« "As a white American, I think that African Americans and Indians should pay us royalties for the use of our civilization." | Main | Comment of the Month »

October 25, 2013

Modern art cannot exist in the same world as traditional art.

modern_art.jpg

There is a reason that during the Renaissance you didn’t have celebrated artists making random splatters of paint on a canvas in the Uffizi - that is because it is stupid.
It is patently on it’s face idiotic. Because a child really could do it. Turner or Rembrandt did not have to compete in the creative arena with a Tracy Emin type character who traipses around confidently arranging mannequins or unmade beds and touting it as art because it is ‘pushing boundaries’. That is because it takes a society existing, as we do, at a sustained level of luxurious stupidity to even imagine philosophizing such obvious lies. Modern Art: An Artful Swindle

Posted by gerardvanderleun at October 25, 2013 1:43 PM. This is an entry on the sideblog of American Digest: Check it out.

Your Say

There is some very good stuff being done now, but it doesn't get much high end gallery space or praise. Its too "pedestrian" and "derivative" to be liked by the glitterati.

The truth is, most of what's produced in any age is not art, its either trash or fascinating craftwork. Yes, that Picasso is praised and beloved but honestly, its crap. I'm sorry. So is that Kadinsky and the Banksy piece. Its just trash.

Every so often there's an amazing surge of talent and artistic genius, such as the Renaissance, but those eras are rare. We've probably killed off more than half the inventors, artists, and assorted geniuses with abortions in the last few generations anyway.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at October 25, 2013 2:57 PM

Trashy faux art represents the age of democratic equality all to well.

Posted by: james wilson at October 25, 2013 4:42 PM

While in art school working toward the BFA, Abe Ajay one of the instructors said art with out saying something is just babble. Actually saying something is not as common as one thinks.

Posted by: Peccable at October 25, 2013 5:09 PM

There is a remarkable amount of antisemitic and racist bile in the comments to that article.

Posted by: chuck at October 25, 2013 6:55 PM

re: Modern Art

1) By all means read The Painted Word by Tom Wolfe. He does a complete autopsy on the fraud of Modern Art.

2) Was back in the 60s and was visiting Pittsburgh (a girl was involved) and I was talked in to viewing with her a large exhibition of modern art at the Carnegie Museum just adjacent to the Pitt Campus. It was a big deal at the time with rooms and rooms of so called Modern Art including paintings, mobiles, motorized contraptions, sculptures and One, only One traditional realistic painting by Andrew Wyeth which was shunted off in a corner. What trash.
A half decade later I got married to a New Yorker and to this day have never visited the Guggenheim or the Whitney but many times have visited the Metropolitan and especially the Frick Collection over the years when we visited her parents.

Dan Kurt

Posted by: Dan Kurt at October 25, 2013 7:15 PM

Modern art provides a way for the otherwise talentless to grow wealthy with government subsidies and the patronage of equally vapid nouveaux riches of various types who want to show how much "taste" they have. Unfortunately, it comes shining through all too clearly.

Posted by: waltj at October 25, 2013 11:20 PM

I can't fault people that have no talent or drive and still practice as young children, but what I find utterly despicable are the trash minds that attribute thousands of words attempting to explain to the unknowing what we are supposed to be *feeling* upon introduction to any of these embarrassments. There will always be idiots and lazy asses but the salesman that pander that shit to others should be shunned, banished and/or beaten. There are artists and then there are people that call themselves artists and thinkers know the difference.

Posted by: ghostsniper at October 26, 2013 7:26 AM

Okay Boys and Girls, time for a quiz:

Can You Tell The Difference Between Modern Art And Paintings By Toddlers?

www(DOT)buzzfeed(DOT)com/jenlewis/quiz-can-you-tell-the-difference-between-modern-art-and-art

(I got 5 out of 11 Correct - which means that a random guess of athe True/false questions would have actually did better than my failed attempt at discerning 'art' - statistically speaking of course)

Posted by: Cond0011 at October 26, 2013 7:38 AM

You posted a video by Roger Scruton on beauty. We should watch it again, here.
http://brambergsk.wordpress.com/2013/06/13/why-beauty-matters-2009-bbc/

It would erase the ick from our eye holes.

Posted by: Jewel at October 26, 2013 9:23 AM

@Cond0011: you're taking the wrong quiz. Of course you can't tell the difference between modern art and toddler art. That's the whole point. I bet you'd have no problem telling apart a Rembrandt or a Rafael from a modern painting, though. One is beautiful, the other isn't. Piece of cake.

Posted by: waltj at October 26, 2013 10:04 PM

Hi would you mind stating which blog platform you're using?
I'm looking to start my own blog in the near future but I'm having a hard time deciding between BlogEngine/Wordpress/B2evolution and Drupal.
The reason I ask is because your layout seems different then most blogs and I'm
looking for something unique. P.S Apologies for getting off-topic but I had to ask!

Posted by: get taller at January 5, 2014 6:10 AM

Post a comment




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)