My art teacher loves shit like this and produces it, she even thinks she's EXTREMELY talented in that.
I hate her.
Modern art =/= abstract art.
Just so you know; the modern art period began in the mid 1800's with foundational painters like van Gogh and Cézanne, their art was representational although had some degree of abstraction.
Abstract art is just a style that is often completely nonrepresentational.
Either way, there are pieces in each that I quite appreciate.
This sig is 100% effective protection from all hexes, curses, evil spirits and bad karma. Guaranteed.
abstract art is all about interpretation; thats why a picture like this (or a line) is considered art, because the art critics (or people who call themselves art critics) believe that there is a reason to why this is art, that there is a deeper meaning to it... google images for jackson pollock... they believe that he was one of the greatest artists of his time, and yet his pictures just look like a bunch of paint splattered on a canvas
http://webchat.quakenet.org/
"Qui audet, adiscipitur
Can you now SEE the deep message in this work of art? He is clearly symbolizing out nations economical values and income and at the same time using the line to symbolize the overuse of another nations oil. And the red background symbolizes the huge dicks of Mexico that us Americans deserve!
[PSN/Steam- Airbourne238]
That's where StrawberryClock got his inspiration!
Click to view.
Hmm, I still think this guy's work was better.
You know the world's gone crazy when the best rapper's a white guy and the best golfer's a black guy - Chris Rock
Art, the only human construct even more retarded than religion.
RubberJournal: READY DOESN'T EVEN BEGIN TO DESCRIBE IT!
Mathematics club: we have beer and exponentials.
Cartoon club: Cause Toons>> Charlie Sheen+Raptor
It's not art! It'a a fucking line. I understand that this can be taken as some shape, or something, but If art was THIS simple, then every god damn doodle I draw is a SUPER DUPER COCOJAMBO ART.
It's not an art. It's bullshit.
Ugh. The question of what is art and what isn't art has been answered a long time ago and the people still asking that are obviously not acquainted with art and probably never had any form of or self-education in art-history.
I forgot the name of the guy that made the painting, but I remember learning about him. I think he was a Jewish American that had a depression and I also remember actually liking his art. There is talent in various forms, and if you're still stuck in the idea that something can only be art if it represents nature as closely as possible, I think you kind of missed the last century and a half.
There were various reasons the abstract movement was so overwhelmingly popular, reasons in art as well as in social life, so please educate yourself before you go "DURR I COULD DO THAT TOO".
Or like (a modern artist) once said: "You could... but you didn't."
Anyway, abstract art was a few decades ago though it has its children in minimal art, if that's still going. It's not contemporary art. Stop whining about it.
At 2/11/11 10:17 AM, Shmossy wrote: I'm talking about abstract art, modern art, whatever you want to call it.
It's shit.
LOOK AT THIS. How the fuck can things like that even exist, let alone be called good? It's A LINE.
To me, it's an insult to talented artists.
I couldn't agree with you more.
It is an insult to talented artists. I like to think I put a lot of time and effort into my art, and my art courses, which I do. And then some jerk comes along and splats a line of red paint on a page and calls It art. I call it "Don't give a fuck art".
They're not even talented, they just like to think they are. And then they make up lame excuses for "what it means" etcetera.
See my most recent blog post.
I don't really mention it there, but some abstract art (that I partly refer to cruelly as 'hotel art' there) actually is quite deceptive when close up. There're colours that you'd otherwise miss. There isn't supposed to be an explanation to it. You call your friend over and say, 'Look at this closer!' or 'Look at it from this angle!'. It's just a by-product for the artist, but your experience just became interactive. It's harder than it looks to pull that off however.
I'm not speaking against abstract art (well, modern art in general) having edged its way well into the commercial mainstream though. It'd be silly to deny straight fact. But eh, it's still quite a fragmented field either way which is always sweet, expressive of this time we live in as far as artistic production and thinking goes.
At 2/11/11 10:37 AM, rowkiller89 wrote: google images for jackson pollock... they believe that he was one of the greatest artists of his time, and yet his pictures just look like a bunch of paint splattered on a canvas
The Hans Namuth photographs of his process are probably just as famous as the paintings now really, from being presented on currency (including them controversially editing out his trademark cigarette, 'cause NOBODY SMOKES IN AMERRRICA!) to actually hanging galleries themselves. Of course it helps that his most famous paintings aren't all that distinguishable from one another (for good reason obviously).
I remember some story last year about a 6 year old splatting some paint on canvas(s) his mom getting paid thousands for them. It's disgusting, and I would never consider it art.
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
╰⋃╯私の腰は、自分自身で動いている
やりまん
At 2/11/11 10:17 AM, Shmossy wrote: I'm talking about abstract art, modern art, whatever you want to call it.
It's shit.
LOOK AT THIS. How the fuck can things like that even exist, let alone be called good? It's A LINE.
To me, it's an insult to talented artists.
Discuss.
Today it isn't important how good the art is, just as long as the artist is famous.
Bananular.
At 2/11/11 12:39 PM, Calintz wrote:At 2/11/11 10:17 AM, Shmossy wrote:Discuss.You're an idiot.
Sorry, I'm a smelly pleb and clearly I don't understand the brilliance of expressionist art. I should buy a Mac and write my novel while I sit in Starbucks, then go to an art museum and tilt my head at the paintings, which will of course allow me to discern their inner meaning.
I said discuss because if I hadn't, this would be a one-sided rant. Go and cry about it.
At 2/11/11 01:32 PM, Shmossy wrote: Sorry, I'm a smelly pleb and clearly I don't understand the brilliance of expressionist art. I should buy a Mac and write my novel while I sit in Starbucks, then go to an art museum and tilt my head at the paintings, which will of course allow me to discern their inner meaning.
At 2/11/11 01:32 PM, Shmossy wrote: Sorry, I'm a smelly pleb and clearly I don't understand the brilliance of expressionist art.
Expressionism is a wide movement, and it's not really what you described in its archetypal aspects.
Some type of archetypal expressionism would be, I don't know, the German stuff from the WW1/post-WW1 era from the likes of Egon Schiele or Otto Dix (though Dix crossed over into lesser defined places) or films like The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari.
Though I'm not picking or anything because expressionism in those forms is still very like-it-or-despise-it, fair enough. Refreshing when you're panning over art history imo though.
Select between 5 monster racers, upgrade your monster skill and win the competition!
4.17 / 5.00 3,223 Views
Build most powerful forces, unleash hordes of monster and control your soldiers!
3.79 / 5.00 3,779 Views
© Copyright 1995-2014 Newgrounds, Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use
newgrounds.com — Your #1 online entertainment & artist community! All your base are belong to us.
