Last Word,
I agree that popularity does not count for much but Vettriano is not an illustrator he has more painterly skills than that. However my choice is for more expression and less realism although I am a figurative painter myself. In the end it is all a matter of what you like.
I am a compulsive painter who feels the urge, but is not therapeutic for me. I have to get it out of my system. I have got hundreds of paintings now!I just carry on, as you say and have been painting all my life. I may open an online gallery when I get round to it.
Most of the public do not understand art at all but they know what they like when they see it.
If you want praise and attention from the public it is easier to sensitise a bit of canvas in the darkroom and project a photographic image down onto it!!wink!
Mike.
Hardcore Porn at the Royal Academy
-
eroticartist
- Posts: 2941
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: Art is wank
amazon.com/author/freeman
Re: Art is wank
This made me smile:
In our time, the answer to this question is under the control of the art elite. The answer to the question is simple:
"Art" is x, where x is a variable. The value of x is approximately "something that an ordinary person could never understand."
In our time, the answer to this question is under the control of the art elite. The answer to the question is simple:
"Art" is x, where x is a variable. The value of x is approximately "something that an ordinary person could never understand."
quis custodiet ipsos custodes
-
The Last Word
- Posts: 1644
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: Art is wank
Good point about Reynolds, but..
> What JV does have is a style that makes one wonder what else is going in in the picture. Emin's skanky bed and Hirst's butchered sharks and sheep are incapable of that.
I'd disagree with you there. That said, some of what JV does isn't too far removed from more celebrated others. The US artist Eric Fischl often gives his work strong, narrative qualities and an equitable body conciousness, especially in early works such as Bad Boy. He's one of my faves.
> While I can embrace the likes of pointillism, op art and the cartoons of Liechtenstein, for example, in the end I like to see something that moves me and makes me think. And that isn't a video "installation" of someone switching lights on and off.
No qualms with that. The problem with video installation work is that very rarely do I see something that hasn't been done before within cinema one way or another, but it's still where very many modern artists are heading. They all want to be directors. It's been said before that film-making is the high art of now and art has always taken advantage of the technology at hand. But the theory that other more traditional creative fields such as painting aren't as well attended to now also holds water. Only an idiot would say all its possibilities have been exhausted, but it still gets trotted out, sadly.
> Bring back the Pre-Raphaelites!
Not a bad idea, but maybe keep them away from camcorders eh.
> What JV does have is a style that makes one wonder what else is going in in the picture. Emin's skanky bed and Hirst's butchered sharks and sheep are incapable of that.
I'd disagree with you there. That said, some of what JV does isn't too far removed from more celebrated others. The US artist Eric Fischl often gives his work strong, narrative qualities and an equitable body conciousness, especially in early works such as Bad Boy. He's one of my faves.
> While I can embrace the likes of pointillism, op art and the cartoons of Liechtenstein, for example, in the end I like to see something that moves me and makes me think. And that isn't a video "installation" of someone switching lights on and off.
No qualms with that. The problem with video installation work is that very rarely do I see something that hasn't been done before within cinema one way or another, but it's still where very many modern artists are heading. They all want to be directors. It's been said before that film-making is the high art of now and art has always taken advantage of the technology at hand. But the theory that other more traditional creative fields such as painting aren't as well attended to now also holds water. Only an idiot would say all its possibilities have been exhausted, but it still gets trotted out, sadly.
> Bring back the Pre-Raphaelites!
Not a bad idea, but maybe keep them away from camcorders eh.
"Let's do it..."
-
eroticartist
- Posts: 2941
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: Art is wank
Jacques,
Thanks for the link. It was amusing!
The emperor is revealed as having no clothes if one refuses to read the verbal justification which can run up to ten thousand words for one piece of "conceptual art." A bulb going off and on,for example,would not be studied as a work of art unless one read the verbal justification and learnt that it was the particular piece this room. If you did not read the verbal justification then the art gallery visitor would just assume that the light was malfunctioning in an empty room.
The test of all visual art is whether you can be emotionally moved by looking at the image that the artist has created. The purpose of the English language is to inform and not to obfuscate. The conceptualist movement have simply invented a private language that no-one can understand except themselves! People reading the verbal justification can't really understand it. The conceptualists simply rely on the verbal justification in order to get you to think that there is something there which you cannot understand.
Do you get what the drift?!wink!
Mike.
Thanks for the link. It was amusing!
The emperor is revealed as having no clothes if one refuses to read the verbal justification which can run up to ten thousand words for one piece of "conceptual art." A bulb going off and on,for example,would not be studied as a work of art unless one read the verbal justification and learnt that it was the particular piece this room. If you did not read the verbal justification then the art gallery visitor would just assume that the light was malfunctioning in an empty room.
The test of all visual art is whether you can be emotionally moved by looking at the image that the artist has created. The purpose of the English language is to inform and not to obfuscate. The conceptualist movement have simply invented a private language that no-one can understand except themselves! People reading the verbal justification can't really understand it. The conceptualists simply rely on the verbal justification in order to get you to think that there is something there which you cannot understand.
Do you get what the drift?!wink!
Mike.
amazon.com/author/freeman