17 Sep 12
5 edits
Originally posted by JS357Here are some works of a form of art that I find exquisite. One color, one brush, one stroke.
It will help if people here can answer this:
Is Vladimir Tretchikoff's work good art, bad art, or not art, and why?
He did "The Green Lady."
http://www.vladimirtretchikoff.com/gallery.htm
Do you have other examples of good art, bad art, and human made works that are not-art?
http://www.skbhavnani.com/art.html
Notice the piece "Shimmer"and "Pause" particularly.
How the shimmer comes out of black ink on paper.
The delicacy of the insect, its impression of lightness.
There is no second stroke. Each stroke is itself.
My flavor.
That response to any nominated 'art' of the past and of different contexts is highly variable is a banal truism. To me it suggests the idea that "art" is an event, a happening that includes the artist, the audience, or lack of, and the cultural context and its time. One time and place and from a certain people's perspective it is regarded as art. Another time, place and culture or subculture, it is not. A passing ephemeral conceptual phenomenon in general, dependent on minds and circumstances.
Enduring art endures for some, not others. the strength of endurance and impression that continues varies. The strength of endurance of some art "happenings" and its response is extremely strong, almost impregnable.
I believe this is because it captures a certain universality in a new way that is immediately gripping to the majority. But again that too will have some cultural limits and certain cultures will find it hard to enter into the "happenings" of other cultures' art, having absorbed cultural and subcultural impressions and traces from the cradle. It appears to me that from ephemeral to enduring it was at some time to someone, even if it was just the artist - art.
Art, like all meanings, is of the mind.
17 Sep 12
Originally posted by mmmjvBack in 2016?
Try multiplying a bit. His No. 5, (1948) sold for 140 million back in 2016. He is a very good painter if you can get beyond the a five year old could do that mentality (no, a five year old couldn't do that)
No, a five year old couldn't do that?
OKAY....whatever you say bub.
I'm just saying artists putting their blood and other bodily fluids on their "paintings" is just not really that appealing as it may have been in the 60's or whenever they decided this guy was ... what is he? an aritst or a painter?
18 Sep 12
Originally posted by karoly aczelI meant 2006. Jackson Pollock never put any bodily fluids in any of his works. He died in a car crash in 1956 so not from the 60's. He was a painter
Back in 2016?
No, a five year old couldn't do that?
OKAY....whatever you say bub.
I'm just saying artists putting their blood and other bodily fluids on their "paintings" is just not really that appealing as it may have been in the 60's or whenever they decided this guy was ... what is he? an aritst or a painter?
18 Sep 12
Originally posted by mmmjvNo, I'm not talking about 'Piss Christ.' I'm talking about Andy Warhol's urine paintings.
Are you talking about Piss Christ? That was a 1987 photograph by Andres Serrano.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File😛iss_Christ_by_Serrano_Andres_(1987).jpg
http://www.brooklynmuseum.org/exhibitions/andy_warhol/oxidation.php
29 Sep 12
Originally posted by scacchipazzoBravo! I agree with you completely.
Sanctimonious prigs like myself never were offended by Impressionists . I rest my case. If you have the audacity to compare Renoir, Monet, Manet, Pisarro et al with pissart you must be fairly impressed by such garbage, but in your polluted mind such things merit comparison. I daresay 100 years from now pissart will not merit a blip in art history wherea ...[text shortened]... ontroversy alone and contempt. I do no recall Impressionism stirring contempt or being reviled.
If you are in the North-East, you should go out of the way to view the Barnes Collection in Philadelphia (if you have not already done so). It's collection (chiefly French Impressionist paintings) equals if it does not surpass the Musee D'Orsay in Paris. I have been to both. Barnes was a most knowledgeable collector as well as a most wealthy collector and his taste, judgment, and insight enabled him to acquire the very best works of Renoir, Matisse, Picasso, Cezanne, etc.
29 Sep 12
Originally posted by scacchipazzoPlease do me a favor and take a long at the work of a contemporary artist whom I much admire. Her work is displayed on her website: patriciahynesartist.com
Sanctimonious prigs like myself never were offended by Impressionists . I rest my case. If you have the audacity to compare Renoir, Monet, Manet, Pisarro et al with pissart you must be fairly impressed by such garbage, but in your polluted mind such things merit comparison. I daresay 100 years from now pissart will not merit a blip in art history wherea ...[text shortened]... ontroversy alone and contempt. I do no recall Impressionism stirring contempt or being reviled.
After you have viewed her art, please let me have your opinion. I respect your judgment.
Aldan
30 Sep 12
Originally posted by Aldan"Oops! Internet Explorer could not find patriciahynesartist.com"
Please do me a favor and take a long at the work of a contemporary artist whom I much admire. Her work is displayed on her website: patriciahynesartist.com
After you have viewed her art, please let me have your opinion. I respect your judgment.
Aldan
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
07 Oct 12
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyTry http://www.patriciahynespainter.com/#!home/mainPage
"HTTP Error 500.19 - Internal Server Error"
Worked for me.
My impression is that technically they look like they are based on and are like stop action renderings of photographs of everyday scenes. The scenes are quiet and transitory. The people in them are not actively engaged in what is happening, and if anything is happening, it's not momentous. Even when they are mid-stride, they seem still and immobilized. They invoke a feeling of peacefulness and remind me that most of life is mundane and that this situation is OK. So I see it as art because it leads me to a change in my mood that I appreciate. (Art being to me, something made by a person, that alters or reinforces my mood in a way I appreciate. This definition subject to change without notice being given, even to me.)
But Aldan was asking for scacchipazzo's opinion.
07 Oct 12
Originally posted by JS357The site you entered is not the one he gave.
Try http://www.patriciahynespainter.com/#!home/mainPage
Worked for me.
My impression is that technically they look like they are based on and are like stop action renderings of photographs of everyday scenes. The scenes are quiet and transitory. The people in them are not actively engaged in what is happening, and if anything is happening, it's not momen ...[text shortened]... e without notice being given, even to me.)
But Aldan was asking for scacchipazzo's opinion.
07 Oct 12
2 edits
Originally posted by Grampy Bobby“Music too deep to be heard… only felt”:
[b]Genuine Art
Genuine Art, in any genre, subliminally succeeds in capturing new tiers of pain and pleasure, restraint and abandon. If you agree, how about a few internet links to examples. If not, why?
gb[/b]
&feature=related
k,
I unashamedly wept.
.