• 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?

#42
fdeck said:
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.
Click to expand...


Great post. The Beatles didn't make music that was beyond the ability of other bands to create, yet no other band thought to do so until the Beatles showed how it could be done.
 
#43
hbarcat said:
Great post. The Beatles didn't make music that was beyond the ability of other bands to create, yet no other band thought to do so until the Beatles showed how it could be done.
Click to expand...

Exactly. If someone taught a bear to play a Beatles song, would Beatles fans be stupid? I think not.

The difficulty in the execution of art has little to do with its validity.
 
#47
Scarlet Fire said:
Dali was a surrealist, not an abstract artist.
Click to expand...

Exactly. One of my favorite surrealist paintings:
148052.jpg


can be interpreted about 20 different ways, and everyone seems to see it differently.

Personally, I have no problem with abstract art. Some of it can be very thought provoking.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I'll never forget the time I happened to be in Chicago during a Feininger exhibit and stood in front of this semi-abstract painting for almost two hours. I still to this day don't know what it was about that painting that was so inspiring, but the experience was all too real.
 

Attachments

  • denstedt.jpeg
    denstedt.jpeg
    42.8 KB · Views: 77
#50
I would just like to point out that I enjoy abstract art BECAUSE I ACTUALLY ENJOY IT. Not because it makes me feel superior or like I'm the smartest guy in the room. I have stood transfixed in front of a Pollock painting for 15 minutes, just blown away by how beautiful it was.
 
#52
Matt Till said:
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...
Click to expand...

Many people just don't get this part, the irony being that when you question the validity of some art it is actually validating it because the artist got the intended reaction from the viewer. There's a whole sub-genre of abstract art that is all sort of "meta."
 
#53
The majority of the best realist artists out there also have a very firm grasp on abstract concepts- their work can easily be broken down into abstract shapes and colors. They just choose to elaborate on it. The misunderstanding and anger towards abstract art (labeling it pretentious or crap, etc.) is the same as towards any medium that allows for great expression- jazz, poetry, theater, etc. It shows way more about the critic than the subject.
 
#55
Besides being a surrealist Dali is not really considered a fine artist, but more of a surrealist illustrator, much like Norman Rockwell or Andrew Wyeth is, or at least thats what they taught us in art history way back when.

How is stacking a bunch of soup cans art?

Its all subjective, like a Wish Bass!

You have a collective that determines what's excepted, but does not mean you have to.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back