art

Bastet said:
hirst7.jpg



aargh! this one ?????????????:yell:
for one, yes.
i have a great interest in anatomy and that.

as a kid i used to hide dead rabbits and such to see the way they'd decay over time. but we also had a dog, which found out where i'd hidden it.
it's more that everything that happens (round the thin line of life and death) in nature that just grabs me.
the most beautiful moment i had on that perspect was when i was about 8 yrs old. my dad kept a couple of sheep, and it was high-tide for delivering..
so that week my dad kept in an eye at night. one night when a little lamb was about to be born, he woke me up @ 3 am. the sheep had already delivered two, but the third one was tough, and the latter of three mostly dies (in time) - the udder has only 2 spots eh? ;)

it was lying the wrong way, inside, and my dad tried to twist it into the right direction, which worked. the little one came out, but looked quite lifeless... my dad used some ice-cold water, didnt work. he removed all the slime and that stuff from birth, but it still didnt breathe.

4 am, my dad did mouth-to-mouth to the lamb. it lived, and the whole lot of lambs died 2 years later on some kind of spooky disease, dunno. we buried them all ourselves :erk:
anyway, i had never seen anything in my life like it. full on impressed, my dad tought me the love for nature.
many occasions more i had to expand that :)

dunno, i reckon thats why i'm so interested in Hirst's work, besides the fast that i love design and contemporary (conceptual) art. :dopey:

*turns off blah mode* who cares anyway :p
 
you know, art is so personal. it has to move you in some way, or make you think about things..... but if i have to read a book first , just to understand what the artist meant,then i drop out...anyway, i don't really like hirsts work, but hey, it's just my opinion.....:(
btw, i love nature too, and i really like your story :)
 
steak-knife said:
speaking of popes, here is one of Francis Bacon's paintings. his work is the most disturbing of all

innocent_X.jpg

haha, i had this exact painting for an exam. i like his provocative themes but not the painting style itself so much...
 
Cerulean said:
That's not art imho.
why not? why does it have to make sense i mean? i think these are the most emotional pieces of art ever (this movement i mean.)

don't tell me you can do that. you can't. we would all be painters then and live rich-ily ever after.
 
Ehm ehm ehm I have like 16 hours of drawing and painting a week hmm. A Pollock imitation, or something in his style, is NOT difficult. We had to make stuff like that already, it depends on the theme we're dealing with. Why I said that it's not art... Well, really, it's all just random stuff and then they give these big theories about it, that's bollocks. Unlike Kandinsky, it seems random at first sight but when you analyse his work (which we had to do) you discover a million of things that DO make sense.
 
why does it have to be difficult? anyways, i think the masters of the past (michaelangelo, leonardo, rubens, rembrant, etc.) lacked seriously on feeling and emotion. then impressionism came and art started being more "real" like, not just a (incredibly drawn, yes) depiction of mary, baby jesus and little fluffy angels and all that. that's how i feel.