Seeing as a cultural debate is underway over on another thread I thought I'd kick this art thread off, over here.
As mentioned, one of my bestest ever artists is having one of his late masterpieces exhibited at London's National Gallery, starting this Thursday. Obviously, you'll be fascinated to watch me list my fave artists. Perhaps, you'll like to list yours, too?
Name some specific pieces. Explain why they make you damp. It's all God's work after all...
So, off the top of my head...
Ed Kienholz Otto Dix George Grosz Albrecht Durer Gustave Doré Cindy Sherman Marcel Duchamp Caravaggio Giorgio de Chirico Umberto Boccioni Fluxus Neoism Lettrism
Ed Kienholz: I had only a perfunctory interest in art at school. I was quite good at drawing and applying paint to paper, but art... meh. Then, when I was twenty, I made my first trip to Amsterdam. At the museum of modern art there I saw Ed Kienholz' 'The Beanery'. (Look it up.) My mind was blown. I'd heard people fannying on about art 'speaking to them' and being visceral, or brutal, or dynamic... and I thought they were just tw*ts. Having seen the Beanery and then queueing three times to walk around it, spending so long inside it that I was literally dragged out by security at one point, I 'got' art. I felt sullied by The Beanery. Like I'd been kicked in the nuts. It was offensive, and creepy and intimidating and... awful. That's not good, but to be made to feel that way by an inanimate assemblage of things..? I started to look more seriously into art after that.
"I'd heard people fannying on about art 'speaking to them' and being visceral, or brutal, or dynamic... and I thought they were just tw*ts. Having seen the Beanery and then queueing three times to walk around it, spending so long inside it that I was literally dragged out by security at one point, I 'got' art."
Did you?
Well...maybe you'll 'get' this 'liar' as well:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjRFEwDmlFM
"The people who call my work 'abstract' are imbeciles...what they call 'abstract' is in fact the purest realism, the reality of which is not represented by external form but by the idea behind it, the essence of the work."
And after you'll 'get' him, maybe you'll 'get' me as well ....
Gabriela M. Scherer says: And after you'll 'get' him, maybe you'll 'get' me as well ....
I feel no desire to spend any time or effort attempting to 'get' Brancusi. And as for you..? Gabriela, there's nothing to get. You're an attention-seeking headcase on a forum.
So, what * you * cannot appreciate and understand, is not worth it (wasn't it what you first said before 'getting' art?) and it's sh*t, including any comment I may make on this forum about spirituality and religion that you may not understand. If you don't understand my view which I am entitled to express, it's okay for you to attack me (and others who express their religious views on this site) and to tell me to f*ck off. My, my, Black Mask ...
(He may not rank in your top 100, btw, but he does in other people's:
"In 2002, a sculpture by Brâncuşi named "Danaide" was sold for $18.1 million, the highest that a sculpture piece had ever sold for at auction.[citation needed] In May 2005, a piece from the "Bird in Space" series broke that record, selling for $27.5 million in a Christie's auction. In the latest Christie's auction, the Yves Saint Laurent/Pierre Bergé sale on February 23, 2009, another sculpture of Brâncusi, "Madame L.R", was sold for € 29.185 million ($ 37.2 million), setting a new historical record.")
Gabriela, take a tablet, you're frothing at the mouth. You obviously understand nothing about art. You obviously understand nothing about people. You're a vapid, twittering, delusional catastrophe. You're a pathetic embarrassing mess.
"Listen, watch the videos, everything what is happening with the music, what instruments are playing, the singers, their voices, and be aware of what that music 'tells' you, through a state of mind, feeling. Don't forget God IS talking to you, He IS the Music."
Edward Hopper. Goya. Johannes Vermeer. If 'artist' includes musicians and writers, then mine would include U2, Lene Marlin, Raymond Carver, George Orwell and John McGahern. Kenzaburo Oe and Yukio Mishima, too. I understand you're no beginner when it comes to Japanese Literature yourself, Black Mask.
I do like the work of McKean. I'd rate him as one of the great living Illustrators. But, artist is a label I have all sorts of problems with. I'd consider labelling McKean an 'Artist' demeaning in some respects. The modern artworld is a dirty place. I haven't worked out a strict system of demarcation, but...
Anyone who produces beautiful and/or interesting things is an artist and magician, as far as I'm concerned.
What do you consider "The modern artworld"? Do you mean the sort of 'luvvie' artists of Hirst, Emin and the like? If you do, then I'd agree but I'd take the label of artist from them rather than others. I think that calling someone an artist and meaning it is a massive compliment.
Yeah, the modern artworld is all about commodities. Turning product and producer into a marketable product. Artist as Brand. The modern artworld (that I so despise) really gained momentum in the late 60s. It was inevitable. Artists were always getting stitched up by their dealers, but as artists became shrewder, and as society became more focussed on capital and exchange, and as artists inevitably reflect/reveal the truths that surround us... Artists (popular, sale-able artists) stopped becoming romantic figures and started becoming icons/mover and shakers/players... Warhol, Koons, Hirst, Emin. They're magnates. Brand-leaders. 100 years ago the artist was incidental to the art. Now, it's the other way around. Hirst is more important or valuable than one of his canvasses, and that's why art now is sh*t.
![[Add comment]](http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/02/x-locale/communities/reviews/comment._V20569588_.gif){kind=small}
RSS Feed
