Plunger .... how about this
....Duchamp's 1917 "Fountain" .... was a major work of the past century's "found" art movement. To some it's just a urinal ... to others... it's finding art in something that isn't meant to be.
Brillant!
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Are abstract art fans stupid?
- Thread starter AlphaMale
- Start date
Plunger .... how about this
....Duchamp's 1917 "Fountain" .... was a major work of the past century's "found" art movement. To some it's just a urinal ... to others... it's finding art in something that isn't meant to be.
Brillant!
Benjamin Strange
Commercial User
- Dec 25, 2002
- 9,737
- 310
- 49
- Disclosures
- Owner / Tech: Strange Guitarworks
Plunger .... how about this
Duchamp's 1917 "Fountain" .... was a major work of the past century's "found" art movement. To some it's just a urinal ... to others... it's finding art in something that isn't meant to be.
Brillant!
I've seen that in person - it's actually pretty cool. It was pretty ballsy, methinks, to submit something like that as "art" - and it's pretty cool to see it on display amidst a whole bunch of other, "serious" art.
I wonder about those who hate abstract art - I wonder how they handle stuff like Pink Floyd or the Beatle's more "out" stuff, like Saucerful of Secrets or Revolution #9?
Am I the only person who thought this was hilarious?
Oh, and Funkalicious--come on man. Do your homework. I understand if you don't like the style, but to call Pollock's revolutionary painting crap is simply uneducated.
I dare you to produce something as pathetic as a Pollack painting, yes it is just paint splashed on a canvas, but if it's done incorrectly (which I have seen and I'm sure you have), it just looks like mud. You have to have an understanding of color and the way colors work together to produce something like that.
But this style of abstract art is really about randomness, things naturally happening. Don't get me wrong, most abstract art fans (probably art fans in general) do take themselves far too seriously. Part of the new wave (new as in since Warhol) has been about the "is it art?" question. Sticking something in a gallery and defending it as art, the art then is the discussion of the art. It's all slightly interesting, for me though if I don't like looking at it, I don't waste my time.
I really do appreciate abstract art in this regard, but I haven't gone out of my way to find it. What interested me in photography (which I do think I've given up on) was a similar sort of thing, decay. It always seems so morbid to think of decay as beautiful, it makes you sound like a high school goth kid, but I think it's the ultimate in nature vs. man. Rust, paint chipping, etc... but also nature vs. nature, the shape of the earth being formed by erosion. It's a visualization of time that has passed.
I don't think you need to go to a gallery to appreciate this sort of thing, so in that regard, I'm no longer an artist or art fan. But you have to think of what was made possible by art galleries being invaded by such crude/abstract art. People tend not to think of a urinal as a work of art, but somebody had to spend the time to design the urinal, figure out how it needs to function, create a mold for it, and go through the required steps to turn it into something you can piss into.
*smb's definition is great, BTW.
In my view, producing something as pathetic as a Pollock painting is not enough. Pollock was the first to do it. He understood the rules that he was breaking. He figured out how to make it have a long term impact.
The dare should be to come up with something of comparable significance and impact on the culture, without any predecessor doing it first.
In terms of the urinal, not all great art produces something that you want to have in your house.
That's another BIG thing (I say big since most of his stuff, if not all his stuff is BIG), seeing a picture from a google image search VS. the real thing is a big part of it.
So..........how do you tell one from the other??
When you see something nobody else can do.
Anyone an can throw paint on a canvas from 6 feet back, but not everyone can paint like Van Gough.
The problem I have with it is that most of it looks like something ANYONE can do
Are you confusing art and craftsmanship?
My new quote .... thanks fdeck.
However, having a urinal in my master bathroom would be sweet!
Fdeck I agree.
I can't stand Home Interiors garbage either. If I see the Dogwood Legend or Footprints in the Sand again I am bound to take them directly off the wall and burn them on the spot.
I almost forgot the the bronze butterflies.
Art is like food, different tastes for different people. Whether I think it's crap and won't touch it, someone is bound to eat it somewhere.
I can't stand Home Interiors garbage either. If I see the Dogwood Legend or Footprints in the Sand again I am bound to take them directly off the wall and burn them on the spot.
I almost forgot the the bronze butterflies.
Art is like food, different tastes for different people. Whether I think it's crap and won't touch it, someone is bound to eat it somewhere.
Dali was a surrealist, not an abstract artist.
Personally, I have no problem with abstract art. Some of it can be very thought provoking. I find that often times, it's not the finished product itself that makes it art, but the process and the statement it makes.
The problem I have with it is that most of it looks like something ANYONE can do
IMO.... this is the same problem that many have with much of "abstract art." The catch is ... it's not easy when you add the conceptualization of it into the equation. As an artist/artisan yourself .... I'd imagine that the conceptualization process of a new knife design is quite hard to do.
Plus, there are also works that look easy, but aren't.... take for example painting a circle. As easy as it sounds .... painting a circle freehand is very hard to do when you try (having it come out as a perfectly round circle).
As far as Pollock .... when he came out with his "signature" style .... he was a mavrick. Painting in this style is much harder to do .... and do well than it seems. IMO .... Even in his 'messy housepainter's dropcloth style,' the composition, colors, and technique of his works are pure brillance.
Are abstract art fans stupid?
According to my wife I am! :just kidding, hun:
I find myself really drawn (no pun intended) to abstract, even though the style I prefer to draw myself is super realism.
It's all in what is interesting to you, the viewer. Just like different styles of music, or different genres of writing. I don't care for fiction, but it is what is by far the majority of what's down at the library.
It's not always about painting figures or representations of figures. I don't necessarily need someone to draw me a barn and a cow, sometimes I like to find it for myself amidst shapes and colors. Although, if I draw it you can bet yer ass it's gonna be a barn and a cow.
I don't care for Impressionism too much. Abstract & Realism - talk about extremes. That doesn't mean Impressionism stinks
According to my wife I am! :just kidding, hun:
I find myself really drawn (no pun intended) to abstract, even though the style I prefer to draw myself is super realism.
It's all in what is interesting to you, the viewer. Just like different styles of music, or different genres of writing. I don't care for fiction, but it is what is by far the majority of what's down at the library.
It's not always about painting figures or representations of figures. I don't necessarily need someone to draw me a barn and a cow, sometimes I like to find it for myself amidst shapes and colors. Although, if I draw it you can bet yer ass it's gonna be a barn and a cow.
I don't care for Impressionism too much. Abstract & Realism - talk about extremes. That doesn't mean Impressionism stinks
However, having a urinal in my master bathroom would be sweet!
Hopefully not pointing the way that Duchamp had it.
