Poll: Art or not?
- Thread starter ExplosiveSheds
- Start date
Recommended Videos
It's art, but also that fucking pretentious art for people who, by lack of talent in conventional art, decide to paste their (perfectly valid) ideas about what art is and is supposed to do, on ordinary objects.
Also, this isn't fucking new. They did this back when dada was still the big thing. So it's pretentious and not even new or shocking. The artist could have spent his time better.
Also, this isn't fucking new. They did this back when dada was still the big thing. So it's pretentious and not even new or shocking. The artist could have spent his time better.
Ignoring the already repeated a dozen plus times subjective lets move on a bit.
Is it art, sure, in the same way i could piss and smear shit on a canvas and say its my deep seeded rage for the government and make 10 grand off it. In that definition it sure as hell is art.
However that art has no bloody dignity. I'm sure there is some stapled on 'meaning' she has attached to it but its bloody damn clear she did it for the money. You can tell there was no real feeling behind it. Its shock art. Its meant to look edgy so she could sell it for a crap load of money.
There is no soul, no feeling. it is just a ploy to grab money. That's not to say disturbing or strange images are not art or are all for money. One of my favorite artists is Mark Ryden. Type that into Google image search. I'll wait.
As well I'm not saying an artist shouldn't make money or that they should never try to sell there work. That is stupid as well. Art can lead to business, but your motivation to make a work in art shouldn't be about the money. When i look at the 'My Bed' picture i don't have any feelings. Its just a messy bed. You have to read the description before any meaning or factors come through.
Back to Mark Ryden, look at this picture.
http://www.scene360.com/wp-content/themes/site/uploads/ryden_04.jpg
While you have to read a description to understand what is so 'objectionable' about the My Bed you can look at that picture and derive some meaning out of it. You might think it sucks, you might not quite understand what the hell is going on, but you can understand why people might hate or love it just by looking at it. It doesn't need to be explained as to why any emotion at all comes up when take a look. The picture itself is all that is needed to enjoy it or hate it. The creator doesn't need to talk about how she pissed and cummed and menstruated on things that makes it shocking or interesting or unique. It just needs to be.
So yes, 'my bed' is art. In the same way a stripper is a dancer.
Is it art, sure, in the same way i could piss and smear shit on a canvas and say its my deep seeded rage for the government and make 10 grand off it. In that definition it sure as hell is art.
However that art has no bloody dignity. I'm sure there is some stapled on 'meaning' she has attached to it but its bloody damn clear she did it for the money. You can tell there was no real feeling behind it. Its shock art. Its meant to look edgy so she could sell it for a crap load of money.
There is no soul, no feeling. it is just a ploy to grab money. That's not to say disturbing or strange images are not art or are all for money. One of my favorite artists is Mark Ryden. Type that into Google image search. I'll wait.
As well I'm not saying an artist shouldn't make money or that they should never try to sell there work. That is stupid as well. Art can lead to business, but your motivation to make a work in art shouldn't be about the money. When i look at the 'My Bed' picture i don't have any feelings. Its just a messy bed. You have to read the description before any meaning or factors come through.
Back to Mark Ryden, look at this picture.
http://www.scene360.com/wp-content/themes/site/uploads/ryden_04.jpg
While you have to read a description to understand what is so 'objectionable' about the My Bed you can look at that picture and derive some meaning out of it. You might think it sucks, you might not quite understand what the hell is going on, but you can understand why people might hate or love it just by looking at it. It doesn't need to be explained as to why any emotion at all comes up when take a look. The picture itself is all that is needed to enjoy it or hate it. The creator doesn't need to talk about how she pissed and cummed and menstruated on things that makes it shocking or interesting or unique. It just needs to be.
So yes, 'my bed' is art. In the same way a stripper is a dancer.
blah blah subjectivity bleh art by technicality blah blah...
Not for me though. I know that artists like Van Gogh were not thought of as proper artists at the time and all, but at least they put colour and some effort into their work. My mum would take one look at this and call it lazy.
As a side note, I would be interested in hearing what a proponent of the piece would say.
Not for me though. I know that artists like Van Gogh were not thought of as proper artists at the time and all, but at least they put colour and some effort into their work. My mum would take one look at this and call it lazy.
As a side note, I would be interested in hearing what a proponent of the piece would say.
I'm not an artistic person, so no I don't think it is. But I suppose you could call it art when comparing it to 'The Lights Going On and Off'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/1701556.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/1701556.stm
Genius.
What the hell kind of world do we live in where this gets in a museum but games that involve the artistic labors of hundreds of people are considered by some as not art?
Art is anything now a days as long as the artist adamantly claims its art and it required the closing of ones eyes in its making. This is terrible. Art is such a fun and easy thing to do today. True talent is only partially seen.ExplosiveSheds said:
In my opinion, contemporary art isn't art. Art to me, is someone putting hours of their own time to create a master piece, no something I can make myself in 5 minutes..
The art world is so messed up :S
The art world is so messed up :S
Doesn't the definition mean it's not art? "of more than ordinary significance." This is perfectly ordinary, so surely by this definition it isn't? JUSTICE AT LAST.Daverson said:
Also, props to whoever I forgot to quote that mentioned that her being a woman makes it art instead of gross. I will be using that point in further arguments, cheers.
Hey, if even one person says it's art, then it's art--obviously they do have to find a sucker to buy it for a bigillion dollars.