I’m not sure. That’s the question I’m trying to figure out.
Maybe. But why can’t an abstract painting just be a load of shit really. Is it because its within a frame and hung in a gallery that people think its great. That because I might stand there and sneer I’m an idiot who, “Doesn’t get it.” I find that when I’m in a gallery, I automatically switch onto the state of mind that tries to find the meaning of the stuff in there. That really, it’s the context, the gallery, that dictates this and not necessarily the artwork itself. For instance, there have been installations that merely feature bricks. Common house-bricks just piled up. Well then, why isn’t that art when I’m on a building site? Should I go and pay the brickie a few million dollars for his post-modern masterpiece? Its absurd.
“Oh, well it’s meant to just reveal the absurdity of modern life.” He says.
And I would say, with the utmost sincerity, “Fuck off, you cunt.”
peterpan
(peterpan)
November 15, 2013, 10:57am
22
“Beauty is in the eye of the beholder”
peterpan
(peterpan)
November 15, 2013, 11:04am
23
House bricks, blocks of concrete…
Blank or uni-colored canvas…
Glass boxes of used diapers/dead animals…
Seeds or sand scattered on the floor…
An empty plate…
Yeah, some abstract art bores me at the least, at the most annoys me that it is considered art by some.
But then again
“Beauty is in the eye …” etc
Neither_Nor
(Neither Nor)
November 15, 2013, 11:57am
24
Maybe it isn’t though. Maybe we can specifically say what beuaty is or what art should be. Maybe relativism is just the lazy way…however, I am quite lazy so I’ll probably end up siding that way anyway.
volchok
(volchok)
November 15, 2013, 1:57pm
25
Maybe. But why can’t an abstract painting just be a load of shit really. Is it because its within a frame and hung in a gallery that people think its great. That because I might stand there and sneer I’m an idiot who, “Doesn’t get it.” I find that when I’m in a gallery, I automatically switch onto the state of mind that tries to find the meaning of the stuff in there. That really, it’s the context, the gallery, that dictates this and not necessarily the artwork itself. For instance, there have been installations that merely feature bricks. Common house-bricks just piled up. Well then, why isn’t that art when I’m on a building site? Should I go and pay the brickie a few million dollars for his post-modern masterpiece? Its absurd.
:
Oh I’m with you there. Much of modern art is a joke. Specifically the economics of it. There’s no question there.
Moreno
(Moreno)
November 16, 2013, 1:25am
26
Fans of Nicolas Samori might also like Francis Bacon:
volchok
(volchok)
November 16, 2013, 2:03am
27
Moreno
(Moreno)
November 16, 2013, 2:16am
28
I like some of them, though I prefer things a bit more seamless and all effects in camera…
In black and White, pre-computer Graphics, Ralph Meatyard…
google.pt/search?q=kyle+tho … 80&bih=646 ">Kyle%20Thompson#q=ralph+meatyard&rls=org.mozilla:en-US%3Aofficial&tbm=isch
and
Francesca Woodman…
google.pt/search?q=kyle+tho … 80&bih=646 ">Kyle%20Thompson#q=francesca+photographs&rls=org.mozilla:en-US%3Aofficial&tbm=isch
Tyrannus
(Tyrannus)
November 16, 2013, 3:25am
29
Saturn Devouring His Son is the name given to a painting by Spanish artist Francisco Goya. According to the traditional interpretation, it depicts the Greek myth of the Titan Cronus (in the title Romanised to Saturn), who, fearing that he would be overthrown by one of his children,[1] ate each one upon their birth. The work is one of the 14 Black Paintings that Goya painted directly onto the walls of his house sometime between 1819 and 1823. It was transferred to canvas after Goya’s death and has since been held in the Museo del Prado in Madrid.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn_Devouring_His_Son
Tyrannus
(Tyrannus)
November 16, 2013, 3:28am
30
Francis Bacon. Nice, Moreno.
Tyrannus
(Tyrannus)
November 16, 2013, 3:36am
31
The Sacrifice of Isaac in the Piasecka-Johnson Collection in Princeton, New Jersey, is a disputed work that was painted circa 1603. According to Giulio Mancini, a contemporary of Caravaggio and an early biographer, the artist, while convalescing in the Hospital of the Consolazione, did a number of paintings for the prior who took them home with him to Seville. (The hospital had a Spanish prior from 1593 to around mid-1595). This would date the work to the mid-1590s, but it seems far more sophisticated than anything else known from that period of Caravaggio’s career, and Peter Robb, in his 1998 biography of Caravaggio, dates it to about 1598. The model for Isaac bears a close resemblance to the model used for the John the Baptist now in the museum of Toledo cathedral, which suggests that the two should be considered together. The presence of paintings by Caravaggio in Spain at an early date is important for the influence they may have had on the young Velázquez, but there is also strong evidence that they may have been the work of Bartolomeo Cavarozzi, a talented early member of the Caravaggio following who is known to have been in Spain about 1617-1619.
The painting shows the moment when Abraham, about to sacrifice his son Isaac in obedience to God’s command, is stayed by an angel who offers him a ram in Isaac’s place. The scene is lit with the dramatically enhanced chiaroscuro (tenebrism) with which Caravaggio was to revolutionize Western art, falling like a stage spotlight on the face of the youthful angel; the faces of Abraham and Isaac are in shadow, but show acute emotions; the gestures of the hands are acutely eloquent, the angel’s hand resting on the ram’s head in imitation of the way Abraham’s left hand rests on the head of his son, the Patriarch’s other hand holding the knife but already relaxing as he listens to the angel. The three figures and the ram are shown without background or context, with nothing to distract from the powerful psychological drama as God’s promise is delivered.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacrifice_ … avaggio%29
Tyrannus
(Tyrannus)
November 16, 2013, 3:47am
32
Tobias Verhaecht - The Tower of Babel
Tyrannus
(Tyrannus)
November 16, 2013, 3:51am
33
Barge Haulers on the Volga or Burlaki (Russian: Burlaki na Volge, Бурлаки на Волге) is a 1870–1873 oil-on-canvas painting by the Russian realist painter and sculptor Ilya Repin. The work depicts 11 labouring men dragging a barge on the Volga River. The men seem to almost collapse forward in exhaustion under the burden of hauling a large boat upstream in heavy, hot weather.[1][2]
The work is both a celebration of the men’s dignity and fortitude, and a highly emotional condemnation of those who sanctioned such inhumane labour.[3] Although they are presented as stoical and accepting, the men are largely defeated; only one stands out: in the centre of both the row and canvas, a brightly coloured youth fights against his leather binds and takes on a heroic poise.
Repin conceived the painting during his travels through Russia as a young man and depicts actual characters he encountered. It drew international praise for its realistic portrayal of the hardships of working men, and launched his career.[4] Soon after its completion, the painting was purchased by Grand Duke Vladimir Alexandrovich and exhibited widely throughout Europe as a landmark of Russian realist painting. Barge Haulers on the Volga has been described as “perhaps the most famous painting of the Peredvizhniki movement [for]…its unflinching portrayal of backbreaking labour”
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barge_Haulers_on_the_Volga
Tyrannus
(Tyrannus)
November 16, 2013, 4:01am
34
The Roses of Heliogabalus is a famous painting of 1888 by the Anglo-Dutch academician Sir Lawrence Alma-Tadema, at present in private hands. It is based on a probably invented episode in the life of the Roman emperor Elagabalus, also known as Heliogabalus, (204–222), taken from the Augustan History. Although the Latin refers to “violets and other flowers”, Alma-Tadema depicts Elagabalus attempting[citation needed] to smother his unsuspecting guests in rose-petals released from false ceiling panels. The original reference is this:
Oppressit in tricliniis versatilibus parasitos suos violis et floribus, sic ut animam aliqui efflaverint, cum erepere ad summum non possent.[1]
In a banqueting-room with a reversible ceiling he once buried his parasites in violets and other flowers, so that some were actually smothered to death, being unable to crawl out to the top.[2]
In his notes to the Augustan History, Thayer notes that “Nero did this also (Suetonius, Nero, xxxi), and a similar ceiling in the house of Trimalchio is described in Petronius, Sat., lx.” (Satyricon).[3]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Roses_of_Heliogabalus
Orbie
(Orbie)
November 16, 2013, 4:03am
35
She is my favorite work of art besides her three brothers and sisters. She is better then a work of art. One of 5 grandkids I am responsible for.
Tyrannus
(Tyrannus)
November 16, 2013, 4:06am
36
Obe, sure that can count as well, for one cannot disclaim living art and aesthetic beauty or appeal either.
Moreno
(Moreno)
November 16, 2013, 4:41am
37
I thought of that exact Goya when I saw Volchok’s tastes.
Not as Close, but in the same region of the Id is William Blake’s
The Ghost of a Flea
Moreno
(Moreno)
November 16, 2013, 4:47am
38
I would guess that both you and Volchok have at least some affection for Bosch…
Moreno
(Moreno)
November 16, 2013, 4:53am
39
And then for concerns about feminists, the Classic Artemesia Gentilischi painting
Judith Beheading Holofernes
Tyrannus
(Tyrannus)
November 16, 2013, 7:36am
40
A challenge I see Moreno. I’ll meet your beheading of a man by two women with this.
Pietro da Cortona: “The Rape of the Sabine Women”