art

[sol83]

so i had to do this history of art courses a year ago. i thought it would be crap and i'd get terribly bored. the result was exactly the opposite, i'm seriously thinking of finding a way so i can do something with it professionaly in the future (without abandoning literature of course.)
anyways i'm curious about what yous think. do you find it crap, this whole "art" thing? if not whats your favorite artists/periods/movements and that. and it doesnt have to be just painting. so enlighten us like...

 

[Dhatura]

I'd choose 19th-20th century art, those crazy concepts about art like Marcel Duchamp and the mates, haha, like "Breakfast in Fur". I think art history is fascinating, I was thinking about it too at your age So I'd suggest you go ahead. There are also a lot of points where you can connect literature and art so you could even write a dissertation topic in an interdisciplinary field.

 

[sol83]

you know, all the art here in greece is about the classic stuff, and i dont fancy that. but theres so much more i didnt have a clue about. like this semester i did about abstract expressionism and that and i freaked out. i love that stuff. its just amazing. i wanna fill me room with posters (but i cant find any in this fucking conservative, christ-adoring, immigrant-hating country.)

 

[Cerulean]

I like romance, impressionism, expressionism and surrealism. Favourite artists are Caspar David Friedrich, Jeroen Bosch, Munch,... I certainly DON'T like suprematism and the 'lighter' vesions of it like Mondriaan and the Russian stuff.

 

[Lenore]

i studied art some time ago ( 3 years in college and 1 year of History of art in uni ) and i've been kind of disgusted. History of Art in Uni was ok, cos it was mostly about middle age, cathedrals and stuff, so pretty interesting.
My last year in college was a pain though, cos i was starting to realize how subjective comtemporary art was, and how pointless most of it was.
I just dont get it, when a guy painting a blue canvas and calling it " blue square over a blue background" can be a millionnaire and considered as a god.
And i have tons of examples like that.
Comtemporary art is a big joke imo.

 

[Lenore]

@cerulean : spot on, Friedrich did brilliant paintings, now that was ART

 

[Cerulean]

The stuff you write there about the blue squares is what I hate yeh, the suprematism... (at least it's called like that over here)
It has no point at all and yet these artists give these huge theories about it, that's fuckin bollocks.

 

[toolsofthetrade]

some stuff you need to skip some stuff you shouldnt.
art isnt bound you know.

i like Hirst, Pollock, Viola - but mort artforms in general. like landart or installations. things that are there.

art for art is bollox. art is perception. imho.

 

[Bambi]

I like rolf harris a lot

 

[Don Corleone]

SURREALISM AND DADAISM

aaaaaaaand

psychedelia

 

[Tauredil]

I just dont get it, when a guy painting a blue canvas and calling it " blue square over a blue background" can be a millionnaire and considered as a god.
And i have tons of examples like that.
Comtemporary art is a big joke imo.

I totally agree

" blue square over a blue background" <== It reminds me "le monochrome de Whiteman" in "Les trois frères" (best comedy ever)

 

[Bastet]

i like the pre- raphaelites alot, and hyper realistic stuff, oh, and the impressionists ofcourse: van gogh, monet and the lot . i'm not that much into installations, but last time we were in london we went to the "tate modern" and there was this installation "the weather project" in the main hall:nothing but a big"sun" on the opposite wall, a damp atmosphere, and the ceiling one big mirror,reflecting all these ppl : wonderfull,

 

[sol83]

art shouldnt be about money, dont think of it like that. for me a painting by rothko or pollock has much more things to say than michaelangelo or rembrant ever did. again its totaly subjective, you cant say its good or bad. its what you like.

 

[Bambi]

My second cousin does art exhibitions, his stuff looks like carpet tiles and he makes big money from them in dat new york. My brother does really boss celtic designs and makes fuck all

Art is great

 

[Achernar]

I just don't enjoy Pop-art that much (actually I hate most of it...). And all the realistic stuff is what pleases me the most. And Pollock does rule.

 

[Dhatura]

My second cousin does art exhibitions, his stuff looks like carpet tiles and he makes big money from them in dat new york. My brother does really boss celtic designs and makes fuck all

Art is great

Oh, but that's not related to the question what art is but rather to what is fashionable to admire artistically at a certain moment of time.

And your brother needs a good manager (I don't like the way "your brother" sounds here, sorry :/ ). But yes, how will the world know about his work?

But anyway, I think art should be what you call art. I think everybody can be an artist, just some people aren't arsed at all. It's another issue who is lifted out of the many artists who dare to regard themselves as artists.

And even though there are too many artists who'll never be recognised, there are a 1000 times more people who don't even give a fuck about art.

Any stuff on the net about those carpet tiles?

 

[Achernar]

Oh, and Edvard Munch sure rulez. He's Doom!

Oh...the pain...

"The sick child":

"Vampire":

 

[Dhatura]

Sol, I sent you something to your Yahoo address

 

[Descendres]

I totally agree

" blue square over a blue background" <== It reminds me "le monochrome de Whiteman" in "Les trois frères" (best comedy ever)

 

[Descendres]

History of Art in Uni was ok, cos it was mostly about middle age, cathedrals and stuff, so pretty interesting.

It can be very interesting (I like Middle Age architecture and arts, my heart goes to the Pope's palace in Avignon). Where did you studied that ?