Top | Newest First | Oldest First
SW-User
I don't understand when people say they don't [i]get[/i] abstract or conceptual art. There is a lot more room for interpretation in something abstract or conceptual than something that is purely representational. Like what meaning do you take away from the portrait of a 17th century merchant?
View 11 more replies »
SW-User
[quote]But isn't the base of art the creation of beauty?[/quote]
No. Art can be beautiful but it doesn't have to be.
[quote]So if you have to have three degrees to understand the "Garbage of New York" or a single bit of red on black is it effective?
[/quote]
You don't. Plenty of people with little or no education, and even more with no formal art education can find meaning in them.
[quote]If those last four pictures are valuable pieces of art why can't I understand them?[/quote]
Maybe you don't understand art in general. Maybe those pieces just don't speak to you. Maybe you aren't smart enough to. Maybe you haven't tried. Maybe you don't have the proper background? There could be many reasons, I don't see why you jump to "they are meaningless and anyone who disagrees with me is just pretending."
[quote]Could you try to explain them to me?[/quote]
No, I cannot.
[quote]I wouldn't give a lecture on these arts, but I am free to question am I not?[/quote]
Yeah, of course you are, but don't be surprised when people don't take your opinion seriously and think you are arrogant.
[quote]A question is the first step to learning.[/quote]
Yes, but generally you have accept the possibility that there are other people out there that can answer the question who know more about it than you do, and that the opinion you formed with no knowledge of the field is probably wrong.
No. Art can be beautiful but it doesn't have to be.
[quote]So if you have to have three degrees to understand the "Garbage of New York" or a single bit of red on black is it effective?
[/quote]
You don't. Plenty of people with little or no education, and even more with no formal art education can find meaning in them.
[quote]If those last four pictures are valuable pieces of art why can't I understand them?[/quote]
Maybe you don't understand art in general. Maybe those pieces just don't speak to you. Maybe you aren't smart enough to. Maybe you haven't tried. Maybe you don't have the proper background? There could be many reasons, I don't see why you jump to "they are meaningless and anyone who disagrees with me is just pretending."
[quote]Could you try to explain them to me?[/quote]
No, I cannot.
[quote]I wouldn't give a lecture on these arts, but I am free to question am I not?[/quote]
Yeah, of course you are, but don't be surprised when people don't take your opinion seriously and think you are arrogant.
[quote]A question is the first step to learning.[/quote]
Yes, but generally you have accept the possibility that there are other people out there that can answer the question who know more about it than you do, and that the opinion you formed with no knowledge of the field is probably wrong.
Challenger1 · M
@KaliKali: "Art: the making of objects, images, music, etc. that are beautiful or that express feelings" -as defined by the cambridge dictionary. So yes, I suppose it doesn't have to beautiful and is very subjective.
I don't think that everyone who disagrees with me is just pretending.
Oh, I am very much hoping that there are people who know more than I do and can answer my questions, that is why I ask them. However, I am sound in mind and won't just roll over when challenged, I expect a conversation and some explanation if someone wants to change my mind.
I don't think that everyone who disagrees with me is just pretending.
Oh, I am very much hoping that there are people who know more than I do and can answer my questions, that is why I ask them. However, I am sound in mind and won't just roll over when challenged, I expect a conversation and some explanation if someone wants to change my mind.
Challenger1 · M
I suppose, but this attitude kinda annoys me...
What really bothers me is when I hear about such and such painting or sculpture or something on art street that sold for about a million bucks and then I see a photo of the thing and it looks like I did it when I was five.
What really bothers me is when I hear about such and such painting or sculpture or something on art street that sold for about a million bucks and then I see a photo of the thing and it looks like I did it when I was five.
Challenger1 · M
Agreed, although the realist paintings are much more objectively amazing. The skill and talent of the artist comes through in how well they capture the scene whether in their mind or from a picture or landscape or whatever.
sarabee1995 · 26-30, F
Spoiledbrat · F
No
bijouxbroussard · F
Challenger1 · M
Well said, yes, I think there are some of each. But to be fair I find that if a piece of artwork shows real talent and skill and a good practice of the craft then I am much more likely to appreciate it than if it looks like it was done by a five year old.
bijouxbroussard · F
@mar3sword: That's what has made art "subjective" for the most part. We don't necessarily look at it with the same eyes or same filter. That's [b]why[/b] there are so many different types. The good news is, if you're not seeing what you like, you're free to look at something else. 👩🏾🎨
Challenger1 · M