Whenever I go browsing in a contemporary furniture/interior decoration store or gallery, I see a lot of art pieces (mostly paintings, but this can mean a variety of things as well) that represent something I can do with my eyes closed. If something like a big blue space next to a bunch of red dots can be called art, I don't know how you judge one person's nonsensical doodle to be "better" than another's. If you put my doodle next to Mr. Famous Abstract/Ultra Modern Artist's piece that's got an asking price of $1200, without prior knowldge, there is really no way in my eyes you can tell which one is better objectively... And that's the doodle kind! There's a lot of them that's just simple shapes and lines. One big cube divided into three colors sitting on top of an oval shape--that's not even doodle, that's something a child with a ruler can reproduce perfectly!

Surely a lot of these artists when doing normal painting will show that they have fundamental skills far superior to that of yours. But does that make whatever they decided to come up with art? The most maddening of all are the conceptual pieces that use actual physical objects arranged in unconventional ways. In this respect, again, I don't see how a knocked over waste basket with leechs crawling all around it is objectively better than a one-armed skeleton made of cereals sitting on a toilet. If it only involves imagination but no skill, is it still art?

Ah...but you say: art is almost entirely subjective, so no universal way of judging art is possible. Okay, then, that makes sense.

Or does it?

Of course it's art. Bad art, but still art. That it is art does not mean it cannot be judged. However, one cannot properly judge art with anything close to an objective focus until one gains an appreciation for art.

I don't see how a knocked over waste basket with leechs crawling all around it is objectively better than a one-armed skeleton made of cereals sitting on a toilet.








Hmmmmm...sounds like that should be hanging at the Louvre.

I guess there's a reason they call the "Old Masters" the "Old Masters". They painted stuff that a person could actually recognize and something which added beauty and meaning to your surroundings--they were also fine draftsmen.

I get no "meaning" from some of that other stuff that a baboon could "draw" and wouldn't pay a plugged nickel for some of that "art", but that is my own conception.

But actually we are all potentially missing out on an absolute fortune by "painting" meaningless crapola and then charging gazillions to suckers who'd actually pay money for something that an "expert" told them was "meaningful" and "art" for the ages!!!!!

People do pay for some "art" that I smile at.
On a cruise I saw people actually bidding on "stick people" art.

Rendova has a point, we should join the manufacture of such.
Maybe I will become an "artist'" in my retirement.
I believe I can turn out several "stick people art" per day x a thousand bucks. My grandkids can help. Plus, my dog can wade through the colors and create a masterpiece.

I like some of the abstract stuff because of the patterns and colors, etc., but unless I'm doing it as an investment, I can't see paying vast amounts of cash for one.

I love abstract art & although I wouldn't pay a huge amount for a work - i've paid upto $1000 several times.

I often hear people say stuff like above "I could do that blah blah"

The answer is - you probably could! and you should do it! - the reality is that faced with a blank canvas you may not think the same anymore. The skill is not necessarily in being classically skilled at painting - it's being able to create something that evokes an emotion in the viewer. It's all subjective and no doubt on your first attempt you might well create something that does just that & therefore have value to somebody.

Art is a concept.

If anyone calls anything art then it is just that, ART.

It may be bad art, but still art.

Art and beauty are "in the eyes of the beholder".

Modern art for me is just bullshit, but for others is something good and priceless. I do respect their point of view, and if they wish, they can pay a million if they want. Not me, for me they are worth as much as a "half a penny USD bill" with the picture of George W. Bush.

If it only involves imagination but no skill, is it still art?


Art at its fundamental level is communication. If you have an idea in your imagination that you wish to communicate, but lack sufficient skill to communicate that idea, then you haven't created art.

And then of course, there is the definitive Art.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/6/63/Ednorton.jpg/128px-Ednorton.jpg

I don't see how a knocked over waste basket with leechs crawling all around it is objectively better than a one-armed skeleton made of cereals sitting on a toilet. If it only involves imagination but no skill, is it still art?

I have often pondered this.

I respect the idea of art; that is is a nonverbal means of communicating ideas or feelings to others......buuuuuuuuut.......in the final analysis, I have come to look at it in this way.

If I (or you or anyone else) were stranded in the desert for 3 days with no supplies, and suddenly came upon a man who offered us the choice of a bottle of ice water and a ham sandwich ---OR--- an abstract painting that hangs in the Louvre, consisting of one big cube divided into three colors sitting on top of an oval shape, and said to be "worth" 1 million dollars, what would we choose?

When you answer that, you will know the true "worth" of a piece of abstract art.

Thus the relevance of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs.
http://www.lifeworktransitions.com/images/maslow.gif

I think the phrase that comes to mind would be: beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but the check is made out to the sales department.

Well, one think came of this thread. I have actually gotten my brushes and canvas out and started painting again. I did not realize that I had missed it until I started again. Thought I did not have time.
I am suprised how many new ideas I have after not painting for a number of years.
I am going more abstract this time. Refreshing.

I am going more abstract this time. Refreshing. I have problems doing abstract. I'm too controlled. But man can I pump out the detail...

I myself am currently a senior fine art student so I think I'll weigh in on this subject:

Most art is shit. Much more value is now placed on the ability of an "artist" to come up with a deep bullshit concept rather than the final image itself. You could glue together dozen of tampons into two giant balls and say "this piece represents the essence of femininity through these breast shapes formed out of devices related to the beauty that is menstruation, and thus abstractly represents life itself". Some people after hearing this forget the fact that such a piece would take literally no effort to put together. Not to mention the fact that it's just a glued ball of found objects.

After nearly 4 years in art school I've witnessed these types of bullshit artists and their bullshit art. The worst I've ever seen was a piece by Yves Klein called "Blue Monochrome", which you see at the MoMA in NYC. Here's the link:

Yves Klein.
Blue Monochrome. 1961 (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.moma.org/images/collection/Thumbs/11493003.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.moma.org/collection/browse_results.php%3Fcriteria%3DO%253AAD%253AE%253 A3137%26page_number%3D1%26template_id%3D6%26sort_o rder%3D1&h=128&w=91&sz=1&hl=en&start=3&tbnid=vIarIB31C7YC5M:&tbnh=91&tbnw=65&prev=/images%3Fq%3DMonochrome%2BBlue%2BMoMA%26svnum%3D10 %26hl%3Den%26lr%3D)

Compare that to a panel from the comic We3, drawn by Frank Quitely who doesn't get paid shit: http://www.comicbookgalaxy.com/images/we3assassination.jpg



Good art is the stuff people will actually enjoy looking at without needing to know any background informaton. Good art requires actual skill and talent. Good art... should take effort. And for godsakes it better be creative!!

Good art is the stuff people will actually enjoy looking at without needing to know any background informaton. Good art requires actual skill and talent. Good art... should take effort. And for godsakes it better be creative!!


Very, very good. You've said it all succinctly.

Thanks. I actually used that from my in-progress essay collection. Chapter one is all about art (entitled "Fuck Art"), the next chapter is on religion ("The Poopy Pope and his Pee-Pee Church"), etc. Hopefully it'll be in select bookstores within a few years.