Poll: does this qualify as art?

[I_B_Ready]

Doing my best to not sound like an art snob here, but as said before, art is subjective. There are times where the piece isn't meant to be understood, but to provoke thought, even if the only thought is "why the hell did the artist make this?"

 

[Kagim]

Its hack art.

In other words art made by a hack.

Art made by a hack who probably will say your just to stupid understand what they meant.

Art made by a hack who will probably make more money off a blue plaster wall he had a seizure on then i will in a whole year because I'm not willing to sell my dignity to shit on paper to make money.

Art should be about meaning, expression, and talent. This new age mess seems to be about who can make the most stupidest thing and act the most stuck up about it while pocketing some idiots cash.

Having a light turn off and on is the work of a hack.
Pissing and jerking men off on your bed while leaving menstruation bloodied underwear around lose condoms is the work of a hack.
Using the paint bucket tool in MS paint and randomly clicking it for ten second using neon colors is the work of a hack.

I'm sorry if i sound bitter, but when someone gets fan and cash for screwing with MS paint for ten seconds or secreting bodily fluids on paper then my wife who will spend 10-15 hours on a single drawing and get rejected from an art school for being, 'plain' it pisses me off.

 

[Korten12]

so today i went to a smithsonian to look at art. the "art" was blue plaster walling and smears of paint on canvases. wtf? that isnt art for me, thats just lazy bullcrap. oh, and i know this is completely unrelated to escapist, i just wanted to see what everyone else thought.

no infact I hate modern art almost... when I went to the modern art musem in Washington, DC. I was almost sicken to my stomach about what how some of the pitcures were apparent "art" one was a gaint canvas with a black dot in the middle saying "a polar bear in a storm" I was like wtf? then I looked at its price which I believe was at a million! A MILLION! really? for a something that I would never in a million years consider art!?

 

[Aesir23]

I hate abstract art. If it actually requires some skill, like what Picasso did, then ok. Art, there you go. But if it's just some paint that's been thrown on a canvas or some two year olds finger painting, then it's crap.

I personally prefer things like landscapes and portraits. An actual image created with a brush, pencil, piece of charcoal, etc.

Pissing and jerking men off on your bed while leaving menstruation bloodied underwear around lose condoms is the work of a hack.

And there goes my appetite. Please don't tell me that someone actually did that.

 

[Kagim]

I hate abstract art. If it actually requires some skill, like what Picasso did, then ok. Art, there you go. But if it's just some paint that's been thrown on a canvas or some two year olds finger painting, then it's crap.

I personally prefer things like landscapes and portraits. An actual image created with a brush, pencil, piece of charcoal, etc.

Pissing and jerking men off on your bed while leaving menstruation bloodied underwear around lose condoms is the work of a hack.

And there goes my appetite. Please don't tell me that someone actually did that.

Its the "my bed" piece of shit people were talking about for a while last week. It says "various bodily fluids are on the bed" and since menstrual blood is specifically mentioned that leaves only urine, semen, sweat, and spit.

 

[Aesir23]

I hate abstract art. If it actually requires some skill, like what Picasso did, then ok. Art, there you go. But if it's just some paint that's been thrown on a canvas or some two year olds finger painting, then it's crap.

I personally prefer things like landscapes and portraits. An actual image created with a brush, pencil, piece of charcoal, etc.

Pissing and jerking men off on your bed while leaving menstruation bloodied underwear around lose condoms is the work of a hack.

And there goes my appetite. Please don't tell me that someone actually did that.

Its the "my bed" piece of shit people were talking about for a while last week. It says "various bodily fluids are on the bed" and since menstrual blood is specifically mentioned that leaves only urine, semen, sweat, and spit.

Eww. Yeah, my appetite's definitely gone now. And it's probably not coming back until next week.

 

[The Blue Mongoose]

Spoiler: This is Art!

OT: I like some modern art. But to me, there is art and Art. Art being something that creates an emotional response and art being something creative. Me painting a picture of a dog = art. Monet painting anything = Art.

 

[Doctor VonSexMachine]

I'd say if they got you thinking (even about it's validity) it did it's job.

 

[DeadMix]

It depends on the artist, I believe. If they put a lot of thought into it, then yes. If all those thoughts went along the lines of "Art is relative, art is relative, art is relative," then no.

 

[Vrex360]

I do agree that a lot of art is subjective to personal taste so what may appeal to some may not appeal to others.
That said I know how you feel better than most, I once had a piece of my highschool art work commended for an exhibition (it was a drawing of a ruined city infested with monsters) but then I realised that I came in second. Now this painting had taken me about a month to complete so I was eager to see what beat me and it turned out the winner did a ten second video of themselves shovelling paper into their mouth and smearing paint on their face.
I was pretty annoyed to say the least.

 

[Z(ombie)fan]

If art is Subjective, I "Subjectify" this: that ain't art.

I do agree that a lot of art is subjective to personal taste so what may appeal to some may not appeal to others.
That said I know how you feel better than most, I once had a piece of my highschool art work commended for an exhibition (it was a drawing of a ruined city infested with monsters) but then I realised that I came in second. Now this painting had taken me about a month to complete so I was eager to see what beat me and it turned out the winner did a ten second video of themselves shovelling paper into their mouth and smearing paint on their face.
I was pretty annoyed to say the least.

...

what?

no. I REFUSE TO ALLOW THIS!

*RAGEGASM*

 

[Yennick]

...

 

[The Cheezy One]

to me, art is a nice picture
no interpretive stuff
pure and simple

 

[Velvo]

Art is art if someone calls it art. That and of course the stipulation that somebody made it. That's... kinda it.

 

[DarthFennec]

Anything is art, if whoever made it (the artist) put some effort into making it the way it is for the specific purpose of bringing about an emotional response in it's viewers. If someone took time to twist the metal together so people could look at it and feel something specific, it's art. If a tornado ripped a metal shack apart and wrapped it haphazardly around a tree, it's not. I think that makes more sense than "everything can be art, you just have to call it that" subjectivity response that most people here are getting.

 

[Omikron009]

I've always been a bit baffled by the concept of art. It's so subjective that technically anything could be considered art, and I think that if that's true then nothing can be considered art. We should come up with two categories for art. "Real Art" for things like classic painting and sculpture that requires a lot of skill to produce, and "Pseudo Art" for everything else, like paint splatters and bibles dunked in feces.

 

[HK_01]

As long as you're known as an artist, anything you do, even the laziest BS, is considered art. I've had the same experience as the OP when I visited a Warhol-museum a couple of years back. The "art" were portraits with changed color scheme and, my personal favorite, a bunch of random lines in different colors. I could have done the exact same thing in 15-20 seconds (and so could any six year old), but it would have been considered rubbish. When a famous artist like Warhol does it, it's a masterpiece.