Ok, enough of the SI swimsuit issue, and such.

[Archae]

I have a cousin I visited yesterday, she had a "painting" on her wall, she paid $1500 for.

It wasn't this picture, but this one is similar.

Why do some "artists" think they can just pull some stunt, or throw paint on something and call it "art?"

Just look at that guy who hung curtains (of an ugly orange color) in a New York City park.

[unblock]

1. if you don't understand that bullsh*t can be art, then you'll never understand philosophy either.

[badtoworse]

14. Is that where the term bullshit artist came from?

[unblock]

15. ba dum pah!

[MineralMan]

2. And you could do it better, I'm sure.

Art is in the eye of the artist and the beholder. What you're saying, basically, is that if you don't like it or understand it, it's not art.

You'll beg my pardon if I don't accept your assessment, I'm sure.

[Archae]

8. I look at it this way...

Art takes creativity.

Any idiot can hang a bunch of shower curtains or smear paint on a canvas.

http://www.futurepig.com/fut068.html

[MineralMan]

10. See my post #5.

Paintings by Hans Hoffman, the painter of the much larger image you borrowed a fragment from, are worth a great deal of money. Some have sold for the mid 7 figures. Maybe some people are seeing something you're missing. You think?

[Archae]

12. It proves to me PT Barnum was right.

There's a sucker born every minute.

As to "seeing something," it's like something I'd see if I did some LSD.

[MineralMan]

13. I see...well, OK, then.

[Drahthaardogs]

96. I think P.T. Barnum was a genius

Koons is a con artist (although a rich one).



Three basketballs in an aquarium is NOT art. Neither are tinfoiled blow up easter bunnies.

[MineralMan]

97. Actually the three basketballs in the aquarium

is art. Have you seen it in person? You can see it as many times as you like, and it is never the same. The basketballs are seen out of their normal environment, and interacting with a different environment than is expected.

[Drahthaardogs]

102. No but I grew up on a ranch.

A real one, with like 1000 head of mother cows. When you have that many cows, you have lots of bulls. Over time, having lots of bulls makes one a bit of expert on bullshit. I know what it looks like, I know what it smells like, and I know what it is when I step in it.


Three basketballs in an aquarium is bullshit. No one sees "something" I don't. There is nothing there to see beyond than what exists. There is no deeper inner meaning that this poor hick is just too bucolic to understand. It is NOT art. It. Is. Bullshit.

However, I give Mr. Koons credit for separating foolish people from their money. I am of the opinion that there is too much "old" money in this country so good for him for jarring some of it loose.

[MineralMan]

105. Well, it seems that that particular piece of art has revealed

something, after all. Our reaction to art is part of the process, and you've stated your reaction clearly. I am better informed, now, thanks to that. I'll never see that piece in the same way again.

[Archae]

16. I forgot about the third picture I have on my wall.

Now *THIS* is good art!

[HappyMe]

17. There you go - personal taste.

I wouldn't hang that in my apartment.

[PoliticAverse]

35. Hey it's not like the cats are playing poker... n/t

[HappyMe]

39. That would at least be humorous.

I wouldn't put a puppies picture like that cat picture on the wall either. I don't care for smarmy Kincade-ish things.

[PoliticAverse]

43. If Kincade had done it flames would be coming out of their eyes... n/t

[HappyMe]

47. Hmm...that's still a no with me.

[Shivering Jemmy]

58. I wouldn't hang that from a gibbet.

[HappyMe]

59. Heh heh.

Gibbets everywhere would be offended.

[treestar]

86. I could do as well

If it looks too easy to do, it's hard to appreciate the talent.

[MineralMan]

88. Really? Then you should definitely do it.

Art is not merely technique. You and I both could put paint on canvas. But I couldn't do that painting. That came from the artist's imagination. I could do something not dissimilar, but I doubt very much that anyone would think it was wonderful. And I'm certain it wouldn't hang in the Chicago Institute of Art.

Think about it. There is a reason.

[Warren Stupidity]

90. People who say that have, in general, never tried to "do that".

[MineralMan]

94. Yes, which is why I tell them they should just do it.

Faced with a large canvas some tools and paint, most people would not have the vaguest idea what to do. It's easy to say, "I could paint that," but when put to the test, it turns out that they couldn't really.

[treestar]

108. Just dip the brush in the paint and start painting

It will not come out like an El Greco or a Matisse, but it can come out like the painting that is the subject of the thread.

[MineralMan]

111. Really? The painter of that painting

was using colors to create the illusion of three dimensions. If you were standing in front of the 5' x 6' painting, you would see that effect. In fact, when I saw it, the way the colors were used created the illusion of movement. Do you really think you could do that?

I think you do not know what you are talking about.

[treestar]

116. "Using colors to create the illusions of three dimensions"

And depict the horrors of modern society thereby. It's a statement on the existence of being. The expectations we have and the nothingness of the normative world.

If I had the time, I could BS just the same way.

[treestar]

107. IMO it's because I don't have the connections

in the art world. I could paint a bunch of squares on a canvas. But I could not paint anything like the ones by Van Gogh or Rembrandt. I know I couldn't manage to do that after a lifetime of study. But I can throw a bunch of paint at a canvas.

[MineralMan]

112. And you think that is all there is to Hoffman's

Gold wall painting? Really?

[treestar]

114. That's what it looks like

Are you pretending there is something more to it and pretending to be smarter because you "get it" and I don't? I call BS on that.

[HappyMe]

3. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Art, clothes, shoes, make up, furniture...... all matters of personal taste.

[Boom Sound 416]

4. ^^ nuff said

[MineralMan]

5. You posted a detail image of a painting.

It's "The Golden Wall," by Hans Hoffman. It's in the Chicago Institute of Art. Painted in 1961, it's worth way, way more than $1500. Here's the whole thing:



I don't know, but I think your posting of a tiny section of this large painting is a little off the mark. You may still not think it's art, but that's really beside the point. Apparently, lots of folks think it is art, and pretty damned good art, at that.

[el_bryanto]

7. I kind of like it. nt

[Warpy]

104. Looks like some jeans on a line during the nuclear holocaust

Yeah, it's kind of fun in a "finding animals in clouds" way.

[Art_from_Ark]

113. It looks to me like someone talking from a podium

but it hurts me eyes to look at it for very long.

[Archae]

9. I posted an image that looks similar to the one my cousin bought.

Even with the whole thing visible, I don't consider it to be "art."

It's just blotches of different color paint on a canvas.

I own two paintings myself.
First one is a woodland stream in autumn.
Second is Niagra Falls.

[MineralMan]

11. As you say. What you don't consider to be art

by that painter has sold for $Millions. You should buy what you like. Others may think Hans Hoffman paintings are worth far more than you think.

Art is in the eye of the artist and the beholder. Your beholding capabilities are limited, apparently.

[Warren Stupidity]

73. "blotches of different color paint on a canvas"

that is pretty much a description of any painting on canvas.

What is going on is that you don't understand what you are looking at, so to you, quite understandably, it is incomprehensible. Your education lacked instruction in art history. Rather than uninformed dismissal, perhaps you should ask yourself "why is this art", and "what do other people see here that I don't".

[Archae]

77. I had art history in high school, mid 1970's.

The "teacher" was known for being a sleep aid.

For the whole period he'd blather on and on, showing how "better" he was than us "uncultured farm kids."

He didn't like me, due to my habit of making snarky remarks about his favorite "art."

[Warren Stupidity]

78. right. So you learned nothing. A bad teacher will do that.

Sorry. Still - Hoffman is a great artist of the 20th century. You don't understand what he paints. Instead of dismissing it, get curious.

[Mosby]

31. I like it

I definitely would pay a hundred bucks for that, maybe more!

[ismnotwasm]

37. I saw a Matisse in a home I was visiting with a friend

And while I like Matisse, ( I go the the art museum if his art is on display if I can) I was incredibly disappointed in this one. I don't remember why, the colors or something. The home owner had a lot of art, most of it far less valuable I liked better.

Still, seeing the whole thing helps understand the attraction of the picture

[MineralMan]

41. Every artist has painted good and bad work, I think.

Walking through art museums is a favorite activity for me. Sometimes, I see things I don't quite get. When that happens, I stop and look some more. Generally I end up getting it.

OTOH, I don't like all art. I don't consider art I don't like not to be art, though. I just don't like some art. Still, if I look at it long enough and attempt to understand it, I often change my mind.

I'm fluid with art. My tastes change as I learn.

[ismnotwasm]

49. Well SAM (Seattle Art Museum) had a painted toilet on display

Complete with turds. I had a hard time with that one. 8 year old grandson thought it was great.

[MineralMan]

70. I used to have an interesting toilet in my

little bungalow in California. A good friend of mine was a potter, and had a very large kiln. He produced a lot of work. So, I asked him if he would do a commission for me. I purchased an unglazed toilet from a toilet manufacturer. That wasn't easy. They didn't want to sell me one. I talked them into it.

Then, I gave this unglazed porcelain toilet to my very talented potter friend. He glazed it, using his finely-honed skills, after the glaze pattern of a coffee mug I had purchased from him years before. Then, the next time he had a firing, in went the toilet along with all the high-fire stuff he was finishing. It came out great. The blue, copper-based glaze had reduced in some areas, providing a beautiful copper red, along with the light blue and white colors he had applied to the toilet. The bowl, tank, and lid, were all glazed with that theme, and the end result came out looking wonderful. I bought some Italian floor tiles glazed in similar colors, and he also made me a round sink with the same glazes. I completely redid the bathroom to incorporate all that stuff. It was spectacular, funky, and unique.

Now, someone else has that house and is using that bathroom. It was one of the selling features of the home.

[Warren Stupidity]

92. Duchamp: fountaine. 1917.

[dionysus]

38. i could paint that with my eyes closed.. but i couldn't come up with the *idea* to paint it.

that might be the distinction, the creative process put into it.

it's like when a guitar snob buddy says "the hit song _______ is so simple , it's only four chords, I could have come up with that"

to which I say; "but you didn't"

[MineralMan]

44. "but you didn't..."

And that's the key here. The artist did, and whether an individual likes what he or she did or not, the artist did it.

I watched a film of Jackson Pollack making a painting. I remember thinking that I could do what he did, using the same techniques he used. But...if I did, it would not be the same thing at all. It wasn't how he made paintings that makes them what they are. It's what he saw as he made his paintings that make the difference.

I'm not an artist. I can draw. I can paint. I used to design furniture projects for magazines for a living and build the furniture and write instructions so other people could reproduce the designs. But, I'm not a furniture designer, either. My designs were derivative, not original. I designed projects for people to build. I'm not an artist. I've known furniture designers who were artists. I wish I could do that, but I don't have that talent.

[dionysus]

120. you used to write for popular mechanics, didn't you?

seems up your alley

[MineralMan]

121. Yah, I wrote a few things for Popular Mechanics.

Also for Mechanix Illustrated and Family Handyman. Later I switched to writing about PCs and applications, following the purchase of a PC Clone so I could do a book on outdoor projects for Rodale Press. I liked the PC better than the power tools, I guess.

[dionysus]

122. from reading you on DU, Popular Mechanics is sooooo your style

[lumberjack_jeff]

117. It looks as if the painter forgot to remove the blue masking tape. n/t

If you can make $1500 with a 3" brush and a 12" roller, you're doing okay.

[BlueCheese]

118. Just wanted to say I'm impressed by your art knowledge.

Being able to identify the painting from a fragment is impressive. (To me, anyway; perhaps much easier for you.)

[MineralMan]

119. It's not that impressive. I identified the painting

from the URL of the image posted in the OP. From there, I did additional research on Google. I have seen the painting in person, though. But I wouldn't have recognized it from that fragment.

[Lost_Count]

6. Someone will buy it...

Marketing is powerful stuff...

[ismnotwasm]

18. Here; have a little "Street Art" it will make you feel better

Especially if you're a "Game of Thrones" fan (I couldn't stand the books after the 4th one I think, but I hear the TV show is fabulous)

[Archae]

19. I've seen more by that artist, he really is good.

Can even give you vertigo!

[ismnotwasm]

20. It's incredible

I almost get vertigo in2d-- I can't imagine walking past that

[marions ghost]

45. Wonderful!

I love ephemeral art that you just encounter...

[seabeyond]

21. the different colors, brush stroke, blend.... i like it. i want to get lots of that type of art.

and in order for it to flow, it is not just throwing whatever up. it matters.

[rrneck]

24. +1

It takes tremendous skill to make something difficult look easy.

[seabeyond]

25. yes. and my passion is colors....

i know, to stand back and say, yes, htis color needs, just must go right here. to make it work.

i cant do it. but i love it.

[ismnotwasm]

27. I have a friend who does Picasso- like paintings

I also have a friend who is an art teacher. His critique of the painting was that while the colors and brush strokes were fine, he didn't capture the "Cubist" part--- Picasso was meant to be a kind of 3D. I didn't care. The colors and subject are cool and I like looking at it

[seabeyond]

40. exactly. and what is going to do it for me, may not do it for another. so? lol. nt

[rrneck]

22. A newspaper reporter was interviewing Pablo Picasso once...

and asked him about cubism, insinuating that it was incomprehensible. Picasso replied (paraphrase), "I speak Spanish and French. If somebody handed me a book in English, I wouldn't be able to read it. That doesn't make the book wrong, it jut means I can't comprehend it." Art is a language that has to be learned. We are inundated by the visual equivalent of a McGuffy reader all day long. If you don't understand non objective art, you haven't studied it.

Most people who say, "I don't know art, but I know what I like" are really saying they like what they know.

[Archae]

26. Besides my views on what is art, and what is just a stunt...

I have to agree with you there.

True confession time, I like Thomas Kincade art.
I just do.

I look at the blotch of paint in my OP, and think, "What the hell?"

[ismnotwasm]

29. Well it's not like his paintings are exactly bad or anything-- he's very talented

Just comfortable and soothing. He doesn't challenge the eye, no. But not everything needs too

[marions ghost]

32. Kinkade

was a marketer, not a really good artist. And he knew it. So admire him for his talented hucksterism but not his art. It's just illustration for mugs and calendars.

[laundry_queen]

89. Reminds me of an English prof I had

He was a bit exasperated with other profs criticizing students for reading what they called 'crap' books. He said not everything HAD to be prize winning literature to make it worthwhile to read. Sometimes we needed a bit of poorly written escapism and there's nothing wrong with that. There's nothing wrong with 'bad' art if it pleases one to look at it and makes them feel good, you know?

[marions ghost]

93. True in general --but

Last edited Mon Feb 17, 2014, 07:08 PM - Edit history (2)

there IS something wrong with the way that Kinkade marketed his work as high art (worthy of collecting and appreciating in value) to people who have no idea what that is. The prices for his art churned out by his factory "apprentices" was often sold for more than what you'd pay for a good original work of art.

One example of his various marketing scams--he charged more if his "DNA" was in the paint (not sure what source he got his DNA from). People paid thousands for these crap paintings and if his apprentice "highlighted" a work according to your preference for a little light here or there, you attained preferred customer status. Kinkades, sold through his personal galleries, are only worth the canvas they're on. You will see them on Ebay or in thrift shops, not Sotheby's.

Sure escapism is fine--I have no problem with pulp fiction or kitty posters. But I do have a problem with someone becoming a multi-zillionaire fraudster. (But Americans seem to be OK with that). Kinkade cannot be compared with "escapist" fiction, which is relatively cheap. He was a scammer of the first order. He died relatively young of severe alcoholism/valium. All his money did not bring him happiness, and his heirs are fighting over the Empire. Most of his latter stuff was made in China.

I don't see this as the same as reading a junk novel or buying a piece of cheap art. This was trash marketed at top dollar to gullible consumers who didn't do any research and thought they were getting a piece of valuable art. It was fraud. Swampland in Florida, a Bridge in New Joisey, etc etc

[rrneck]

36. 'Sokay. I don't like sushi.

Anybody asks me to a Japanese restaurant, I tell them, "I don't eat bait." And when it comes to music I don't have a clue. If it sounds good I listen to it. Right Said Fred's I'm Too Sexy for My Shirt makes me laugh every time.

I'm not a culture snob. And modernism was a pretty sterile genre. But I would have to admit that Kincaid's work makes me throw up in my mouth a little.

[marions ghost]

48. Maybe because

it's like eating three Krispy Kremes in a row?

[rrneck]

56. Sorta. I don't like people telling me what I want to hear.

Kincaid's stuff is designed to be comforting and when it comes to visual art comfort ain't what I'm looking for. I certainly can't diss others for wanting a bit of relaxation on the wall. Shit, sometimes I can't face my own work before coffee.

Your analogy is kinda funny. I'm out of practice now, but back in the day I could, and regularly did, eat KK's by the dozen. I'd eat rocks if they had sugar on them.

[marions ghost]

68. Speaking of visual art that is "designed to be comforting"...

--are you familiar with the art of our ex-pResident?

http://www.thewire.com/politics/2013/03/maybe-george-w-bush-dog-his-dog-paintings/63407/

[rrneck]

71. I've always tried to separate

the artist from the work. But in the case of W, it ain't possible. Everything that guy touched turned to shit. Anybody else painted it I could probably find something nice to say. W could fuck up a soup sandwich.

[marions ghost]

76. I feel the same--

I like some "naive" art (or folk art, or whatever you want to call it)--the most general term is probably "self-taught." Actually I like a lot of it--have collected some thrift shop art.

But like you say--have a slight problemo with "The Artist" himself in this case...he gives puppy art a bad name...

[treestar]

87. What's the point if only a few people can understand it?

A language I can learn. All languages have a certain order.

A painting, if it does not depict something, is meaningless to all but the small cabal of initiated.

Reading a TS Eliot poem can be like that - if I had an extensive education in the classics I might marvel at the brilliance but who has time today?

[rrneck]

91. The answer to that question

would hold true for any academic discipline. In the case of the visual arts, visual literacy would help solve all kinds of problems.

One of the primary ways we perceive the world is through our eyes. Governments and corporations know this. Probably 90% of the images you see every day are produced by a corporation. Understanding that visual language is just as important as understanding a government policy.

If people were more visually literate the SI swimsuit issue wouldn't be nearly as effective.

Modern art is very sterile. That's because the form is the content. It's a study in the nuts and bolts of images. Understanding modern art can teach you to deconstruct any visual image.

[ismnotwasm]

23. Here's a French political one that is just creepy

(I love street art, i love any art, and I see your point about the painting; we can call it art, but we don't have to call it good art)

[marions ghost]

28. I happened to see The Gates

on a frigid day in February. That saffron color was uplifting. The experience exhilarating. But I understand how some people prefer Nascar.

[Archae]

30. "Saffron" = "Ugly orange?"

They still look like shower curtains.

[marions ghost]

42. So? Is that bad?

Not everything humans create has to have a practical component. A lot of art doesn't. It's all about the experience. Whatever it evokes for you. If it evokes shower curtains and other negative things, OK.

I thought of ship sails, Tibetan shrines with prayer flags flapping, labyrinths, and the paths we all walk through life. The weather being very cold made the color inviting. City dwellers probably like it better than others because it changed their usual view of their controlled environment.

Because you don't like it, should it not exist? I see far uglier things than The Gates every single day of the week.

[Kali]

55. oooh that is cool

I love stuff like that. (though I have no clue about art in general) I love big out door things. The contrast between the "natural" or urban outdoors and the flamboyant creativity of whoever creates those kinds of installments. especially if there is COLOR.

[marions ghost]

63. You dont have to know a lot about art

to see and feel and use your imagination.

Sometimes people get too involved in trying to define "What is art?" (And limiting it to whatever they happen to like). It gets in the way of experiencing. These days, there's something for everybody. No need to like all art. I certainly don't, and I have formally studied the subject.

Modern Art has been around for 150 years or so now. Kind of old fashioned to say only very "realistic" art is what art is.

In art, there's no right or wrong, only preference. There is an audience for all types of art.

[HappyMe]

57. That looks really cool.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

103. i agree

[marions ghost]

110. !

[Vashta Nerada]

33. People said the same thing about Van Gogh.

They laughed and made fun of him and told him what he was doing wasn't art. He suffered from major depression because of it.

Now what do we think of his art? (Hint: that's a rhetorical question)

[PoliticAverse]

34. At least there's some paint on that canvas...

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/art/news/blank-canvas-london-gallery-unveils-invisible-art-exhibition-7767057.html

[ismnotwasm]

46. Keeping up on my street art theme here's Tupac as David

“I ain’t a killer, but don’t push me” KAI pays tribute to Tupac. (photo © Jaime Rojo)


The original



The original oil painting The Triumph of David 2 by Matteo Rosselli (Italian, 1578-1650). Oil on canvas. (Creative Commons copyright)

The website has great street art images on it.

http://www.brooklynstreetart.com/theblog/2014/02/16/images-week-02-16-14/#.UwJLWn-9KK1

[Archae]

50. Is it art?

[Shankapotomus]

51. This looks like 2 year old painted it

But it wasn't. You think it's not art?

[Archae]

54. Looks like someone needs to be medicated.

[Shankapotomus]

60. You don't see

the cultural and political commentary in it?

More here: http://mondoexpressionism.blogspot.com/

[Archae]

52. Is this art?

(Throws in swimsuit for the SI swimsuit issue fans too)

[Vox Moi]

53. I like the Vonnegut quote:

Modern art is a conspiracy by rich people to make poor people feel stupid.

But I don't buy it. First, 'Art' is a terribly difficult to define.
Modern art can be a bit like DU Posts. Some are infuriating and some are obscure and some appear to have no value at all.
All are learning experiences. If you don't understand it, that does not mean there is nothing to learn.
In fact, it is the incomprehensible that provides the most opportunity to discover something new.

That being said, I was at the Guggenheim once and there was a canvas on the wall. It was painted yellow. Just yellow.
It was entitled 'Yellow Square'.
Next to it was a small canvas, painted yellow.
It was entitled "Study for Yellow Square."

I felt ripped off at first. This is not art, it's a joke. I recalled the Vonnegut quote above.
It was a joke. What was my problem?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

61. Yeah. Let's stick to Real Art

[HappyMe]

100. Now I haz a sad.

Now I needz some vodka.

Seriously though, I might send out a Christmas card like the second one. Other than that.....

[grasswire]

62. one of the best experiences of my life...

....was taking a 7-year-old boy through the modern art gallery at the National Gallery.

Now, this was a boy who was a natural-born artist himself. From the day he could hold a pencil, he was a meticulous illustrator, and inventive in other media as well.

To explain dada and cubism and pointillism and all the other genre and see it through his eyes was very, very rewarding.

When we got to the Jackson Pollock. Oh my.

The Rothko didn't impress him.

Personally, I love Kandinsky at this time in my life.

[grasswire]

64. Jackson Pollock at the National Gallery

[grasswire]

66. Mark Rothko at the National Gallery

http://www.nga.gov/cgi-bin/pimage?66334+0+0

[Warren Stupidity]

95. Most people find Rothko difficult.

You have to actually meditate on a Rothko to appreciate it. Take ten minutes to contemplate one of his paintings, it might change the way you look at the world. It is an art form that, for most, is the visual equivalent of TLDR.

[Heidi]

65. If the artist calls it art, and your cousin (who paid for it) considers it art,

who are you to say it's not art? What's it hurting you if the artist calls it art?

[Archae]

67. Because it's cynical exploitation.

Throw cans of paint into a jet backwash, and call it "art."
And then sell it for tons of money.

Meanwhile good illustrators and artists are ignored.
Or they end up selling their pictures that take talent to create, for a pittance.

Who sells more, Justin Bieber or Tangerine Dream?
What sells more, The Foundation Trilogy by Asimov, or 50 Shades Of Grey?

[Heidi]

69. You know, I bet your cousin can look out for him/herself

without your condescending implication that s/he is being exploited.

There are probably more than a few classically trained musicians who might think Tangerine Dream is crap, but as artists they probably would not imply that you're being exploited for enjoying Tangerine Dream's music.

See how that works?

[marions ghost]

72. You have a point there

in that what sells best is NO indicator of quality when it comes to art, music, and writing.

50 Shades of Grey I agree was one of the worst written, stupidest books ever to make somebody rich.

But your analogy with abstract art is wrong--in the general public, the market for Abstraction is far less than the market for Realism.

This is how I see it:
50 Shades = Thomas Kinkade art = over-hyped crap

Also, much abstract art (not all of it) is considered good art--whereas 50 Shades is not considered good writing.

[Archae]

74. There is a big difference...

Kinkade art is pleasant to look at, at least.

50 Shades Of Grey was just cutting and pasting the most disturbing BDSM porn literature, and throwing some soap-opera story in.

[marions ghost]

82. Difference in subject

but not in quality.

Not sure which I think is most disturbing--Kinkade's sugary fantasies or Soap Porn.

Actually what I think --is that the people who live in Kinkade's little cutesy cottages are reading "50 Shades" under the covers with a flashlight.

[HereSince1628]

101. I recommed you should watch the video "Cutie and The Boxer"

I think that could provide an interesting look into art and artists in which you can explore your position.

[Warren Stupidity]

75. Here ya go:

[rrneck]

79. That one's in my bathroom. ntt

[Warren Stupidity]

80. honestly I like that too, but my tastes are very eclectic.

[rrneck]

84. Me too.

From Stuart Davis to John Singer Sargent to Banksy and more. But Vito Acconci was a little bent. Performance artists are so out there.

[Puzzledtraveller]

81. Can we create a post asking "Do you think you are attractive?"

I really would like to see peoples responses. I am curious as to how their own perception of themselves shapes their attitudes towards the recent topic we have been arguing about here.

[Blue_In_AK]

83. Here's our one piece of art

(other than the Native carvings)



It's kind of abstract, but I like it.

[ismnotwasm]

85. Nice!

[sakabatou]

98. That's the similar painting/mural on her wall?

O.o

This picture is what inspired me to on one of my walls (which is now covered over, sadly):

[Warren DeMontague]

99. Ahhhh! You obviously don't understand art.

For instance, getting someone to pay 50 grand for a blank canvas?

That is art.

[lumberjack_jeff]

115. It's also a craft.

Did I say "craft"? I mean graft.

[LanternWaste]

106. I'd imagine for approximately the same reason many under-educated or sub-literate critics

"Why do some "artists" think they can just pull some stunt, or throw paint on something and call it "art...?"

I'd imagine for approximately the same reason many under-educated or sub-literate critics believe they can post art and call it something else.

[edbermac]

109. Yeah enough of the SI issue and you go posting pictures of porn!

Look at that filthy painting, it'd make Larry Flynt blush.

[PoliticAverse]

123. Cleaner Mistakes $14K Worth of Art for Trash, Tosses It

Whoops: A cleaner at an art exhibition in Italy threw away some pieces of cardboard, cookies, and newspaper that were strewn on the floor ... not realizing they were actually part of artist Sala Murat's display. She assumed the debris was trash left behind while the display was being set up; security noticed pieces of the work were missing when the exhibit opened yesterday, but by then it had already been given to trash collectors, the BBC reports, citing local media. A rep from the cleaning firm says insurance will cover the art's value, estimated to be nearly $14,000.

http://www.newser.com/story/182650/cleaner-mistakes-14k-worth-of-art-for-trash-tosses-it.html