When does art stop being art?

When does art stop being art?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conceptual_art
theatlantic.com/health/archive/2011/10/you-are-not-so-smart-why-we-cant-tell-good-wine-from-bad/247240/
youtube.com/watch?v=bHw4MMEnmpc
youtube.com/watch?v=lNI07egoefc
youtu.be/WyL5ABXltW8
lmgtfy.com/?q=Paintings done by children
youtube.com/watch?v=qPJvGMYxDPs
youtu.be/lNI07egoefc
youtube.com/watch?v=7Rn1NT5dlIc
youtu.be/I9lmvX00TLY
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Sup Forums is no place to discuss art.

Unless you want to circle jerk about how modern art is shitty, and easy, and degenerate.

Let the artists tell you what art is. Ignorant critics on Sup Forums can fuck off.

When it stops being made by a human.
What you posted is art, it's just shit art.
Calling something "art" is not a commentary on its quality.

when people can expose a chair and call it art

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conceptual_art

When does figure skating stop being figure skating? Unlike painting "art" this is a type you can be rated on and I am pretty sure you would get a zero if you just fell on the ground and spazzed out.

When someone decides to ban all art that looks like shit you could create on a computer, using a line tool.

>He doesn't realise modern art is just a money laundering front

Degenerate art is shit and the emperor has no clothes.
You don't need to study art history to say most 20th century art is garbage (but it helps)

When i can do it, it stops beeing art. Art needs craftsmanship or else it is just an idea.

>Let the artists tell you what art is
what a shitty statement

No, it's your job to explain why a painting of a hairy asshole is art or random shapes in a park is art.

When you don't understand it.

Art is something intended to express some feeling/idea/concept

So pretty much anything can fall under it

Good/bad art is about how effectively it delivers that, and most "modern" art is total shit because of that.

why tf am i posting as a leaf today?

It doesn't.

The real question is whether someone stops being an artist. If you submit garbage art and nobody knows who you are, it's garbage. If you submit garbage art and you have a lot of jewish friends who get everyone to think it's something glorious, it's the next groundbreaking movement in artistry.

It's like those experiments where nobody actually knows what good wine tastes like. They just say it's good or bad based on what they think the branding is.

theatlantic.com/health/archive/2011/10/you-are-not-so-smart-why-we-cant-tell-good-wine-from-bad/247240/

Flicking a paintbrush at a canvas with different shades of red and grey is not Art

youtube.com/watch?v=bHw4MMEnmpc

>Art is something intended to express some feeling/idea/concept
>So pretty much anything can fall under it
Good goy.

...

When you stop looking at it.

When there is no technique, no skill, no heart into the work.
Most modern "art" you see that get sent to museums or new money exhibitions are usually a front to launder money.

When it looks like you can replicate it quickly.

I was visiting Paris a while back and I couldn't help but to notice just how fucking beautifully detailed the houses were. Chiseled with perfection and precision, every single one of them. There were these decorative curls on the pillars, and even the curls had other extremely small curls coming out of them. I stood in awe just looking at them.

That's what art is supposed to be. When someone makes art, the precision and time it took to make it is key. It has to be perfect, every little detail hammered down into a perfect showcase of human possibility.

This is partly true.

People to get on trend and like what is pushed on their face, tho art and artists don't live in the same world, they are keen with creation so they will always push forward.
If you really wan't to know your shit just read a lot about art history as you must know the basis of all the evolution and revolutions.

...

Art stops being art when people try to treat it as anything more than a skilled craft. Think about it. THINK ABOUT IT.

I didn't say it made it good or beautiful or even a positive thing for soceity, but something being awful self indulgent mindless shit

its art

just gross disgusting art of no substance, it's not art of substance or value.

You realize that DuChamp, they guy who did that toilet piece, was trolling the fuck out of artfags at the time, right?

when you let jews degenerate the standards for what is and isn't art

youtube.com/watch?v=lNI07egoefc

not difficult to figure out breh

I have increasingly more respect for the skilled drawfags we have on these boards. They might not be all that good but at least they put some semblance of effort compared to the lazy fucks that attend art schools.

Pic related was bought for 300 million usd, its by willem de kooning

>Art is like... What ever you want it to bee maan.. Groovie dude, right on!
I agree. Peaches is my favourite artist.
Look at her art: youtu.be/WyL5ABXltW8

Your fucking face when the last refuge of traditional art is fucking furries.

True. Post-modern bullshit takes little to no skill.

It's not art, someone's just calling it art.

Or would you fuck this pig because I called it a hot woman?

who are your favorite painters? I really like beksinski and dali

Post redwall covers.

See attached for a good example.

sure showed him haha

...

Some more art coming through. Here's a nice collection: lmgtfy.com/?q=Paintings done by children

>inb4 Cucklaysia

You have yet to provide a contrary definition of art, and a definition of what the other things are. You must determine principals with which you can determine them, not just saying its not art.

...

Memes are art too!

Gondola is the purest art.

Not a painter, but Giraud, also known as Moebius. Also Andreas Rocha and Syd Mead, he of Blade Runner fame.

wow, thats a flashback and a half

god i loved these books as a kid, so fucking amazing famalams

contrast it with what's going on with pop culture degeneracy, liberalism and modern art

hold my feels

Shit art is still art, only that is shit.

When it becomes science.

Beauty!

gondola is just retarded
Gachimuchi is real art

proof
youtube.com/watch?v=qPJvGMYxDPs

If you want to know the history of this untalented lazyness called ((((modern art)))) here it is: youtu.be/lNI07egoefc

>someone who makes art is an artist
>artists decide what is art and what isn't

But that doesn't answer the question. It just delegates authority to a group of people, which suppposedly have some sort of sixth sense what is art and what is not.

Did you watch that video I posted? Well at least listen to it in the background

i mean come on
youtube.com/watch?v=7Rn1NT5dlIc
if this isnt art then what is?

>mfw this will never happen thanks to the Jew
>mfw the future is the Flintstones and not the Jetsons, thanks to niggers and Islamic immigration brought to you by the liberal kike

RIP Brian Jacques
Every other fucking book was boring to look at until I saw the Redwall covers. And then when you started reading you realize the covers perfectly complement the stories inside. The artwork is like a window into the fucking redwall world. Now here I am immersed in anime and manga and big fucking robots.

Happier times, user. Happier times.

art is anything that was made by a human being.

>hurr durr it's only art if I approve
Too many Uncultured conservative swine ITT.

When you start adding elements from this into the equation

>mfw this will never happen thanks to the Jew
Don't be defeatist.

aaaaaahaha dragon cunt

I'm watching it but you should still be able to say your definitino of art and by what principals detrmines art or waht isn't or whatever

What happened to art is the same as what happened to Universities and intellectuality. We allowed the untalented and retarded masses pursue the fine academies meant for the educated and the talented.

I.E. we ignored meritocracy in favour of good will and commodification. When you allow the low folk into high academia, the outcome is often shit. Like Modern Art, or Social Justice.

Take a look at this RADICAL PIECE OF MASTERFUL ART: youtu.be/I9lmvX00TLY

^That's what you end up with. And the worst part is that you're "ignorant, uneducated and generally an awful person for not understanding it". Modern Art and it's artists are the Nu-Male SJW's of contemporary culture.

>by what principals
My principals from elementary, middle school, and high school.

dali and bob ross got me into oil paints. im terrible and its hard but it is fun. visiting nelson art gallery really,put me in awe. master level work is beautiful.

Holy fuck you are stupid
This guy is also an idiot and is totally misrepresenting modern architecture in super over the top cherry picking ( i dont like modern architecture either)

He keeps spouting contradictory pseudo intellectual stuff about how stuff is useless making it useful lmao, but even modern architecture has ornamental stuff, that isn't the problem. The problem is what modern art is trying to express vs old art trying to express.


but again if you cannot form concrete principals to establish the state of something being art/non art then you are just irrational and if thats the case stop responding

>theatlantic.com/health/archive/2011/10/you-are-not-so-smart-why-we-cant-tell-good-wine-from-bad/247240/
This "you can't taste the difference between red and white wine" is such a fucking meme. Sure, there is a certain overlap, but wake me up at 3 AM in the middle of a night when I have a blindfold and a cold sore and give me a cabernet sauvignon and a riesling and I'll tell you which is the red one and which is the white one correctly 100/100 times.

As for identifying grapes and age, I'll leave that to the experts, but there are experts that can identify the grape, the region and the age with a relatively high accuracy. As for the price, well that's a bit more difficult to quantify. The fact that their definition of good and bad quality is price is also part of the problem. It's kind of like saying nobody can tell the difference between a good and bad axe because they can't correctly identify if a gränsfors bruks or a hudson bay is more expensive. There isn't necessarily a completely linear relationship between price and quality.

right in the feels. Pearls of Lutra...must have re-read that dozens of times.

Even looking at the my old Redwall books chokes me up sometimes.

piss bottle jesus is not art. its shitty. and they call it art but it is not art.

Of course it's some leaf nonce spewing this pretentious shit

I bet you attend an art/media course at college because that's pretty much what every leaf on the internet does

>doesn't notice different flags or IDs
Fucking retard

Even if I did reduce what defines art into a small bite for your retard brain to eat, you'd just try to pick it apart and twist it around to refute it. You're a dumb goy puppet who buys into marxist bullshit, enjoy your lack of culture.

Something is art if it is beautiful. Beauty is defined by lots of well documented theory in all mediums. That picture is just a bunch of scribbles on paper.

it never stops being art because apparently literally anything can be art. however, there is a continuum from god-tier to shit-tier to modern-tier.

for the atheist there is no god-tier and all the other tiers are equally valued. what they produce is a reflection of their soul. they label art whatever their degenerating, disintegrating mind shits out.

to produce god-tier art you must have not only skill but a relation to a reality that transcends the material.


this kind of art
represents the artist's will to nothingness and unconsciousness

>doesn't know the difference between principle and principal
How ironically fitting, a living metaphor for modern art.

Long Patrol was bretty gud, so was Lord Brocktree.

>I can't actually explain my thoughts so i will just call you a marxist

You are LITERALLY unable to define art, but are arguing my definition is wrong. You are the one destroying and replacing it with nothing of substance, you are doing the very act you accuse the vile post-modernists of doing.

I dont think what the post-modernists are doing is just something that should be dismissed as not art, as art has the ability to move and motivate people to do things. Their work undermines and defiles the potential grandiosity and beauty of the human spirit and hum an action, making people feel like nothing matters so they can push their collectivist bullshit. If you just say it's not art it makes it seem like it won't accomplish anything, but it is art, and it does accomplish it's goal. It's just moves people in a totally negative direction that we have to be aware of.

Though just focusing on style isn't even the most important thing, it's art/design without any positive emotion behind it. Someone can build something in older pre-modern styles just mixing random stuff together to sell something but it won't inspire anyone.

Just focus on the art of any style that does actually inspire positive things and is constructive, worrying about what style they happen to be using isn't the most important aspect (though post-modernist stuff is almost without exception shit.) The fountainhead is an example of someone whose modern art is more beautiful then expected "beauty"

You sound like the kind of person who would do pic related.

...

...

yeah speaking against marxists who wish to destroy the individual human spirit and pursuit of better things is really on par with some kike talking about memes
holy fuck he is a massive kike

> is a writer and LGBT activist in the USA who writes on spirituality, Judaism, sexuality, and law

>Nehirim. Nehirim was a national LGBT Jewish organization Michaelson founded in 2004

i very much dislike that comparison a kike faggot lawyer journalist activist is there a worse collection of descriptors on earth?

Talentless hacks in concert with the evil j00 found that usurping the superior art establishments was the only way to get their art noticed. Likewise, the desecration of culture and core principles of beauty helps the evil j00 wave their wand over th3 sh33p.

When it doesn't evoke emotion at all.

/mlp/

Anything degenerate and devoid of skill is not art.

So when you can say "I feel nothing" the piece of art is actually a piece of shit?

Actually, the answer is very easy.
It's art if someone other than a self-proclaimed expert can tell the difference between a good one and a bad one.
For example, I suck at drawing, but my brother is pretty good. Ask us both to draw something, and you'll easily be able to see that one drawing was done by a good drawer, and the other wasn't. However, ask us to create a piece of modern """art""", such as that in OP's pic, and you won't be able to tell who's skilled and who isn't.

The reason you can't define art (which used to be exclusively a chase for perfection, to recreate what God created but with our limited materials - to inspire) is because of (((Aesthetic Relativism))) the same philosophy that dictates that Fat = Beautiful and Islam = Peaceful.

It stems from ethical Nihilism (I used to be there.. It's insanity). The argument revolves around the ideal that there is No morals and No ethics and thus there is also No beauty or objective beauty. Aesthetic Relativism is thusly open for interpretation and entirely nihilistic or "personal" which means that Anything can be art. Even a suicide bombing, because... We (as people, with eyes and brains) are too disgusting/retarded to know what "beauty" is.

This is a trade off between human ingenuity (talent) and human feelings and psychology (subjectivism). Aesthetic Relativism is anarchy within art and culture, it is the start of demoralisation.

When you start to disregard objective beauty, beauty, perfection and raw talent as "shit" you no longer have to abide by culture as either aesthetically pleasing or a necessity. When you are able to discredit culture you start hating your own culture and seek an alternative art form that can take it's place.

Aesthetic Relativism is the entry-philosophy to Cultural Relativism and Multiculturalism. This is why modern art is important to discuss as a cancerous element in modern society. But as most cancerous things this new art movement was hijacked somewhere along the way.

When the (((artist))) tells you that art is subjective or tells you what Xe things objective beauty is, you should know that you're talking with the equaling of an Art-Socialist.

Modern Art is a leftist politically motivated "counterculture movement".

Around 1974

You probably just don't get it because you were turned off by the video showing jesus on the cross and then instantly made up your mind to hate the video and dismiss everything about it. You make claims that he doesn't make sense or is contradictory or call him a "pseudo-intellectual", but don't back it up at all. It's like I'm talking to an atheist.

I don't want to define art because if I call it something beautiful then you'll just claim that beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.

Why jewish, it's just part of the free market. Inflating the price of worthless shit through marketing.

>When you are able to discredit culture you start hating your own culture and seek an alternative art form that can take it's place.
Does this explain why anime and especially manga is so popular now? Entire fucking bookstores with rows upon rows of shelves full of manga and kids browsing them.

>pic
lol is this loss?

underrated

You may feel nothing but someone else might, and the painter for sure. If the piece of art only evokes emotion to the artist for interpersonal reasons it can barely be considered art, since it's not really connecting with the viewer in an emotional level, which can be happiness, tranquility, fear, disgust, etc; but these emotions must not be confused with simple physiological reaction, which a lot of modern artist fall into nowadays by painting with shit, blood and making all kinds of disgusting performances that provoke a reaction, but not an emotion, the reason why modern art is mostly literal shit.

When you can't interpret your own meaning of it.

>If the piece of art only evokes emotion to the artist for interpersonal reasons it can barely be considered art, since it's not really connecting with the viewer in an emotional level
So if the emotion evoked is disgust followed by a physiological reaction like puking, would it still be art?

When it isn't created by a sentient creature.

Where the hell did that come from?
I also did back it up he kept talking about how art is useless, but it's useful. In saying that the ornamental qualities of architecture/art grant it a use even though in themselves they lack one. However modernist architecture still has ornamental qualities so it's irrelevant and does actually talk about the thing fundamentally negative about it.
Which I said and backed up in my original statement, just not as in depth.

>you'll just claim that beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.

Never said this and never would, I Just said art doesn't have to be beautiful, though I'd say good art generally does.

You don't want to define art because you don't know a definition that rationally conforms to your claim and if you were to actually state what defines art you'd be unable to without contradiction maintain your stance. Just fucking define it you pussy instead of making shit up about how im an athiest triggered by god or think anything can be beautiful try actually saying something substantial.

I also never called him a pseudo-intellectual and have no idea where you got that from, most errors in this are likely just because it had to be condensed for TV audience, obviously for an actual in depth analysis you would have to read a book. (but i don't assume that's something you care to do often)

But again challenge, just like the art you hold up so high, try actually saying something of substance then just hiding behind vagueness

I'm not explicitly naming/blaming Jews, I named j00 in the likeness of referring to an actor working under their motives.
It's different, but not really if you feel meh.