|
|
Post by conspirologist on Mar 5, 2017 2:45:43 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by bonerxmas on Mar 6, 2017 6:58:28 GMT
well there's another way to look at it, you could say that the artistic tradition continued in commercial art, book illustration, posters, book and album covers, even comic strips - but people doing "gallery art" kind of lost their sense of relevance so they turned to doing crazy stunts, and art historians and critics made a mistake by writing about them and not about illustrators
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2017 7:02:47 GMT
Because imagination and creativity is dead. Not to mention Ugly is in and beauty is out.
|
|
|
|
Post by Matthew the Swordsman on Mar 9, 2017 10:08:51 GMT
The only thing worse than modern art is modern architecture. They both look like someone vomited.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2017 10:28:40 GMT
The only thing worse than modern art is modern architecture. They both look like someone vomited. I agree modern art and modern architecture is pure crap. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2017 21:37:29 GMT
This won the Jerwood Drawing Prize last year...
I must admit that I do like the resulting image but in the end it's not that much different from the cloud effects in Close Encounters.
Now this is what happens when modern artists get together with modern composers.
|
|
thornberry
Junior Member
@thornberry
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 1,055
|
Post by thornberry on Apr 25, 2017 1:30:50 GMT
Because imagination and creativity is dead. Not to mention Ugly is in and beauty is out. I disagree. Modern art is if anything more creative and imaginative. The craftsmanship is often worse, but it makes up for it in whimsy. |
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Jun 8, 2017 1:16:25 GMT
Traditional art was rooted Nature and historical heritages. The advocates of modern art are very much opposed to natural/national traditions.
Simple as that.
I think one of the planks of the McCarthy attacks on Communism was that it was going to dumb down art and make it abstraction in keeping with Communist doctrine (funny thing that Bible religious tradition, not Christian but the other two) are also fairly abstract.
No Michelangelos of Judaism or Islam.
|
|
lucifer
Freshman
@lucifer
Posts: 77
Likes: 39
 
|
Post by lucifer on Jun 12, 2017 5:54:43 GMT
we can beat anything with LOVE I brought the binder with me. |
|
Joshua
New Member
@jb
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
|
Post by Joshua on Jun 27, 2017 11:15:50 GMT
Artists and contemporary art movements should emphasize realism more often. That is the only way I could see a widespread return to an earlier, even more appealing form, possible. As for the state of modern architecture by large, it is regrettable that ornamentation is not done as finely as earlier periods, as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by general313 on Jun 29, 2017 0:11:47 GMT
Artists and contemporary art movements should emphasize realism more often. That is the only way I could see a widespread return to an earlier, even more appealing form, possible. As for the state of modern architecture by large, it is regrettable that ornamentation is not done as finely as earlier periods, as well. I prefer something in the middle. There are many examples of great draftsmanship to be found in Renaissance and baroque painting, but apart from some of the masterpieces they quickly get pretty boring and repetitive. The same can be said of abstract expressionist paintings and the more recent modern or post-modern art. The art of the late 19th and early 20th century is where it's at. I can look at Van Goghs and Picassos for hours and hours and not get bored. As for architecture, I way prefer mid-century modern to Victorian: Yes  No!  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2017 8:45:09 GMT
Artists and contemporary art movements should emphasize realism more often. That is the only way I could see a widespread return to an earlier, even more appealing form, possible. As for the state of modern architecture by large, it is regrettable that ornamentation is not done as finely as earlier periods, as well. I prefer something in the middle. There are many examples of great draftsmanship to be found in Renaissance and baroque painting, but apart from some of the masterpieces they quickly get pretty boring and repetitive. The same can be said of abstract expressionist paintings and the more recent modern or post-modern art. The art of the late 19th and early 20th century is where it's at. I can look at Van Goghs and Picassos for hours and hours and not get bored. As for architecture, I way prefer mid-century modern to Victorian: Yes No! The bottom house if far better then the above house. |
|
|
|
Post by general313 on Jun 29, 2017 14:46:34 GMT
I prefer something in the middle. There are many examples of great draftsmanship to be found in Renaissance and baroque painting, but apart from some of the masterpieces they quickly get pretty boring and repetitive. The same can be said of abstract expressionist paintings and the more recent modern or post-modern art. The art of the late 19th and early 20th century is where it's at. I can look at Van Goghs and Picassos for hours and hours and not get bored. As for architecture, I way prefer mid-century modern to Victorian: Yes No! The bottom house if far better then the above house. Yeah, if Bates Motel Moderne is your thing, I could see that.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2017 15:38:35 GMT
The bottom house if far better then the above house. Yeah, if Bates Motel Moderne is your thing, I could see that. I just find the above house boring. And frankly i don't like that type of architecture. |
|
|
|
Post by general313 on Jun 29, 2017 17:19:18 GMT
Yeah, if Bates Motel Moderne is your thing, I could see that. I just find the above house boring. And frankly i don't like that type of architecture. De gustibus... It's good that not everyone has the same taste. That would be boring! |
|
Flynn
Sophomore
@flynn
Posts: 515
Likes: 270
|
Post by Flynn on Jul 10, 2017 3:59:08 GMT
I just find the above house boring. And frankly i don't like that type of architecture. De gustibus... It's good that not everyone has the same taste. That would be boring! In general, I prefer Victorian, Queen Anne, the Craftsman bungalow, and American foursquare house styles far more than the prairie-style house you are providing as your example of a mid-century modern home. I even love Dutch Colonials. However, the "modern" house looks pretty cool (at least from a distance). The Victorian house you are showing isn't really presented well. The paint scheme is a little off. I just love the intricate detailing that you get in Victorian homes. In homes from the 1890s, you can marvel at the craftsmanship of the wood carvings and metalwork. The labor and skill that went into making those homes is phenomenal. In homes of the 1960s, you're like, "Ooh, a straight line." Both styles are cool. As you said, we all respond to different things. But my heart lies with Victirian homes. |
|
|
|
Post by general313 on Jul 11, 2017 23:32:47 GMT
De gustibus... It's good that not everyone has the same taste. That would be boring! In general, I prefer Victorian, Queen Anne, the Craftsman bungalow, and American foursquare house styles far more than the prairie-style house you are providing as your example of a mid-century modern home. I even love Dutch Colonials. However, the "modern" house looks pretty cool (at least from a distance). The Victorian house you are showing isn't really presented well. The paint scheme is a little off. I just love the intricate detailing that you get in Victorian homes. In homes from the 1890s, you can marvel at the craftsmanship of the wood carvings and metalwork. The labor and skill that went into making those homes is phenomenal. In homes of the 1960s, you're like, "Ooh, a straight line." Both styles are cool. As you said, we all respond to different things. But my heart lies with Victirian homes. Yeah, I might have unfairly picked a particularly ugly Victorian example, but that's pretty much how I see all of them. One of the important influences for mid-century modern is Japanese architecture and its sparse use of ornamentation, preferring instead to integrate with its natural surroundings. That juxtaposition is what breaths life into that style.   |
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Jul 16, 2017 14:28:01 GMT
Traditionally art is supposed to represent the public's heritage, i.e. Homer playing the lyre and singing about the Trojan war to an audience of Greeks. It is their history, it is relevant to them. Nature is a constant truth, and good art is about truth.
Abstract or modern art has nothing to do with the public--it is about wealthy people selling to other wealthy people.
The less it is relevant to the public at large the better. Thus the more it defies natural or traditional structure, the better.
But you end up with incoherence.
Movies have gone the same way.
It is less and less about identifying with or communicating truth to the public.
A few years ago some Wall Street folks commissions Demian Hirst to make an artwork for them--it consisted of dozens of decapitated sheep sitting at school desks (and yet there are people on this board who think Wall Street--and the media companies they own--actually care about the public.).
I dont know what is more shocking, the depravity of that "art work," or the naivety of people who defend Wall Street bankers--the same folk who sent jobs to China--that's how much they care about the public.
|
|
