Now see, that's an example of art - comedic timing. That, you might say, is an example of "art for art's sake."
What Makes a Great Work of Art?
- Thread starter cosmicfolklore
- Start date
SmokingPipes.com Updates
Watch for Updates Twice a Week
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
Site Sponsors
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
Never paid attention to Brad's pipes have you?
I go by what does it make you feel, or what atmosphere does it give to a room, and is that what you would like it to imbue your space with.
At one time in Florence, a family named Medici wanted their city state to be known for its wealth and culture. So, they dumped a lot of money into decorating their city with new art that drew on ancient as well as new ideas. So, they hired these guys like Michelangelo, DaVinci and such to paint and sculpt things. Never did Michelangelo have to set his work up in a gallery or a street fair to make money. They wanted to set a standard that made themselves look more powerful and smarter than the rest of the world. The Medicis not the artists.
Never in the Renaissance did an artists or patron buy or sell art. That actually didn’t start happening till the Industrial age. The “isms” impressionism, post impressionism…. the modern age. “Modern”
People get mad at the term Postmodernism. But, really, it was this age that put art back into the hands of us, “the people.” You can buy a painting displayed at your local library, a street fair, or a “gallery”, or order it online.
we are liberated from the church, galleries, Universities or the government telling is what is art. I’m not sure why this scares people.
Never in the Renaissance did an artists or patron buy or sell art. That actually didn’t start happening till the Industrial age. The “isms” impressionism, post impressionism…. the modern age. “Modern”
People get mad at the term Postmodernism. But, really, it was this age that put art back into the hands of us, “the people.” You can buy a painting displayed at your local library, a street fair, or a “gallery”, or order it online.
we are liberated from the church, galleries, Universities or the government telling is what is art. I’m not sure why this scares people.
Feel.., this always perplexed me. I can feel hungry or sleepy. A painting, I can ignore. I prefer the word “think.” What a work of art inspires me to think. I don’t really go around crying or smashing my fist very much.
But, a Picasso can make me think about the thrill of winning a bullfight, or of wooing a woman, or of the tragedy of war. But, my feelings are very much in check.
semantics…. I know.
Substitute the word democratization for the word post modernism and see if they still want to decry the term. If they do, then let them embrace the word fascism to describe themselves.
At the risk of going too far off topic, I think we would all agree that any society has certain unspoken norms. In that sense, we live within a set of certain parameters. Changing those parameters is like changing the rules to a game. It impacts the game as well as the players of the game. Maybe some players thought the older rules were better. Point is, changing a social norm (such as "what constitutes art" or "what constitutes music") does have an impact upon everyone who lives within or subject to that norm..
I appreciate your argument that the responses to this new "art" show that standards aren't being lowered. However, I would counter that the fact that we have to entertain this banana-on-the-wall stuff at all is demonstrative of a lowered standard. Granted, the banana-on-the-wall is an extreme example, but we can also look at architecture to see the daily impact of this adjustment of standards. Pre-modernist architecture is beautiful. Give me Italianate or Neoclassical any day, or even a simple 1920's Craftsman style house. If we venture too far away from those norms about what constitutes "good" architecture in the name of modernism and challenging established norms, then we wind up in a some sort of Bauhaus / Brutalist nightmare resembling Soviet communist architecture. At least that's where modernism has already gone and seems to be further headed.
I am now venturing into the edge of the political, and in truth, I believe that fundamentally, the efforts to alter things like art and architecture are essentially political at their core, and represent an effort to alter previous norms for political reasons. I mean why else did the Soviet Union suddenly start constructing all of its buildings in Bauhaus and Brutalist style in contradiction of previous Romanesque-type style? Aesthetics matter.
In this movement about "who says what is good art / architecture / manner of dressing yourself / manner of speaking / etc" we are undermining the idea that there is an objective reality, and replacing objectivity with relativism. There is even a well-regarded physicist who was able to recently troll a peer-reviewed journal into publishing his article that the the laws of physics are fundamentally subjective and unknowable. I digress, the the extent to which thought leaders in our society have ventured down this rabbit hole is troubling.
None of this should be construed as "change is bad." I've got no problem with change, so long as it's an improvement and there is a reason that the change is suggested, other than "I don't like the old standard." Changing something because it has problems is no good if the thing that replaces it has even more problems.
Many people misuse the word think for feel. With art, or anything that inspires a reaction they can be interchangeable. Ask a man what he thinks, and he'll tell you what he feels. Ask him what he feels, and he'll tell you what he thinks.
Fascism or communism. The commies dictated what art was just as much as Hitler did.
Eh, evolutionary change that moves forward after and only after a 1000 dead ends were first explored. Providing room for what seems nonsense allows a stage for brilliance. Are do you disagree?
@lawdawg I would love to enjoy a bowl, a glass of wine, and this debate with you. Maybe one day. Us both being debaters, I’m sure we’d be quite entertaining.
They dictated what could be public art -- no one can dictate what is art. In that sense, yes "popular art" was what was allowed to be displayed in the train stations, etc. What is actually art can't be dictated.
I think there is a distinction between growth or improvement as opposed to mere change for change's sake. I think the postmodern movement includes more of the latter than the former.
In all honesty, I love the banana thing. It’s like a huge joke on this University system of art. Someone actually bought it, ha ha, which furthers the joke. A fruit that will be completely decomposed, probably already is. I think it’s wonderful. Zing it to them!!!
