that the artist statement or critical analysis of the piece is more important than the piece itself. Conceptual art has been the standard in art institutions since the 70s and was accepted by critics decades earlier. And yet artists, institutions and critics keep pretending it's still shocking and that they're rebelling against conventional aesthetics (which have been dead since the early 20th century). It's a farce.

File: theo-prins-8.jpg (288KB, 1000x806px) Image search: [Google]

288KB, 1000x806px

>>9469176
>If you're interested in talented painters and sculptors, there are more of them than ever before, they're just doing concept art for vidya and CGI for movies
Concept art for games and movies has developed a vernacular of bland overused aesthetic tropes far more limiting than classicism ever was. There are a handful of concept artists who break this mold and produce work of any artistic merit but studios generally want more of the same bland overused space marines and WoW characters, and going against what the client demands generally results in reduced employability.

>>9468480
But mainly providing (social or whatever) commentary through your art is more literature than fine or visual arts. In a way you can say that modern literature has eaten up all the other forms of art, since they're nowadays more like illustrations accompanying some form of broader commentary by the artist.

>>9475135
Hasn't that always been the case, that most painting and art isn't innovative? Not everyone can be Picasso. There are still people out there who are good at it, and some who are innovating.

>>9475131
>His influence has been entirely negative. The art object itself is no longer the focus, but rather the context in which the art object exists

This isn't true though. There isn't any art without an object. Even conceptual art has an object. Yes the context is important, but it doesn't essentially differ from the use of a frame. The objects, whether they be a person, sculpture, performance or painting, still have aesthetic standards and visual criteria of assessment

>>9468459
>great works of the past
Fuck off

>>9475131
>The art object itself is no longer the focus, but rather the context in which the art object exists. This means that the artist statement or critical analysis of the piece is more important than the piece itself.

That's a positive.

>>9475152
The best visual art has always been literature-based. History paintings were the highest form of painting for this reason.

>>9475131

>Is this the only criteria Marxists have for art?

Pretty much.

>>9475131
>It's a farce.

No it's literally the most advanced aesthetic theory which is why no one can move past it.

>>9474845

Why is her "art' worse than any other piece of postmodern "art" ?

>>9469179

>Tfw went to the Picasso museum in Barcelona
>His early work was great
>Then he became a massive pseud

>>9474404

/lit/ hates Scruton.

Ergo, definitely watch this documentary and read Scruton.

>>9475195
I'm not sure if the point of the art is to be an image or not, but there's nothing aesthetically interesting about it for anyone viewing her in person. It's just a naked person. It's lazy and pointless and has been done in better ways.

As a photo it's okay though, but not particularly noteworthy.

>>9475135
The lack of classical training really fucking shows in this one. You don't know what's good art.

>>9468475
Duchamp questioned what is art and open to us a larger scope, I believe we have taken the worse of that larger scope.

We need to be fair and consider that every new movement produces work of merit before it degenerates. Standards fall until there is no standars.

File: 1489181333494.png (7KB, 420x420px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 420x420px

>>9475215

Why isn't it aesthetically interesting? Why is it pointless?

>>9475210
>this meme again
his early works are shit, fucking open your eyes

>>9469186
>it's le enlightened chemistry major again

>>9475297
Just look at it. Do you get anything from that?

It's just a naked woman sitting on some steps with a blindfold.

>>9475466
why does she wear the blindfold ?

>>9475505
You tell me.

So she can't see anyone? Is it supposed to be like, you can see me but I can't see anything?

File: 1483669884692.gif (146KB, 388x400px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 388x400px

What's the point of all this non-pleasant looking conceptual art? Is it like a logic puzzle for the viewers?

>>9468519
>it's time the pendulum swung back.
That's not how it works you fucking idiot.

Anyway plenty of people are doing life drawing, it's the basic way of learning art.

>>9474928
>Xavier Renegade Angel
Fuck you

I don't care about Riget but fuck you

>>9475610
>logic puzzle for the viewers?

No. And art doesn't have to be pleasant-looking to be good. It just has to be worth looking at and well-composed.

>>9475739
This.

Most people at the local art university near me can draw. And I've heard life drawing is one of their most popular classes, even amongst the pomo conceptual sculptor types.

>>9468447
>>itt people are uncomfortable with art they don't understand
>>daw

>>9475762
>implying

there are "art schools" and there are Art schools

youtube.com/watch?v=vpxrY0O40Ic

>>9475772
>it's the Russian one
of course

>>9475755
>And art doesn't have to be pleasant-looking to be good. It just has to be worth looking at and well-composed.
I don't know what you mean by "worth looking at", but something being well-composed makes it pleasant to look at. By pleasant I don't mean it has to be rolling green hills and thicc women, just visually interesting. Or do you think there's good compositions that are uninteresting to look at?

>>9475775
looks like I detect a bit of an inferiority complex
it's not your fault you don't have access to proper artistic education

>>9475785
Bitch I don't WANT a proper artistic education.

It's just the most mainstream, easy-to-post Art School you could have posted.

>>9475762
It totally depends on the artschool.Of course students can always organize something themselves but imo its best to have a model availble 24/7 like in the art academy in Munich where they have a classroom that always has a nudemodel present.
t. went to artschool with no life drawing classes

>>9469025
>What do you like?
I like those sculptors in car commercials

File: 1493323097001.png (28KB, 688x773px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 688x773px

I want to make art but post-ironic mindset ruined me.

>>9475173
>knowing how to apply oil paint is bad

File: JMDispersion.jpg (2MB, 2100x1331px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2100x1331px

Skill still exists OP. It's just become so narrow that it no longer subsumes all of art, but is now up to the individual itself.

>Reproducibility of art is going to transform art into a good of consumption, thanks to capitalism, and killling its authenticity

>In order to preserve authentic art, we need to do something completely different

>Enter Duchamp, Warhol and the other lads

>End up trapping art in a word game as inauthentic or more then what capitalism would've done

>Said art cannot be approached by the mass because it's under a veil of obscurantism

>Art is now even more of a bourgeois plaything

Wow, nicely done! Really saved us from fascist ideology, thanks lads!


It certainly is true that following the rules is not necessary to creating Beauty, because strictly following rules would kill originality (in art), and because it would allow people to become expert in Beauty by marking off a checklist.

However, flight from Beauty is having really serious impacts on contemporary society atm. Then again, it's not surprising that a culture that denies Love would fear Beauty ;)

>>9476985
>Art is now even more of a bourgeois plaything
Not really, it's just more obvious now. You don't have to play if you don't want to, there are other places to go for artists than the "artworld". It's liberating, actually.

>>9477008

The other kids are disrupting the classroom and I'm going to stop them.

>>9477015
this sounds like a threat

File: Enough.jpg (14KB, 316x202px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 316x202px

>>9477033

>>9471135
I'll stab you if you say one more thing against Mucha

>>9477037
shut up, meme frog

File: abstract pepe.jpg (123KB, 423x620px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 423x620px

>>9477059

You can't silence me

>>9477064
You're disturbing the classroom, psycho. Maybe you should show yourself out and quit embarrassing yourself.

>>9477049
That drawing is an over-dramatic collection of cliches. It's blatantly over the top and and trying too much. It's going for a biblical scene but the finished product looks more like "Bible: The Movie".
The gigantic characters in the back? What is this, the ending of Evangelion?

>>9477074

Nice argument

>>9477077
as opposed to the under-dramatic collections of clichés that are modern deskilled art?

i feel like it is the people who are the least concerned with art and its history that sees the most problems in it

File: pepe.jpg (27KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 600x600px

>>9477085
Oh, so you're incapable of defending your idol? cool, another victory for me under the belt

>>9474928
I would think this is ironic but why the fuck would you throw in X:RA? Is this post-irony or are you sincere?

>>9477080
>it's only okay when I do it

>>9468447
top right is pretty good, rest are either twobly knock-offs or straight up trash

>>9477121

>the squiggles on the right are better than the squiggles on the left

>>9477163
what's wrong with having an opinion?

>>9468484
Marxism doesn't have anything to do with that
the closest thing to a culprit would be women, I think

>>9477091
Nope, incorrect.
The people who are the least concerned with art and its history have barely any opinion at all, maybe minor concern with the state of post-modern art.

People who are somewhat fluent in art usually realize that it's just a temporary issue and might fade away sometime soon, they also analyze the wider frame and see some other minor issues as well.


And then the people who are advanced level art users just disregard the spectrum altogether and focus on the decent cases of existing art, at least from my experience. Or they go back to classics or whatever.

File: laughingwhores.png (490KB, 449x401px) Image search: [Google]

490KB, 449x401px

>>9477208
>the closest thing to a culprit would be women, I think
topkek, surely you can't be serious

>>9477215
>realize that it's just a temporary issue
>it's been 100 years since The Fountain
>temporary issue

>>9477225
Yeah, it's funny how urinals still look the same today.

>>9468447
what's deskilling, and why is it bad?
>>9468475
who's Duchamp, and why is he bad/good?

>>9477168

Nothing, when you base it on something concrete.

>>9477225
Well, depends.
Do you mean the legit post-modern art? The Fountain happened prior to that
Also desu even if I meant general degradation of art (though, again, I specified that post-modern gains the most attention as 'problematic'), then yes, 100 years is still not enough, at least in this context, to call it anything more than temporary

Whenever I see that kind of thread I can't help but imagine one of the fedoras doing D&D book realism got assblasted they weren't accepted into their college salon or something.
We live in an age (and frequent a site) in which a lot people make their living by drawing the most absurd fetishes for reclused autists who form international communities on discussion and critique of said fetish porn. It is literally IMPOSSIBLE that the art you want to see isn't being produced SOMEWHERE in the world. There are people proposing shit like making art FOR computers, like, what the hell do you even fucking want my dude.

>>9477244
That's an absurdly weak argument.
>There are billions of people on the planet, I'm sure at least one of them is for example moral, by your exact definition of morality, like dude why are you complaining about beheadings and shit, like what more do you want

yeah man, like why have an opinion at all

>>9477297
Are you denying there are and have been societies in which beheading someone is considered moral? Are you implying that someone making art you dislike is the same thing as someone chopping people's heads off? Do you disagree with the statement that there is enough art to please anyone in the world?

>>9477219
I don't mean in a /pol/ way, I mean women are more likely to kind to students, and are likely to be kinder
most of the time that's good, sometimes it's misguided, sometimes it goes too far
this is why it's important for every child to be a petulant little shit at school (but now I am joking)

>>9477313
I disagree with the statement that if I see something wrong with art, morality, anything really, that I should keep quiet, just because there will be some singular example of it that I like.

>>9477323
I don't see how that has any bearing on reality whatsoever
women have very little to do with fine arts, you won't even find a single woman artist in this thread spoken of by name

>>9477326
You're free to say whatever you want if you're ready to accept the consequences. I don't understand why you have to make yourself a victim.

>>9477341
what about that chick who makes those neon signs with confessional shit like "my pussy is wet with fear" and i'm like oh shit that gives me new insight on women thx fuck is her name

>>9477244
>duuude my man check out my enlightened conciliatory viewpoint!

>>9477326
Oh, you shouldn't keep quiet, at all. But this doesn't mean people will stay quiet as well. Now, to say that acceptance of one system of morals will make others disappear is already quite a stretch, to make the same claim about art is absolutely retarded.

>>9477367
I'm not conciliatory at all, I just think it's extremely counter-productive to focus solely on what you dislike while also thinking the world should change because (You) want it to.

>>9477361
tracey emin, had to google it

>>9477376
Emin and the rest of the YBA crew (and their detractors, like the stuckists people who were mentioned sometime ITT) are huge fucking memes desu, amongst the biggest reasons as to why anglos shouldn't be allowed to do anything but sprinkly gadgets and MRI machines.

>>9468753
>But there's nothing that separates fruit baskets and spaghetti in vagina

Imagine thinking this.

>capitalist does it

oh wow such innovation

>artist does it

fuck off

>>9477374
Criticism and appreciation of what we enjoy needs context, context is provided by criticising/appreciating other works and broadening horizons. Criticism doesn't automatically mean you want the world to change to accommodate your whims, this is an assumption. Dismissing it as counterproductive and discouraging discussion that doesn't adhere to arbitrary standards of discourse is narrow minded.

>>9477341
the guy I was replying to said academia, not fine arts
where do think these people get the idea to be artists? most likely elementary and junior high art classes

>>9477434
>damage control

>>9477451
>the irony

>>9477434
>criticism needs context
>context is provided by criticising
try again

>>9477163
what an absolutely embarrassing post

>>9477476
>misrepresenting the point
try again

>>9468447
Read a fucking book.

>>9477476

>critical evaluation of one thing can be enhanced by critically evaluating many other things
Pretty straightforward

>>9477434
Criticise all you want, I've already told you you can. But you confuse criticism with simply not accepting what other people might think. This thread has been up for 3 days and everytime someone else points you to solutions for your problem you disregard them for the most autistic reasons possible while you keep crying (again, for THREE DAYS) that "deskilling" is a problem even though art with technical skill is still being produced in a range of different scenes and situations all around the world.

File: duchamp.png (27KB, 920x182px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 920x182px

>>9477527
Here's the meme you are looking for.

>>9468484
Marxism has nothing to do with the participation trophy culture, and Marxist doesn't mean "thing I don't like." There really aren't that many actual Marxists left in Western academia, they're more influenced by (explicitly un-Marxist) postructuralists and feminists these days.

>>9477537
Yes but it's just distracting from the conversation.

>>9477538
>you
I opened this thread today chum, so direct your embarrassing angst elsewhere. If you don't like the opinions in this thread (some of which are indeed retarded), then why not practice what you preach and go post in another thread? There are many threads out there and at least one will be to your tastes. May I suggest Reddit.

>>9477565
what a useless post

>>9477569
Delicious tears

>>9477565
Why do /pol/ types always say that like it's some kind of defense? We're all anon here, take your lumps.

>>9477565
Oh, but I am having a ball itt, seldom i get to talk about art to anyone, so even faggots pissed we don't get more Venus being raped by Zeus dressed as Pikachu or whatever shit it is that you like are are a chance for me to talk about it. But I still don't see how art you dislike being made hurts you so much, you seriously strike me as a le wrong generashun type of guy after going through college.

>>9477421
This is why the reactionaries hate Duchamp, he played fair and won.

>>9477585
You shouldn't really be having a ball because your hypocrisy is getting exposed.
You try and lecture others when they complain about something they can simply overlook/ignore, but fail to realise that you could have overlooked and ignored their complaints too.
I'll write off the rest of your post as juvenile projection, an assumption I'm making because my preference was never stated.

>>9477611
shitposting medal for you

>>9477620
holy shit man, how salty can you get

you didn't even have an opinion in the first place, just got mad that there are people discussing art

>>9477639
An opinion about what? Art?
What else can you tell me?

>>9477649
>accused of not having an opinion
>responds asking for opinions
Lel

>>9477653
I don't know why you assume I witheld my opinions. I did contribute them to the thread, posturing is not my thing.

>>9477683
>posturing is not my thing
All your replies so far imply otherwise.

>>9477697
Show it, windbag.

>>9477716
Systematically destroyed, better luck next time kiddo :^)

>>9477733
Writing it down doesn't make it true, big boy. The reader knows how this board works and can tell when anon is arguing disingenuously or not. You're bound to be exposed, no matter how hard you hide your preferences.

File: sergey-kolesov-pappavera-post.jpg (97KB, 764x1600px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 764x1600px

>>9475157
We're in a period where art is supposed to happen in accelerated bursts of innovation rather than gradual evolution as was the case in the past. Most of Picasso's artwork is very ugly to look at, even his academic work (which his father likely helped him on) while impressive for a teenager is not great.

>>9475160
The object itself is unimportant. Take the concept piece "An Oak Tree" which is a glass of water on a shelf. The art-piece is not self contained and relies on interpretation of it's context.

>>9475193
If the goal of aesthetics is to be advanced/complicated then I guess you're right, but I'm not convinced that it is. I find work that can be interpreted on its own more advanced than art that must be explained.

>>9475295
It's not a classical piece, but many classical painting techniques are in use despite the looseness of its presentation. Primarily the tight value grouping and balance of color temperature. Seeing as your only criticism of it is that it's not classical makes me wonder if you know what good art is.

>>9477997
>it's not classical

No, that wasn't my criticism. My criticism was that the artist displayed a lack of technical skill, which would not have been present if he was subjected to proper schooling.

File: theo-prins-10.jpg (348KB, 1400x592px) Image search: [Google]

348KB, 1400x592px

>>9478021
Not sure what you mean by lack of technical skill, Theo's work has a lot of subtle and tasteful decisions put into them. I can only assume you mean it doesn't look realistic, which is true, it's very stylized.

File: 9f42947b576ab3ecc9193a3b76b17c4b.jpg (1MB, 1280x832px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1280x832px

>>9478035
Another aspect that's impressive with his work is the stroke economy, AKA how much is said with how few strokes. The opposite of this: >>9476540 where there is an abundance of redundant strokes and very few serve any purpose to the graphic statement of the piece.

>>9478035
There are a lot of pretty colors there, sure, but it looks like he never took any damn anatomy classes to learn how 3D objects look, how they are shaped and how to convey that. Honestly, some of these objects look like unshaped blobs - and he is at least partially going for realism so at least that part isn't stylized.

File: theo-prins-3.jpg (495KB, 1400x827px) Image search: [Google]

495KB, 1400x827px

>>9478054
He's a background and mood artist for Guild Wars so it anatomy seems like a weird one to hang up on. The black and white piece was by a different artist named Sergey Kolesov, but he definitely knows anatomy.

>>9478054
dunning kruger

I can't believe you've spent a whole weekend autistically screeching about bad contemporary art on /lit/ to post this illustrator class tier landscape garbage, this shit looks like Peter Doig (by itself, a meme painter) fooling around on fucking paint brush, embarassing.

>>9478122
That's a pretty accurate description

File: High-Definition-ok1.jpg (1MB, 1024x695px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1024x695px

>>9478129
The only thing more pointless than doing landscapes these days is to try and be creative about it.
It's funny because sometimes I feel my landscape drawing classes were even more important than live drawing or painting in helping me understand compositional language, but at the same time, it's nearly impossible to find landscape painters that are doing something exciting, I think I've only seen one guy at a local (think, county local) exhibition doing something interesting with the themes, and even then I don't even remember his name because it defintely wasn't THAT interesting anyways, I can't even remember why I liked those fucking paintings so much. This is the best thing I can even think of and it's still extremely tacky

File: 9253911_fullsize.jpg (1MB, 3000x2458px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3000x2458px

>>9478122
Only because the artist's work became a topic of discussion. While a good artist, not some one I would place in my top 3 or anything. Odd Nerdrum on the other hand is some one I consider on a truly high level of aesthetic achievement.

File: beksinski.gif (570KB, 1000x811px) Image search: [Google]

570KB, 1000x811px

>>9478148
What about these landscapes my dude, are they sexy?

I ask because I always see a lot of people gushing over those, but how good are they from a more professional perspective?

>>9478202
kitsch artist that /pol/fags circlejerk about

>>9478248
ayy, I think it's more subtler then kitsch, maybe the style hides it

>>9478202
this feels punk as fuck

File: 10389243_10152349416861222_5904744683873346054_n.jpg (76KB, 720x720px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 720x720px

>>9478248
Beksinski has been an overposted artist for a long time. He wasn't bad, though.

>>9468844
this guy's right.

even if we tried, it would be like the difference between neoclassical music and classical music (in terms of the movement vs. the period)

>>9468809
this guy's retarded
"to return to good art"

>>9478202
A bit dull, I get what he's trying to illustrate but I don't really like grandiose / mythic works most of the time

>>9478195
>Literally the inventor of Kitsch

>>9477997
>The art-piece is not self contained and relies on interpretation of it's context.

But without the object it isn't art.

>>9475776
>Or do you think there's good compositions that are uninteresting to look at?

What I meant was that a well-composed image can be depressing or unsettling, which isn't something I would call pleasant.