ART. Not .ART - A Documentary about Contemporary Art
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 16 ต.ค. 2018
- A Documentary explaining the controversial scene of Contemporary Art to whom do not see it as Art.
Producer : Lilian Al Hakim
Director of Photography: Hind Anabtawi
Director: Peter Moussa
I find it interesting that; if a piece of art, like banana taped to the wall, was taken out of the gallery, would it still be art? I'm not sure, but I am certain it would have less of an affect if it was on the wall in someone's house and probably just laughed at. This suggests that a lot of modern art needs the gallery in order to be validated. However, if a painting of a landscape, a portrait, or a still life, was taken out of a gallery, then we all would still recognise it as art. A painting stands for itself, it does not need a gallery to validate it. I also found it interesting that this documentary began with showing the huge prices of art today, which in itself tells a lot.
Banana rots
this is exacly what i strugled to express. imma use this explenation in a video.... thank you.
A lot of art simply does not work in the home setting. Even some great abstract paintings would look gaudy in a typical home. The huge prices are simply investment art. No different than real-estate. Beyond investment art, the wealthy don't want to pay what great art is worth. Stealing from the lower classes makes them feel more important. They rejoice in it!
A lot of modern artwork becomes valuable just because someone famous has produced it or placed a thing on show. Almost like possessions belonging to famous people. However I like the paintings of Stephen Hough and the sculptures of Jonathan Miller not just because they are and were famous polymaths but because they are created from the heart and because I just like them but I feel inclined to like them because I like famous polymaths.
@@MikeFuller-ok6ok lf you like a work of art for personal reasons that are linked to your own identity, then l believe there is no greater reason than that because it is an aurhentic response. This is what all 'genuine' artists hope for.
to me, art is doodling in my book
and remembering how i felt at the time when i see it the next time
that is exactly art!!! I'm a professional artist...unique work...but that is all it is.
I do this too but while listening to podcasts or video essays and it's funny because years later I can still remember snippets of what was being talked about (though not usually the specific video/creator) just by looking at the picture.
Art that has to be in a museum in order to be considered art, is not art.
There are always these three entities of an art piece. The artists' intention (if there is any), the viewers' reception or emotional attachment received, and the art piece itself which doesn't care about any of the previous entities. It doesn't care about its existence and when it does exist, it never questions itself. Every one of these entities stands for themselves and are not comparable. So since it is nearly impossible to get the artists' intention, the experience of oneself is the most important.
“Those who know that they are profound strive for clarity. Those who would like to seem profound to the crowd strive for obscurity. For the crowd believes that if it cannot see to the bottom of something it must be profound. It is so timid and dislikes going into the water.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche, The Gay Science
@Jaziel Jaxxon why would you do that fucking creep
Nietzsche himself was obscure trying to be profound.
9:58 “Don’t believe what you read about art. Believe what you see and what you feel. When you look at it. That’s the truth. The truth is in the world and if you don’t see it. Then find another work where you do see. You don’t pay attention to what other say or think or is high or low or in the middle or expensive or famous. Just find something you like” (Michael Findlay)
Let's just say, judging by the extreme variety of objects and experiences one finds in galleries and museums, that there is currently no consensus on what art is. Many recent exhibitions at the Venice Biennale have become entertainment for the easily bored. Two seconds here, two seconds there. Nothing sticks.
A person stands in front of a painting a proceeds to inform you about that painting, its depths its meaning. The truth is, you have as much idea about that painting as they do. It has always been this way. The only question is..Does an art piece speak to you, or not.
So true...
god damn! gesso as art.
You suck as an artist when you cannot even draw a circle. To be an artist requires some skill, just like driving a car.
@@eirvingdiaz7185 What does "skill" mean in art?
@@Lulu_Lime Skill in the fine arts is like having mastery of the brush strokes. No one is born knowing how to hold a brush but often 99.9% it is a technique which must be learned and mastered if you aspire to become an artist. The same rule applies to sketches and drawings, if you aspire to become an artist one must first learn the skills of holding the pencil the write way; the same is true of handwriting. The same is also true of modern art, if you aspire to become a kick-ass animator you need to have mastery over the e-pen and tablet. So, art becomes a necessary skill. Unless, if you consider Robert Ryman Untitled 1961 as art then anything can be art, a woman urinating on the street, or a woman vomitting paint, e.g., Millie Brown: Vomit Artist, then it does not require any skill at all. You do not need to go to a Fine Arts College to learn how to scribble, e.g., the red spirals of Cy Twombly's “Bacchus” painting. If you aspire to study art in a real fine arts college like Beaux Arts de París or Saint Petersburg Academy of Arts then you need a serious art portfolio, not throw-away-art.
@@eirvingdiaz7185 Why should you learn any of these "skills"
The cinematography is very artful and nicely done! 💪👁
Mabrouk!!!!! Very very interesting video, fascinating subject and very well treated in this reportage. Admiration and gratitude from Tuscany
Great work of art does not require any explanation about its beauty.
But bad art does. ;-)
Is "Guernica" beautiful? If it isn't, does that mean that it isn't a great work of art?
Art has become a business that rich people use to feel intellectual
lol
this should be quoted on wiki
Thats why I returned to graffiti
That is naive. They use it to make money.
@@lluhu That's why I said it's a business. They make money with it with absurd prices, while feeling all intelectual about it, putting meaning into pretty much meaningless things
Awesome very nice😃love it❤️❤️👌😃
- "We live in an era of obscurantism of Art 2.0 the good thing is that soon the Renaissance 2.0 will come". Alexander Levy (1965).
They really accept anyone in art schools these days, wouldn't want a repeat in history. IYKWIM
Really cool video. Now that that I see it, I do in fact remember art I stopped to look at for more than a minute, more than the art I just took photos of. My belief is that the art has to intrigue you, or make you say "how was that made". Though I feel bad because this video (why i'm here) was probably used for many schools as an assignment. I can see the 10 year olds comments about how none of the art makes sense, and... "the chain thing was such bullshi8t xD really cool vid for the most part though', thanx"
Though really great video, it showed me that even someones experiment can be a form of art, like the %6 rings.
Telling the truth alone these days is a revolutionary act.
So, then, going back to representational art would be revolutionary in the same fashion.
There. That's the evolution of art again.
that’s one of the shittiest takes i’ve seen on youtube comments, and that should mean something to you
@@bigdickenergymanifestation
OK, troll. That's because you probably have no job.
I have, thanks for checking in.
@@bigdickenergymanifestation i think you should just respect other peoples opinions
@@rica011 well respect his opinion that this is nonsense dont be a art bigot🙄
Thanks. I totally agree. Educate yourself and find what you like.
Some of these "art" pieces are just too abstract to have an emotional functionality, which leaves me asking what's the point? How can we find any value in it
3:02 why did he stop explaining modern art. what Monet and Picasso did indeed abstract, but they studied to know basic fundamental to express realistic through abstract, they are skilled enough to create new movement. They both make a decent living from making art, they are not that unpopular at their time. how a white canvas could even compare to them?
I think the point he's getting at is not the artists skill, its about the audience. Almost like when you hear a new song that you just don't understand sometimes you start liking it after a couple listens and sometimes you don't. Sometimes you're so caught up in what you think you know that you can't see the value in something new, and even if it's a skillful artist you might not be able to see the skill. Only time will tell. And untill that i'd recomend you to stop thinking about who has skill or what is pretty and just look at it, if you find something interesting in it then continue to look and if you don't then just go look at something else.
(also some info, a lot of artists know how to for example paint very well but they prefer to do neon signs or putting bananas on the floor because they find it more interessting themselves, they dont always lack "skill"(whatever that is supposed to mean)
Have a good day fellow human being!
@@trassel1104 oh, art has encourage us not to try or learn anymore, cuz eventually people will see values in random stuff you randomly made in kindergarden after you die
@@withyouxxx Nah I really don't think so. Why people are very open to the living artists of today is because they dont want to miss out on something great. But just imagine how many people were painting/sculpting back in the renissance and still we only talk about like 3 names. History is a good bullshit-o-meter.
You kinda sound like a faschist also, don't you think people acctualy can appreciate good art? Do you think every one is stupid except for you?
@@trassel1104 right, majority arent stupid, but still we can only name few renissance artists throughout history
Yes, I’ve never understood how someone without fundamentals, i.e., they can’t really draw and paint with the right proportions would create abstract art.
There is sooooo much creative art being produced this past 13/4 months because of Covid 19, amazing work.
You're lying to yourself
I am a student from art university and I have something to say
A canvas painting with a streak or black and white (or any color) is not an art, it's a bullshit out of the landfill
Art can be anything though
@@madisonmartinez5597 i know but a painting full of white and have nothing in it that worth million dollars, you got to be kidding me
+Kazimir malevich "white on white"
+Robert Ryman "Bridge" this one is sold for $20.6 million dollars in 2015
wow and for someone else's that know now to draw or paint,they could do it better in 3min to make the painting look lively
@@madisonmartinez5597 you are right. Shovels and other every day objects have thought and design behind it. With this reasoning, the context is what matters. However, I do appreciate craftsmanship and dedication. I place greater value on works of art that were purely created to speak and function as so. This is my personal opinion. I wish artists such as Norman Rockwell would become as big as piccasso and remind people what it is to create a work that resonated and spoke with a people. I believe this like music is the true primal function of art,to move and connect a people.
Nihilism has gripped the human soul like a vice and won't let go. These self referencing 'Easy' artifacts passing themselves off as having some kind of cultural significance are the product of bookish academics, and so called 'experts, having polluted the well from which the Art in past centuries nourished itself. The so called 'artist' being reduced to the mere channeler of taste belonging to critics and afficionados. The end result is 'Art' made for a market, not for the sake of life. Banal in the extreme , much of what is valued these days has no real purpose other than to reflect the degraded taste of academics and critics and subjective notions of beauty. A waste of time emblematic of the decline of the West.
So called Contemporary Art ( that which began in the 1060's ) art is, essentially, a 180 degree departure from what we have traditionally thought of as “art”.
And by art, I mean the visual arts: painting, drawing, sculpture architecture etc.
The big problem is that while the traditional visual arts have a millenniums long history, this new kid on the block,does not.
Sculpture has evolved from The Venus of Willendorf to the Great Sphinx, the Venus De Milo, Michelangelo's David up to Rodin, the Statue of Liberty and Alexander Calder.
The arts of painting and drawing can be traced back to the cave paintings of Lascaux in France to The Sistine Chapel, Monet and Degas, Mark Rothko and beyond.
And through all of the changes, these art forms have stayed essentially the same:making marks on paper, canvas, wood, plaster etc. and building up forms in three dimensions as sculpture and architecture.
Along with the evolution of these art genres has developed a language and a set of criteria that form standards by which such pieces can be critiqued, evaluated and placed in historical context. And while some people might like the lurid landscapes of Thomas Kinkade, his paintings are not and should not be hung alongside the landscapes of Church, Cole, van Gogh, Cézanne and Thiebaud.
There IS such a thing as bad art and we know what it looks like and why!
It is called aesthetics.
This cannot be said of Contemporary art.
All sorts of crappy, bogus and hare brained stuff is piled up or strewn across the floors of museums and exalted as art because no one knows or can know what is worthy and what is not.
So you get pieces of blank white paper crumpled up in a ball, three basketballs suspended in a fish tank and cans of human excrement.
First, i love rothko, but i think a hundred years from now, this time in art (about 1960 to the present, 2020 and however much longer conceptualism lasts), i think itll be looked back and laughed at, be looked at as a time when the art world went insane. Some is ok, but so much garbage, so many con artists
thank you
the nature of humankind wants to understand always and the experience must tells you something; this kind of art, doesn’t tell you anything and this experiece goes nowhere!
The issue I have with contemporary art is that it makes me feel nothing. If anything most of it makes me feel worse. Also the financial side is very sketchy, seems to me like a popularity contest where the purpose of owning a piece is just to own it for the name of the artist and the clout. A banana taped to a wall is just a banana on a wall who cares what the name of the person was who put it there.
interesting fine art documentary video, I love it so much ... fine art life ....
Time will tell. As of now, many of these pieces, I do see them, feel them and like them as art. No through any rational argument but through an emotional take.
I draw and paint intuitively.
great vid bro
Art is supposed to be a representation of the artists vision and their skill in expressing it. When an artist insults you with a bunch of rotten bananas on the floor, it tells you more about the artist than their “vision”.
I agree
agree, although skill is what someone who's never tried to express themself artistically expects from art in general, if it makes sense. A good artist venturing into a new medium of expression will find a way to convey emotion without great skill. And if you think about it, if a bunch of rotten bananas on the floor insults you, then maybe the artist succeeded in making you feel something with their performance. Art will always be subjective, to both the creator and the spectator.
@@ByGraceThroughFaith777 if someone willfully insults me with their “art”, they aren’t artists. They’re assholes.
@@raymondmeyers5974 how could a banana on the floor insult you? If you show me a glass of water on a table and say it's art, I might think you're crazy, trying to be funny or a clown, but I don't think you're an asshole....
@@raymondmeyers5974 You're not entitled to art of any kind. Besides who are to judge what others consider art or not? If you don't like the bananas on the floor, or you don't think it's art, fine, keep walking until you find what you enjoy. It's that simple.
The development of Art and its legitimate discoveries ended with Picasso. IMHO. Art became self conscious. In a panic, the rush to be the next great innovator, Art critics and gallery owners became, like junk bond salesmen, the commodity mongers of the 20th century. Throw anything at the canvas, into a room, hang it from the ceilings, if we call it art, it must be. The great con line...”they laughed at Picasso, so your laughter at this must mean it is art.”
Actually, the idea of "avant-garde", which described visionary and innovative artists (and that more or less everyone wanted to be part of), definitely took an end with "post-minimalism" which led to what we today know as contemporary art. Now, I agree with you: the art market always seeks for the next big thing that will make money (think of the Banksy's "Balloon Girl" stunt that only made its value higher), but since the 70's, many artist have actually tried to avoid being flashy and revolutionary at all costs by rejecting the elitism and strict formalism of the high art scene. That led to numerous new trends and mediums (gathered through the name "post-minimalism") such as performance, writing, light, relational, conceptual, video, ... Art became whatever you want it to be, whether it's a sound installation, making a big feast with strangers, spending a year outside, name it. So we must always keep in mind that what we experience in a museum (or not) was first made by an actual human with only an idea and maybe a few skills - and that human could be you. Even though you hear this particular piece is genius or worth millions, it doesn't matter. What should bother you is what you feel, in a both emotional and sensitive way (awkwardness, happiness, sadness; smell, texture, colour, sound, ...). If you don't feel anything, so be it. If it makes you angry, well I'm pleased to tell you you finally lived the experience you were looking for. Now you can start asking yourself why you feel this way.
Very interesting
I think the main problem is that people intentionally try making things they personally don't think of as art, and then see if they can sell it for absurds amount of money.
People who actually want to create art do, and those are the truly amazing artists. How much the art sells for is completely irrelevant. Rich people clearly are gullible if they are spending millions on an empty canvas. There is 0 possibilities that artist didn't know what they were doing, and I bet they laughed about it when they got home. Wanting to get rich on stupid stuff and creating art are 2 different things.
And don't get me wrong here - the majority of what is presented as art in the video is truly art. But a canvas that contains nothing is not art.
It's a business, as long as you are friends with a millionaire, you are guaranteed to sell shit for the price of gold
Omg the god hv finally defined wt is art and wt isnt.
Maybe im a bit old fashioned but i always forget to take pics and Friends always ask like: did you take any pics?? 😭🤣
Fantastic video!! Made me feel like i was back at the Art Institute😅
I know right?
🤙😎👍
👣
I saw a wall covered with framed Twitter quotes at the Chicago art Institute. Was just really confused how to feel about it. Do any of you think that's art? Or of it even belongs in a museum?
the chain thing was such bullshi8t xD really cool vid for the most part though', thanx
:D It is a message....6 % bigger .....666 ....not funny :D
I think he explained it really badly. Saying "from the smallest possible" it was contradictory to what he was getting at. Maybe that shows the point of the piece even better. We tend to think that way, that things are finite, when they are not.
@@propalislucaj7300 i only judge art by what feeling or reflection it gives me, i really feel the void with this chsin...the "spirals of time of the cycle of life" was also a bit extra but maybe pleasing in real life ahahaha. my opinion though of course. i am still an art enthusiast
@@Surya-rv3ib I actually thought the chain was very intressting, would've loved to see the whole thing. FOr me it gives me the same feeling as when you realize you're a little being(with even smaller beings inside you) on a little planet in a relatively little solar system in a infinitly big universe. We are both so small and so big at the same time and sometimes that can feel so contradictory but for me the work shows how it gradually goes from theoretically supersuper-small to extremely big(while you still can't barely see the difference of 6% between every link of the chain).
But I understand your feeling and I think we need to embrace that you are allowed to not like something. I think a problem with art today is that people feel like they have to "get it", and as he said in the video you're not supposed to get it you're supposed to engage with it. It's like having a conversation, some people are just boring to talk with.
A common theory in art is that all forms cannot be examined any differently because of their size due to the fact that their size can change when compared to forms bigger and smaller then them. This art piece approaches art with that mentality which I found interesting.
I think people underestimate the role of anything digital/online nowadays in influencing the development of art in the future. They will one day be recognised as the origin of a completely different form of art. Museums won't be able place to see them, probably they can only be perceived neuro-electronically.
no they dont
The video games I play have more artistic merit than almost everything shown in this video.
I like the way the documentary was made, the idea that I as an individual can decide what is art, has been my motto. (art and beauty are in the eyes of the beholder) and most of the so called art shown in here in my opinion is crap. Beside, the artists that he mentions as been under appreciated in their time; knew how to express themselves classically and then they evolved, most of the contemporary artists do not know how to paint or sculpt and they use other real artists to execute their ideas ie. Koonz, Hirst, etc etc....
The art of moving money!
This is my own personal opinion on this type of art. There are some art works that I may have liked or found a bit interesting, but for the most part it felt like the pieces presented in this video, as well as just other contemporary art in general, lacks something really vital, which is intent. I'm not saying that these artist don't have intent, I'm not even saying that they don't have skill, but it just doesn't seem to show in the artwork itself. Art is a language, to me at least, and you should be able to communicate something through it, good, bad, and somewhere in-between. Learning the different rules and techniques of art may not seem all that important, alot of people might say all you need is your imagination, but having that understanding of art is what will better help show what your are thinking. If your just making art for your own sake, that's fine, but if your gonna make something that will be shown in museums for millions to see, shouldn't it be a little more than meaningless? I know there are people out there who enjoy this art, that's fine, but if your gonna use these pieces for selling as well as educating, then shouldn't it be something that implores different techniques as well as creativity? I feel like there explanations just didnt justify the art, nor should they, for example, I could get a great explanation of the reasons I should appreciate Michelangelo's art works, but I wouldn't really feel the need to, having background information can enhance a piece of work for sure, but it shouldn't be the soul reason for liking it, when you just look at the piece you should be able to get some kind of message or idea from it without having to know everything about it . Those were my thoughts, I don't want to make people feel bad about liking it, I just don't agree with this kind of stuff myself.
5:52 cool
Im willing to bet not a single one of these modern contemporary abstract “artists” could even draw a face.
I feel like a dinosaur: so much of it is meaningless to me, maybe I'm too old and haven't got enough imagination?
@@oldsmate Doing my best to learn about art (with my brain injury) and I create my own art (which I'm sure is meaningless & rubbish to some or many!), and I do fcome across some new art that moves me/is interesting - but lots doesn't, it feels empty & meaningless - as does some old art but as there's less of that then that isn't really surprising?
@@oldsmate I hate this pretentious bullshit, you don't need to learn about art to enjoy it whatsoever. Everyone can instantly see michelangelo or wilhelm turner are great.
You need however much knowledge and skill to create art. The reason Jenny feels nothing is because this art lacks skill and beauty, it's bullshit.
@@thorsten8790 Must art be beautiful or skillful?
Right, learning has nothing to do with appreciation of art.
Art must communicate something to the beholder and for that to transpire, expectation must be arrested.
In that quietude, just maybe it does connect.
Contemporary art has its own language and translation doesn´t work. A good work can take you, if you let it.
@@kend3800 I really like what you said there, Ken. As an art school student who feels compelled to make abstract art, I've always felt like a bit of a fool, as it's rarely taken seriously outside of the art world. I have the skill and technical knowledge to make what is considered 'good art', but if making that kind of work does nothing for me in terms of emotional and creative fulfillment, then is it really good art? As pretentious and cliche as it sounds I think many people forget that for artists it's not always about whether the final product is 'good' or not, but truly about just fulfilling that need to create. Or at least that's how it feels for me.
no, it's meaningless, actually
5:11 I'm sorry but everything she said in my opinion was inaccurate I saw no fibonacci sequence or any parallels with nature and how do badly spray painted spirals equate to a passage of time or a "natural movement of time"
because they say so duh, it doesn’t have to be impressive at all as long as you can make up enough bullshit about it to get people hyped
Picasso used Cubism by him knowing what direction his work (or any particular piece) was going to take.
Also a lot of people don't know Picasso was classically trained.
Come on!
Picasso did a better job even in his synthetic Cubism phase of his work than those spirals!
I like Pablo's art. He is my mentor in my mind. Cheers
@@tonybinda6905
On that note, it depends on which one of his styles. I personally like his Blue Period better. 👍
Cheers as well.
I actually like the spirals more than Picasso. I'm chocked that so many people love Picasso when there so many other interesting artists from that time. Not trying to argue against you(more than on the part where you mention he was classically trained since I think that has no importance at all) just wanted to share my oppinion to show that different people like different stuff :)
@@trassel1104
Yes, sharing the opinion is valid.
What a lot of us find reprehensible is the fact that there are a lot of massively talented artists out there today and the things that you see are conceptual art. Its like that is the only thing that's out there and it chokes out all the actual talent.
Yes but art appreciation is not founded on what one likes!
Nice video :)
Good Explantion
yes
to change the art, to revolutionize the art, first we must change society. there will be no change if we are not to change ourselves first. a return to nature vs hypercapitalism/cyberpunk. thats my vision
I am absolutely open to experiences. But one time in a Dollar Tree was enough of an experience to not require a second visit. So much art today is not mysterious, not unique, not creative, not interesting. It is trinkets, baubles, and commercial zombie-consumer prey.
i have thinked lots why certain kind art upset people so much?I mean if rich people are spending their money on art you dont like how come that money is away from you?You are not forced to like the art or buy it?You can buy and go see art you like and maybe even support upcoming artist who do art you like by buying their art?If you look internet theres all kinds of art made these days so you can find the artist you like and support him.Then there are people who criticise art but dont own any of it and people who say that is so easy that even i can do it so why arent you doing it if its so easy to create and earn that money?Theres lots of modern art i dont understand and even dont like and healthy dose of critic help culture move forward but there must be some credit to the critic andnot just butt hurt comments that why he/she gets that kinda money whit that kinda work.Those people shoud go and give it a try might not be as easy as it seems
The problem is people feel it is unethical to lie to others about things like this. If you were famous for selling a blank canvas for 14 million dollars, I garantee you the majority of people will see you as a con artist who scammed who they sold it to. And whoever bought it is definitely gullible. But people who want to make money more than they care about ethics or art will just make a blank canvas and sell it for absurd amounts. They'll get tons of money, be happy, and probably laugh at the idiots they are selling it to in private with their friends. There is no way in hell that person wasn't trying to scam the person who bought that canvas.
An artist wants to create something with meaning. So of course they will get pissed off when they see a faker out there when they are struggling to sell their beautiful works of art. There are tons of artists out there who make gorgeous art. I cannot pay them 14 million. I'm not rich. And I'm pissed the person who paid 14 million is so gullible as to buy something like that when there are actual artists to spend their money on. If they want a blank canvas, they should go to the art store and buy one. It would be a lot cheaper. And I'm sorry but painting a canvas white doesn't change it from being blank because it still looks exactly the same as it did before. There is no difference between the two. Like what a rip off. I understand that it is their money, but they are truly gullible and stupid to buy that particular canvas because it costs so much more than its worth. Unless of course they also intend on being like 'look im so rich I bought a blank canvas for 14 million lol' at which point they know its not art too, aren't stupid, and its a crime and damned shame the art world is looking at this as a sale of art when it isn't.
Artists don't want to make stupid things. Artists want people to actually recognize the vision for their art. Not some boring blank canvas they had to con some idiot millionaire into buying.
I believe that Art is for the Masses not for the limited 1 percent of snobby Elites.
Karya seni di seluruh belahan dunia semakin menjadi satu nada, satu kata dan satu semangat yaitu kebebasan berpikir dan berimajinasi.
ART. I know the truth. And the truth is I dont know.
I think this minidoc does a good job showing the folly and validity of the various modern movements in 'art'.
It doesn't always have to look 'photorealistic'--or even beautiful--to be appreciated, either my stimulating the senses, or communicating (something to be interpreted) that would be difficult or impossible to do through other media. (Being the producer of this is from an Arabic background, he's likely aware of how 'haram' it is to depict nature, and how Muslim artists went to produce beautiful calligraphy, tilework, and other abstract items to create beauty and meaning).
And then there's the nonsense of 'conceptual' art. Honestly, it's not a bad thing to put, let's say, a cheap ceramic on a pedestal if the intent and end result is to make the viewer appreciate that there's nice and well-crafted things all around us, if only we paid attention to them.
But things have gotten a little ridiculous with this.
The 'worst' part of art is the idea that you always have to be 'pushing the envelope'. Why?
In a park during a warm summer afternoon, a man cover’s his entire body with fox sh!t.
He then vomits down himself, sits on a bench and collects 1000s of swarming flies.
Some will see this as an artistic masterpiece and another evolutionary step forward for the global Art scene.
You need the stage, press or audience to make it a known art piece sadly. Nothing is holy if the gods are blind and deaf.
Have trust in the source of all things...you are *That! And a co-creator within a human form. The power is always here and will always be.
ASMR For Your Soul Genocide of beauty: a cultural Marxist in the arts
Jonathan Genocide of beauty: a cultural Marxist in the arts
Jonathan Genocide of beauty: a cultural Marxist in the arts
Yep!!!⚡👉🤘
I dont get it
Your local art museum is better off used as a Amazon warehouse. At least they sell some useful things. Their art is better too.
Watch in youtube "filosofía cara caras baratas".......
So how come entertaining the masses gets more money and attention when going your own way is frowned upon?
Who knows maybe one day you might get the attention. Hang in there bud. Hang in there. You can do it.
Now i have found something crazy 💋
Just because monet and cezanne were laughed at in their time and eventually were recognized as great artists (which they were) doesnt mean these idiots will be; most of these fools are con artists at best; 100 years from now people will laugh at this bullshit. Art is in a dark age right now, ever since raucshenburg and warhol totally crapped on it. Its sad.
Well said
Agreed!👍
Thank you for saving me the effort to write the exact same words.
@@KpxUrz5745 absolutely...I feel so alone sometimes, lol
I dislike Obama so intensely that even a brief glimpse of his face is quite unpleasant.
2:09-2:20 that is a ridiculous lie
To those of you who don't get what contemporary art is, try making something yourself with an emotion in mind. It doesn't have to be pretty, it only needs to come from you. That something that moved you to pick a certain color and draw a line or whatever, that came from your soul, and no one else in the history of mankind can replicate it.
I understand it, that's why I don't like it.
Does it speak to you ?
It’s a visual image. That is all
Enjoy! It is possible to cultivate your taste buds though
"Maybe in 100 years art will be digital" The year is 2020, digital art obviously exists already. Losing touch with reality perhaps?
No I don't think so..it's a statement by someone who has not engaged with a lot of art in person. Real art is powerful, real paintings are so rich, when you develop or experience appreciation for it...digital is nothing in comparison a mere glitzy tin sized concept in a screen. I admit digital can be incredible in its own ways, but look at any great paintings in person and you will very quickly realize great art is here to stay. It may be destroyed, suppressed, or forgotten by some, but it will never disappear because it's intensely rich. Look at Picasso paintings, Michelangelo, Chagall, or Mondrian, -anyone. Art is extremely potent compared to digital representations
@@archadeinteriors a framed picture is a screen basicly. I dont get your point at all. I have engaged with art in person.
cmon.. making a statement that PERHAPS in a 100 YEARS, there MAYBE art will exist that is digital. This statement is ridiculous.
btw, You can also do things in digital that aren't even possible irl.
I'm not sure if I understand, then, the original idea..forgive me if I spoke to quickly or strongly...I just meant digital art and fine art are very different in some significant ways and that fine art like painting will always be around..hope that makes sense..: ) ..
Oh wait now I get it!
I'm so sorry, I totally misread and got your comment wrong. Yes, you are right. And, you actually watched it!
I didnt see your quotations, that you had taken it from the video, and not having watched it all, didn't get your meaning.
Theres abstract art that I see and think "huh, I don't understand that but I really like it, it has a feel." There's also work that I see and go"nope, that's a bunch of nonsense masquerading as art"I think this is the strength and weakness of art. Enough freedom to allow revolutions and hardly any restrictions that allow mediocrity.
Our taste is a construction. Some are building it to sell art, others to sell other products, others to make you vote for a type of president. If u don´t like it, or u don´t understand, u are a kind of homosapiens, cultural homeless, or a Barbarian. That s the way system apart u from "art". Adding high prices. So u don´t get in. But for me this metedology is ending, because as same a president, the music, the tv shows and lot more they dont represent you, visual arts too. So it is a good posibility to build our taste and it s happenning, we are in a new emancipacion era. Taste is from each one valid, return to your bases, from where u live, from where u was, your family, friends, good memories, try to remember when u were happy and when something had sense for u. Art will never can be separate from his context. Build sincere art, build sense, build symbols that represent not excludes, build real art.
The culture of lazyness
All art has a criteria of standard reflecting the encapsulation of feeling. What's on show here is feeble and pretentious , more like wall decoration . It is sad to see the human element being reduced to a bit player in favour of mechanical and artificially pretentious constructions such as that enlarging link chain piece. Artists need to forget about commercialisation and instead rediscover their inner humanity .
where is the gallary , and the name pleas
All of those bananas? Art?
yes
@@oldsmate that's wastage
Its called art installation which isn't necessarily to be sold but to provoke the audience with a certain message that is normally associated to social issues or just a fantasy from the artist's imagination
Dillon W one day, centuries from now, art students are going to be laughing at the start of our millennium. They’re going to ridicule our time period. They’re going to learn about our bullshit artists, for sure, because those “artists” are still part of art history. But, art students centuries from now are going to be laughing so hard that they shart, and they’ll ask their professors, “is my shit art?”. Irony right there.
@@__-ng2eg or not. I dont disagree with you but is not impossible that they would on the contrary embrace it and perpetuate this so called art form.
A small child's crayon doodle of a cat is art. Anyone can create a work of art, nevertheless I could never in my wildest dreams recreate a work created by exceptionally clever minds such as works by John Saint Sargent or John Evert Millais. But I could quite easily recreate works by Rothko or Robert Ryman. If anyone can do what they do then they are not exceptional by any measure.
Agreed
There is a difference between abstract and mimicry of abstract to extract value that they otherwise couldn’t have. It’s an vengeful assault against the creative process to the artists initiated by losers.
And the uneducated public like me, will fail to differentiate. Simple example: We all “love” the transformer movies according to the box office, but the reality is that it takes no effort to consume, the same way a piece of rock untouched can be called art because it takes no effort for us to brand ourselves “appreciator of art”, the path is plowed, then we took the path of least resistance.
No wonder it’s untitled 😂
Right!!!!!!🤣🤣🤣
My taste I would hardly call most of this art .
Watch in youtube. "filosofía cara caras baratas"....….........
just as i thought, all artists are failed philosophers
Perhaps. Or maybe philosophers are failed artists.
yes
Once I’ve read that the best compliment a philosopher can get is been called an artist, I believe it was a Nietzche quote
Sounds kind of like a compliment to me
I thought art was forbidden in Islam.
That's just not true at all
@@mapki6750 Really?
th-cam.com/video/l5EZNpbM0-g/w-d-xo.html
What about beautifully painted walls of muslim architecture? thats art too. Also, there are a lot of paintings of muslim rulers. please google.
@@kalakartist Yeah I know, that's all forbidden.
@@kalakartist Or, Islam didn't make any sense?
I don’t see it 15million.😳
The king has no clothes and the educated fools believe he is well dressed.
Wow this comment thread is a bunch of art cliches and a pseudo intellectual hub
Art as stop being art during mordern art movment... When everthing is art, nothing is... not to mention its fill with stupid things like an urinal, can of poop and a banana tape to the wall...
There's a big difference between Monet and blue paint with a white stripe FFS ...
this bg music is annoying af
Robert Ryman, not art. Michael Findlay justifies why a large number of people are shocked by new ideas and concepts in art and few accept and admire and enjoy them, well Yaa Michael Findlay till the large number of people that say its bad and ones who really know art are indoctrinated by galleries and few OL's and the few that tout the "Bad Art". When people start telling you that you should like this or that art and why realize you are being indoctrinated and The majority have bin controlled by the few 'Because the majority give their power to the few in the form of "Acquiescence".
yea definitely, i only take pictures of things i don’t find interesting and will forget, what a fucking ridiculously stupid statement
5:09 i get it now, in order to get art, you either need to be delusional or have hallucination. i take care of my body so i wouldnt take drugs just for that thingy
Modernism is over. Why are people so stuck in the cult of an artist?
Ridiculous subjective reasoning to justify bad art
The awful hacksaw philly zip because dugout excitingly burn an a thirsty perch. horrible, lean anatomy
Call themselves art-experts even when 99.99% of everyone doesn't agree with them ?!! It's not 'Real' art when all you need is some ignorant rich guy to buy your painting after they had been fooled by some con-art-expert who are just there for the money !!!
That shit is GARBAGE!
In reality its one big scum.
bunch of mobsters, worst than narco traffic