Modern Art
 

what do you guys think of modern art? please if you have a favorite modern artist i would love to hear about it, personally i think their is some great modern art.

modern art sucks balls

hahaha and rich sed i cud say that

Yeah, I allowed her to say that, so no flamage, she's allowed her opinion. Anyway, some modern art is good, some is not so good, it depends on opinion. I don't know enough about art to talk about artists and what-not yet though.

I look forward for the 'masses' to step forward and diss modern art. How fun and original.

Didn't ye know some guy pickled a shark?! And they call that art?!?!?

Some of it is good, some of it is bad.

What the hell is modern art, anyway? Art made in recent times? Or out-there wannabe-surreal painted toiletry products and the like?

yeah that was Damien Hurst, he kicks ass.... In a good way....

I think it's impossible to classify Modern Art, at least based on what I've been seeing recently. I like some modern art, most significantly Kandinsky. Calder's kinetic sculptures are amazing also. Artists who do wierd random shit then call it art can be entertaining but I don't find it too enlightening.

For a good lesson on modern art, I'd recommend anyone to go to the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art. They've got a great range of really good art and very little of the random shit. Life-size plaster model of Michael Jackson and Bubbles notwithstanding.

EDIT: According to wikipedia: So the term refers to time-periods rather than anything stylistic.

Basically what Tirano says, modern art sucks. The works of Vincent Van Gogh make modern at look like elephant dung.

So what artists make modern art look good? Van Gogh is amazing.

I agree, pity he had to kill himself.

I like it alot acutally. I love the abstractness about it, its like, Thinking Art.

Nah, I find abstarcts a wee bit iffy. But I do like drawings of countryside scenery and mountains.

I think a work must take skill, talent, or at least incredible innovation or inspiration to be labeled as 'art'. A lot of 'modern art' is scammy bullshit.

However, Juxtapoz has hundreds of examples of EXCELLENT modern art. A lot of it is done by graffiti artists. Top-notch.

My problem with 'modern' art is that I can just put a painbrush in a bucket of paint, spray it at a canvas and call it art.
Most 'art' these days is all tasteless crap that hardly had any effort in it. Art is only as good as the effort the creator put in it. Putting a few lines on a canvas is not art in my opinion, thats a doodle.

I don't get all this 'effort' shebang - someone can work really hard on a piece of shit, and another person can just piss something onto a canvas and it's a thing of beauty.

The more talent you have, the less effort required. Potentially.

The man speaks the truth!

I don't know. I just don't get modern art. I've been to art museums a few times and while I didn't hate it I just couldn't get into it. I'm not going to go off and say it "sucks" as I haven't really spent that much time with it but I like sculptures and paintings and carved art that you know, actually looks like something. The message is lost in all the pretentiousness is what I think. But then again I'm no art buff.

Even the best painter in the world has to spend weeks on painting a masterpiece. I wasn't so much talking about skill effort, more like time effort.

I can paint an abstract painting in, hm, an hour? 10 minutes to get the paint and the brushes, 15 minutes to get the canvas, 35 minutes of painting and I have myself a modern piece of art.

But MF is right to some degree. I sometimes see stuff standing alongside the freeway which is supposed to be modern art. And supposedly someone has worked weeks on designing it and huge manhours into creating it... and all it looks like is some needle, fork, knife, pointer thingy case thing.
But in general I don't like modern art for the simplicity of it. Art for me needs to have a meaning. Like the dogs playing poker. It's a cool painting to look at.
Then I see some painting with a few lines in it... and... I see 5 different shades of red and thats about it... get my point?

You wouldn't believe it, I have just seen a piece of modern art that is on sale for £15,000. It is two dots! Two freakin dots.

You're right, I wouldn't believe that.

You sound exactly like that guy from One Foot in the Grave. And don't start that again.

If artist is good, than the art is also good.
I generaly like modern art. It gives an artist a chance to use his creativity.

Oh so if Picaso would put one single DOT on a 2 x 2 canvas, someone would buy it for 500k? Never mind, don't answer that. Yes there are morons out there who would do that and they need to be shot.

Even the deepest of philosophies can be expressed with something as simple as a dot. :)

No, they can't. That's why I hate SOME art so much, it gives you so little and expects you to bring so much.

Well, you're British. :p

Nothing to do with being British. :p

I agree that the dot can indeed be expressive.

.


EDIT: Look, I'm expresive!

It has to be used in an artistic sense.

And don't say you were.

Using a brush for it suddenly makes it artistic? Thats utter bullcrap.

haha :p

A sculpture of the dot... thats where it's at. :p

Btw, Pop Art is awesome.

Does a football count as a piece of art then? It's a 3D dot made of fabric. ART!!!

It has to be used in am artistic sense though.

You could make a gigantic football and call it pop art. :) :p

Anyway, on the topic of crappy art. For those that browse DeviantArt every once in a while, don't you just get sick of all the 'photographers' who put a soda can on a desk, take a picture of it from a strange angle, make it black and white in Photoshop, but a nice white border around it, and DARE to call it ART?! Not to mention that the idiots on DA actualy find these people good photographers... It's sickening.

Ah, what is art? That old chestnut.

For me, art is anything that is shaped by conscious hands and labelled as art.

So yes, I can move an object a couple of metres, call it art and it would be. It would also, however, be crap.

Well yea everyone has diffrent idea's on what defines art. I define it as this: Art is everything that is handmade by a person with exceptional skill (AKA, not everyone can do it).

Everyone can take a picture of a can, so in my definition thats not art.

It's not a matter of what you are able do, no, that completely kills the concept of art. Art is presenting new, creative ideas in any kind of form.

I believe that soda can thing could be considered art. Creativity is basically rearranging what you know to discover what you don't know.

*W00t, 3000 posts and counting... not that I care or anything... you know...*

Well I guess there is some truth in there. What I just can't take is the guys who do the soda can thing, and pretend to be highly experiences artists. I hate it when people do that.

But by your standards, a few specks of paint by a 2 year old would also be art. And even though I guess that every parent sees it as art, I'd rather call something like that... a spurt of creativity, at most.
Art is the kind of stuff you see in a classic museum. Huge pieces of art that took weeks of one person's concentration and energy.