What happened to art?

...

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=lNI07egoefc&list=FLN_0WnioRVzKc5tgXkhlokA&index=67
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_CIA_and_the_Cultural_Cold_War
youtube.com/watch?v=hxPsXPCR5MU
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

...

In the case of classical art, cameras.

talentless idiots thinking artistic genius is just annoying people

...

pop culture cancer

Modernism, it all started with Picasso

Three things
1.) Jewiversities want more money so they have more "art" majors that cant paint for shit.

2. Art is no seen subjectivly, instead of the value of the work coming from how good it is it basically is now as good as the artists thinks it is

3.)because of 2 you can affix any value to any work, so you can use modern art to launder money. Pic related sold for tens of millions


Tldr: lefties ruined art

>credit to my mom for taking the pic
oh my God my sides, holy kek

Realism and figures got boring.

Some moron decided that "anything can be art" they forgot to distinguish that not all art is good art and decided to celebrate all art even though most art is garbage.

Ooof no, user.

Any Realist painter worth his salt, doesn't paint a photo-realistic picture.

This.

>photographers thinking they are artists

It's embarrassing.

(((Nothing. Art is still fun, goy.)))

It got better. With software it doesn't take 10,000 dollars and 3 years to make a picture of a crowd

10/10 kek

...

women

>Jews fund art making it worse

Such cognitive dissonance, your left and right brains must barely be communicating

Oh look,
It's another "Sup Forums tries to pretend that they understand what art is although they are clueless as can be" thread.

I'm not saying today's art is good, there's some good shit out there.

Also, impressionism was the best in my honest opinion.

creating art like that is a microagression against minorities that triggers their subserviance to white man

Newman is cool though.
I'm guessing you don't like rothko or pollock either.

the camera was invented and unskilled artists without creativity had to come up with an alternative

While I do think that a lot of current "art" is just that, "art", I cannot simply dismiss it out of hand because it doesn't adhere to classical standards.
There are a lot of artists worth their salt can still paint and create evocative works. But as said, it can be (and frequently is) used to launder money, which I cannot support.

...

>pol doesn't know what art is
did you ever sell your 'art' for 100k? no? then fuck off back to plebbit

The value of an artipiece is determined by the emotions it stirs within the beholder. As such, as artistic and technical excellence became more common, they were pushed out of the limelight with more "daring" pieces which were seen as edgy counter-culture. Either way, it is the free market at work.

Dead.

This here:

youtube.com/watch?v=lNI07egoefc&list=FLN_0WnioRVzKc5tgXkhlokA&index=67

As an artist I find it highly frustrating with his modern art is treated as it is today, instead of hours of work you can just shit on a canvas and have it be called a masterpiece.

...

...

...

...

Funny, as there was quite a visceral reaction to Impressionist art not unlike the reaction to postmodern art today.

My understanding is that term "impressionism" was coined by a hostile critic.

My question is: what will be the next "revolutionary" step after edgy postmodernism goes stale? Will there be another Neo-Classical period?

...

...

>that picture

Thanks, you are now part of the problem.

Also, implying that art or knowing about art is strictly tied to how much money you have sold your shit for is part of the problem as well.

Show me a piece YOU have worked on and I'll show you one of mine miles better.

...

>I'll show you one of mine miles better
then go ahead

...

Cultural relativism.

Remember The Incredibles?

>When everyone is super, no-one will be

This was already achieved in art decades ago. Partly, in fact, due to the CIA funding shit art in cultural warfare against the USSR. And now that everything is art, we are saddled with generations of "artists" who are fully convinced they can do anything, and just spin an entertaining story around it, and it is art.

I like Han van Meegeren. The man who became Vermeer. He proved how insane this relativism is.

Are those FUCKING ANUSES? What kind of autistic knob takes pictures of their own assholes and decided to put it up on a wall.

"Mommy mommy! Look what I made"

Mother looks at her son, she sheds a single year as she continued to sign the paper that will send him to the orphanage.

>credit to my mom for taking the pic

from 1 to sweden, how faggot this painting is?

Is this the secret to a happy life?
An utter lack of shame?

This pictures made over 30 Million....

Its a sick world.

...

re: Weimar Republic


(()))))(((((())))

is that a photograph or a painting of a painter?

There's plenty of good modern art. A lot of it is shit, but that's always been true. You might get hundreds of "failed" pieces for every one success, but that's okay. If people never tried new styles then art would stagnate, which is true of any field.

...

it started long before that

>credit to my mom
imagine if someone created pics like these on purpose but in a manner you couldnt tell they are fake

now that would be a true artist

Well I might as well just paint my nipples and press them against a canvas, because shit I actually put time in is practically nonexistent

...

They're just good friends.

A confluence of political, cultural and technological factors

Despite the fact that Sup Forums will fantasize and fetishize the past, the fact is that art after the advent of photography faced a real challenge. Despite how nebulous the concept of 'art' was, a reasonable goal could have been said to be 'a reasonable, if romanticized and aestheticized, approximation of real life'

Only thing is, photography does that much better than any art does. And art always needs a direction to be pointed in. Without a solid goal, and with art being nebulous and vaguely defined, a significant chunk of art began playing with more meta and abstract concepts until they basically disappeared up their own asshole.

There's still good art being made today, but it really needs a goal and no one has provided it with a suitable one yet.

...

>bowl of hand lotion
What did he mean by this?

...

It still exists, but you have to look for it.

This Guy is right when it comes to modern art:

youtube.com/watch?v=lNI07egoefc&list=FLN_0WnioRVzKc5tgXkhlokA&index=67

Representational art? Been there, done that.

...

This

...

...

...

That's a photograph, but the painter is the true work of art. He was derided by cultural relativists for cleaving to a classical style. He judged that if they would only think that his work were originally made by an old master, they would laud it.

So he set out to create the perfect "forgery". A new, original painting in the style of Vermeer, artificially aged and inserted into the market as a new discovery. He was 100% right. But instead of coming out, he took a liking to the prices old masters tend to fetch. He kept it up for years, and during the war sold one to Göring. After the war he was arrested for selling Dutch cultural heritage, and he finally came clean.

They didn't believe him.

That picture is him painting his final work, under court supervision, to prove that he truly was a master forger.

why dont you show some of your art? are you scared? I promise I will be nice

...

...

more based art ruskie bro

...

Excuse me while I sink into deeper depression because of this.

...

...

...

Art was nothing more than a tool for the wealthy to help display and express their wealth.

It is not different today. Back then, even if you were a good painter, if you did not have any sponsors or backers or people who would pay exorbitant amounts of money, your art will not reach center stage in the public eye.

Today, with the advent of digital media, you no longer had to rely on physical media to create paintings. There are still others out there that create amazing art, whether digital or physical but aren't in the limelight like in famous shows or auctions because they have no backers. Jews would rather supports garbage art to be displayed today so people don't feel so "left out." Art is now subjective and up to interpretation more than ever before and skill is no longer valued. It coincides with the bullshit liberal mindset of not offending anyone.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_CIA_and_the_Cultural_Cold_War

...

>academy duh bow arts

Confirmed for clown.

This is beautiful, and realistic to the point I feel like I am in the room, to see it in person would have much of a stronger i believe.

...

One problem is you are comparing several thousand years of history to this exact moment in time. There have been great works of art in the last 100 years, but even better works of art in the last 1000. Did anyone make anything truly innovative this week? Probably no. Infinite Jest is a pretty impressive work of art from the last 30 years. It's still not Shakespere, but at least admirable for its effort. I personally love all creativity, so I don't know what's up your craw. Just a thought. The 60s had better music because we remember only the very best of the best from the decade. This reasoning compounds even more when we consider the last 500 years, etc. To celebrate, here's some degenerate art from the 60s:

youtube.com/watch?v=hxPsXPCR5MU

>Show me a piece YOU have worked on and I'll show you one of mine miles better.
Sure thing bud, I'm waiting for yours.
Did you forget to read the first part of the sentence?

...

...

PhD candidate in art history at a north american university here (can proxy). AMA

Exactly.

How do you paint depth-of-field and blurring in a physical painting? It's insanity.

...

Neomarxist shit, thats happen.

That kind of art still exists, it's just that other kinds of art are more popular in the art market now.

It's been happening forever in art history, many classical art forms were also scorned and negatively criticised as stupid by their contemporaries.

It's also happened in dance, fashion and design.

There were times when people complained that everyone was fucking painting Venus nudes, when art was too mathematically proportionate, then when it was too flowy and lacking in structure, when it was too realistic and dull, etc. All this happened with classical painting movements an eternally repeating cycle, many works you consider great traditional art was looked on by its contemporaries as boring degenerate trash at some point in history.

In the future, when more virtual art is made with vr and 3D animation along with holograms, people like you will complain about the art not being real, solid and in a physical form, lamenting the loss of traditional practices such as when abstract painters drew many rectangles on a canvas.

You're seeing nothing new.

...

This is some Godly art mane. Feelsgood.

...

...

>academy duh bow arts
>Confirmed for clown.

Ah that straw man argumentation instead of discussing his statements.

you're objectively missing a step:

>the experience, value, and content of art are no longer dependent on art that expresses a skillful artist

>the literal content and perceived message becomes important c. 1900-1910

>by pop art, the works aren't even important anymore; it is entirely about the artist

there was incredible amounts of (((SUBVERSION))) on the part of (((EXPERTS))) in the late 19th c that set up the 20th c downfall of standards and undermining of aesthetic beauty.

want me to elaborate?