Who killed real art?

Who killed real art?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=lNI07egoefc
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

no one,

theres still plenty around, just have to look past your mainstream social media

Computers

Money launderers

The Jews.

(((they)))

Photography.
There is no reason to paint something realistic now, you can just take a camera and capture it.

Also, money laundering and pseudointellectualism.

Das Juden

Jews. Although photography had made figurative art pretty much obsolete by the late 19th century.

the (((entertainment industry)))

hitler, and after he was finished with art he started with the jews

Only non-meme answer

are you autistic?

do you believe only things that exist (and can be photographed) can be painted?

Because degeneracy is rampet in our society. Western culture is being destroyed by (((you know who))). Only. (((they))) buy that fucking shit. Look up the most expensove art from 2010-now. All (((of them))) buy it.

Oi vey there's nothing wrong with modern art. Art can't have objective standards or else it wouldn't be art. Classical art has already been done so now its time for something new. Hanging up blank canvases is very bold. You just don't get it

What mex bro said. Quality post my friend.

Modernism and post-modernism.

niggers

youtube.com/watch?v=lNI07egoefc

This.

Look at the shift in painting after photography was introduced. From pastoral landscapes, portraits and depictions of historic events to full-blown edgelord "abstract" bullshit.

Put Gainsborough and Manet up against Barnett Newman and Theo van Doesburg and you'll see what I mean.

butthurt artists and jews

it can be restored only by people demand more of it

Aesthetics -
According to its Greek etymology, ‘that which evokes a strong sensation’. Aesthetics is linked to notions of beauty, harmony, achievement of form.

Contemporary egalitarian ideology abhors and implicitly demonizes aesthetics. It associates (rightly) the will to power with discipline, which it considers morally unacceptable, ‘fascist’ in effect. This ideology opposes aesthetics to ‘ethics’ and situates itself in ethics iconoclastic tradition.
With plastic arts, architecture, cinema, literature, theatre, even fashion, the ugly, the unachieved, the unformed, the most far fetched nonsense, the shady and the watered down are now preferred to the aesthetic, which is made synonymous with a menacing ‘order’.

Since the mid-twentieth century, contemporary arts, encouraged by the dominant ideology, have rejected any notion of aesthetics. Instead of harmony, the power of forms, the exaltation and the elevation of sensation and beauty — notions of abstract ‘conceptual art’ are preferred, which become a pretext for degeneracy, willful ugliness, and subsidized incompetence. Abstraction accordingly reigns, just as a jargonising meaningless and obscurity enthralls the intellectuals. The genuine aesthete, the authentic artist, is ostracized or marginalized — as if he was politically correct. Hence, the paradox of a society that strives to be ‘moral’ and humanistic, but ends up privileging barbarism, the inversion of values and new forms of primitivism.

this

>Arno Breker and Josef Thorak

Just think what could've been.

We’re witnessing the simultaneous cohabitation of (1) abstruse ‘contemporary’ art subsidized by the system, (2) a cult which turns the ‘past’ into museum pieces, and (3) a commercial and consumerist subculture. Contemporary art has become the very opposite of avant-garde art. Its sad impostures haven’t budged for a century. It combines a dull academism, impostures, an absence of talent, and financial speculation. Instead of aesthetics, the system prefer pessimistic or suicidal values of representation, those that come from chaos and deformity, nonsense, pathological abstraction, regression, infantilism, scatology, a psychotic pornography: the exaltation of primitive forms. Accompanying this wretchedness, this impotence of old men, there’s the vulgar, artificial boom of costume-culture, which is to culture what costume jewellery is to jewelry.

The rejection of aesthetics is crucial to the dominant ideology. For aesthetics, at root, is aristocratic, opposed to massification and fake elites.

In its historical essence, the political is a declension of aesthetics. ‘Grand Politics’ aims, in effect, at forming a people in history, making civilization a creator of great works, turning civilization itself into a work — a work of art.

This conception opposes the modern doctrine that reduces the political to the administrative, that hollows out the notion of a people’s destiny, and rejects the creative projects of the statesmen for the sake of career politician.

— Guillaume Faye, Why We Fight: Manifesto of the European Resistance

The exactness of photography led to impressionism, and less importance put on figurative art. But once you give them an inch, they'll take a mile, so very quickly art can become incredibly lazy and yet supposedly still ripe with meaning,

I don't see any paintings of my gf so it's more likely than you think

so Bosch painted depictions of historical events?

the sistine chapel used god and angels as real life models?

all the paintings of mythological figures are "historic events"?

nigger what are they teaching you at school?

Hippies followed by computers.

polaroid

andy warhol and the pop art movement

man if there had only been a camera to capture this historical moment!

Pablo Picasso.

With photography (Later TV, movies) artists do not need a complex narrative to describe a historical events or life itself for that matter.

I do not think photography was the only reason, but had its impact.

Pop art movement also was part of the reason, a joke that went to far.

Yes, those are fictional and rather surreal events that have never happened, but it's still figurative art. If you had the budget you could build that and take a photograph of it.

That is not the case for abstract art, which seeks to represent something much less tangible.

No one, youre just upset because the only art you appreciate is realism.