Modern Art

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Renard

Guest
Abitrary said:
And thus, your cynicism now becomes part of the art.

I like that :sad:
 
If you look at a painting - like a Mark Rothko for example - the 'field' of colour seems to change (no - not as your eyelids close together either...)
Once upon a time, modern art (in its broadest, 'recognisable' sense) did more to adjust one's visual perceptions, rather than illustrate an ideology/a politic as an abstract.
Morris Louis, Frank Stella etc etc - powerful stuff...and the viewer takes from the pics. what they can.
Technical ability - no matter what the subject, always appeals to me - look at the way a button on a soldier's tunic is painted - totally abstract close up, but a perfect button resemblance when one stands back...

In short - Modern Art contains a lot of 'emperor's new clothes' type of stuff but, historically, the 'good work' always wins through - like it or not.

So complicated - wish I never started but I'm not going to rub it out now :sad:
 

Noodley

Guest
Aperitif said:
If you look at a painting - like a Mark Rothko for example - the 'field' of colour seems to change (no - not as your eyelids close together either...)
Once upon a time, modern art (in its broadest, 'recognisable' sense) did more to adjust one's visual perceptions, rather than illustrate an ideology/a politic as an abstract.
Morris Louis, Frank Stella etc etc - powerful stuff...and the viewer takes from the pics. what they can.
Technical ability - no matter what the subject, always appeals to me - look at the way a button on a soldier's tunic is painted - totally abstract close up, but a perfect button resemblance when one stands back...

In short - Modern Art contains a lot of 'emperor's new clothes' type of stuff but, historically, the 'good work' always wins through - like it or not.

So complicated - wish I never started but I'm not going to rub it out now :sad:

Oooh 'ark at 'im :tongue:
 

Dave5N

Über Member
AH. Modern Art.

I must confess I prefer design to visual art (music is different). But if you really want to know what it's about, go and see 'Guernica'.

A profoundly moving experience.
 

simonali

Guru
This was the biggest load of balls I ever remember seeing.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/arts/1701400.stm
 

Arch

Married to Night Train
Location
Salford, UK
Creamcrackered said:
90% of it probably is rollocks, but 10% hits the spot and moves things along. There were probably people wandering around in the 19th century saying "Impressionism, what's that all about?"

Absolutely, and before that every other new style of painting that came along.

I've tended to be a bit of a sceptic, but a couple of years ago I was as Tate Modern - it was when there was that piece made up of white plastic boxes, all piled into peaks and mountains in the turbine hall, and you could wander through. As I wandered, I realised that there people on the balconies looking down, and that all the folk wandering through were now part of the art work (As I supose they are with any of those huge pieces). I dunno if that was the intention, but it seemed quite interesting to me...

Generally I think, I tend to favour 'art' that I don't feel I could do myself easily - or that I'd have to practise to master - anything with drawing, or painting, or sculpture. I might struggle to appreciate Tracy Emin's unmade bed, because I feel I could do that any old time (although I always make my bed....). But then she had the idea and the chutzpah to call it art, which I never would... Is it that art is art if someone says it is?
 
OP
OP
M

Melvil

Guest
Ok, I must confess I have a bit of interest in hearing the answers to this as I do a bit of art myself, some of which might be termed 'modern' - (but how do I know, I still have no idea what it is!!!).

For the record, my main (classical and proto modern) dudes include Dali, Mondrian and the Futurist school.
 
Top Bottom