Most ridiculous thing touted as "art"

[MysticnFm]

The point of some of the art people think is ridiculous, is the fact that it was the first of its kind. In most cases of things such as the first two examples cited in this thread, they are original and unique for that fact alone, and the ideas lose value immediately after the first sale.

People always say "Anyone could do that", but that is easy to say after the fact.

That being said, there are still some ridiculous examples around.

You should look up 4'33" by John Cage.

 

[Nailz]

Personally I think that whether or not something is art is a matter of opinion. After all, some of the things I've heard about that are called art to be utterly ridiculous. The most prominent example to me would be Tracy Emin's "My Bed". It makes no sense to show of some messy, unmade bed and call it "art".

<3<3<3
I like how you say first you think art is a matter of opinion, then you say "It makes no sense to show some messy unmade bed and call it "art". Who knew how difficult it was to stay consistent within three sentences...

I think personally modern art gets a lot of flack by people less versed in the art world.

A lot of the people who criticize paintings that get sold for millions that are "just random colours" overlook much of the artistry and mastery that these painters bring to the table. Many non representational, surrealistic, etc artists choose purposefully to eschew the convention of beauty to focus on their own preferred aspects; such as composition, color, concept, relation to viewer, etc in a pure manner. This is not to say that they couldn't perform master level photo realistic paintings, a feat which many have had to accomplish within their training, but rather that they wish to explore other avenues.

A classic example would be Cezanne whose watercolors broke all convention and within their time were looked upon the same way we might look at a monochrome, with all sorts of contempt. Yet now days he is one of the Big Names. I've seen some elusive sketches done in his training without his particular style and they were master quality. These paintings get huge prices for a reason, and they were not something whipped off without thought. It can be hard to see from layman eyes, but as are most things. Code is indecipherable to non programmers. Video games are a waste of time to many people. It's hard to give full respect to something with only superficial awareness of it's context.

 

[VanityGirl]

I don't like people slopping paint randomly on a canvas and then trying to peg some deeper meaning to it.
Someone who threw two different colors on a canvas and said "It a piece about war and peace and the turmoil the world is in"

I just tilt my head sideways and say, "It took you how many seconds to do this?"

 

[Googooguru]

Andy Warhol - Superficial irreverent artist - Campbells soup i mean come on people

Just my Opinion maybe people like paintings of Campbells soup ..... sigh

 

[Ickorus]

Spoiler: Spoilered because someone might be disturbed by this.

Yes, that is exactly what it looks like.

It was auctioned for £2000 - £3000.

 

[Mr. Grey]

i once saw a gray suit hanging on the wall of the museum of modern art. that one threw me for a second. it was supposed to be about how "empty" corporate america is, but it was just a suit, hanging on a wall.

I dunno, I can see what the guy is talking about. I just think he's got his head so far up his ass that he doesn't realise the generalization he's made or the importance of corporations today regardless of how empty they are.

You should have worn the suit and walked around picking your nose... it would have been your statement that Corporate America is run by idiots. Maybe go "Huurrrr..." at some people for no real reason at all.

Yes, I am fully aware of my irony.

 

[Zayren]

I feel like "Modern Art" is just a bunch of people who know all their shit is shit, but they all have some secret organization to convince everyone that it really is some "Art" with some deep meaning to it. Basically, the world's best trolls.

Because, no, a nasty ass urinal is NOT ART.

 

[Unia]

What's worse is that garbage is considered art while people just write stuff like this off as silly:


That's more art than anything you could find in a museum.

That clip needs an epilepsy warning 8p

OT: Art is like religion, except there's a lot of art out there I personally like.

In Finland there was a huge debate over what people can and can't do in the name of art when someone did a video montage on sex and violence. At one part he killed a cat with an axe and ejaculated on the corpse because it was "totally necessary for the potrayal of the whole". Luckily that poop did not fly.

I became allergic to the word "art" in high-school. Our teacher was so into conceptual art she made us write an essay on every. bloody. piece. that we did. Not only that, but she had the delightful habbit of presenting someone's unfinished picture to the whole class and telling her own expressions on it. Never got it right.

Bottom line: good art is not only made with emotion, but conveys that emotion to the viewer without the need for further explanation. I take technical skill over the ability to self-analyze any day of the week.

 

[Notere]

I'm going to go ahead and use a well-known artist for this. Simple. Maplethorpe's X Portfolio. Someone found his porn folder. He made up an excuse for it. That's the long and short of it. It's insanely NSFW. It was goatse before goatse existed. Fuck that guy and his "art." Seriously.

 

[theklng]

I saw a "work of art" hanging up outside a theatre before that just had rectangles. I don't remember specifically how many, but it was around two or three rectangles. They had primary colors. The whole picture was about the size of a sheet of notebook paper. Give me a break.

Actually, it might have been this:

Spoiler

that's actually an esoteric programming language.

edit:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piet_(programming_language)

 

[luke10123]

saw a blank canvas sell for a 5 figure sum before.

 

[Jezzascmezza]

Those paintings that are like two white dots on a blue back ground.
Seriously... That's considered "art," yet games aren't?

 

[Kair]

There used to be logic in art, now it is abstract and unreliable.

 

[iLikeHippos]

Jesus Christ... If you can't be insightful, art is nothing to you.

And you shouldn't bother than.
Apparently, this qualifies to many posting here.

If you take "My Bed" for example... I am guessing the artist wants to show how she usually gets up in the mornings.
But it's something I'd have to ponder longer on.

As for the Black Box, you can see there's a tiny little white dot in the middle.
Does that white dot represent a lone little man in all the enveloping and massive darkness?
Could be anything. Just depends on what you're seeing.

 

[theklng]

You can throw a load of different paint colours on a canvas and make some "insightful" bullshit about what it means and make millions!

only if you're famous, that is.

Or if I cut off my ear.

So Van Gogh's a sham?

No, I am just saying that's why he became famous.

his paintings are what made him contemporarily famous. his ear is what is remembered best posthumously.

 

[Marmooset]

So Van Gogh's a sham?

No, I am just saying that's why he became famous.

That's like saying Michael Jackson became famous for his kiddie trial. It's an element of the legend, but hardly the origination.
This would be a more appropriate reason:

OT:
I think a lot of folks here may need to brush up on the definition of art.
Art is not everything.
Art is not "good" (although it can be).
Art is not necessarily the result of painstaking attention to detail, or even hard work.
It doesn't even have to be an image.
It is simply a creation which evokes emotion. The emotion can be wonder - or it can be indignation, amazement, or anger.
Trust me, most of the examples brought up are not my cup of tea. But they are, nonetheless, art. Remember, during at least one period during or after their lives, Pollock, Picasso, Dali, Monet, and Van Gogh were generally dismissed as artless. Similarly, Stravinsky, Mozart, and even Beethoven were as well. It does not change what they've created.
Art does not await your acceptance. It just is.

 

[Evil the White]

A pickled cow cut in half. Look it up.

 

[Asparagus Brown]

Context people, context!

From memory, The Bed was meant to be some kind of reference/statement on prostitution that won a big prize some years ago, yes? I might be wrong there, feel free to correct me, because it's irrelevant to my point.

My point is this: conceptual art is conceptual. You're looking at this art as an object, not as a concept. I'm not saying the examples given are good or bad, or fulfilling either as objects or concepts, just that it seems short-sighted to dismiss them as not being art simply because you don't find them aesthetically pleasing. Also, the "I could do that" reasoning is crap because, whether you would have liked to or not, you didn't.

 

[sageoftruth]

OT, we also had to do a study of this joker's art- Sean Scully. He pumps out this tripe all year and gets lauded for it.

Spoiler: Sean Scully

I saw a "work of art" hanging up outside a theatre before that just had rectangles. I don't remember specifically how many, but it was around two or three rectangles. They had primary colors. The whole picture was about the size of a sheet of notebook paper. Give me a break.

Actually, it might have been this:

Spoiler

In my opinion, at least this stuff has some aesthetic value. Sure, you can say "anyone can do this" but the fact is, no one else did. Some of this abstract art I think doesn't have to have any meaning behind it, though I bet it usually does, but if someone can look at it and say "That's pleasing to the eye" then I think it's worth it. Hell, even to some extent, the "squares" mentioned earlier could be interesting to look at, but I'm kinda wary of them.

Selling your own crap in a jar though... No. Just no.

I don't know much about this guy. From the looks of it, I'd say he had some

OT, we also had to do a study of this joker's art- Sean Scully. He pumps out this tripe all year and gets lauded for it.

Spoiler: Sean Scully

I saw a "work of art" hanging up outside a theatre before that just had rectangles. I don't remember specifically how many, but it was around two or three rectangles. They had primary colors. The whole picture was about the size of a sheet of notebook paper. Give me a break.

Actually, it might have been this:

Spoiler

In my opinion, at least this stuff has some aesthetic value. Sure, you can say "anyone can do this" but the fact is, no one else did. Some of this abstract art I think doesn't have to have any meaning behind it, though I bet it usually does, but if someone can look at it and say "That's pleasing to the eye" then I think it's worth it. Hell, even to some extent, the "squares" mentioned earlier could be interesting to look at, but I'm kinda wary of them.

Selling your own crap in a jar though... No. Just no.

I'm no true art critic (if such people exist) but this looks like the result of someone using inspiration to create something and then finding himself out of ideas once he's famous. Doesn't change the fact that it's art though, even if I wouldn't pay a huge wad of cash for these.