English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Is it all its supposed to be, or simply stuff we could all do...compared to the works of the rennaissance of impressionist masters

2006-07-22 01:36:02 · 20 answers · asked by Richelou 2 in Arts & Humanities Other - Arts & Humanities

20 answers

There is so much going on today with contemporary art. The blurring of the lines between art and fashion and entertainment and activism has created a very dynamic atmosphere. Significant battles are being fought for viewers attention and identity. Larger corporate media does a great job at convincing people that art is something like a painting on a wall, when really art is about attracting a viewers attention and placing their thoughts in a context. If we look at everything as art , we begin to think more critically and ask more questions about the experiences we are having. Post-modern art dealt with this in ways that people were/are uncomfortable with, largly, in my opinion because the element of "craft" was often sacraficed for content. Where the Surrealists crafted images with great care in order to get viewers to question reality other artists such as Duchamp used found objects to ask questions. If you think that contemporary art is crap, you're not looking. It's not always about "getting it" it's about the interaction between you and the piece, a dialoge where hopefully you can discover something about yourself and the world around you.

Some cool work going on right now....(forgive the bias toward painters)

Walton Ford
Mark Tansey
Phillip Ross
Kara Walker
Barry McGee
Phyllis Shafer
Andy Goldsworthy
Mark Ryden

anyway this is just a tiny tiny list of people doing awesome things and dealing with a number of different issues. Try to enjoy it, because it's important. Peace

2006-07-22 03:04:21 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 5 0

To be pedantic, modern art is a very encompassing term. Anything ''modern' in the art world generally refers to work produced between the late 19th century right up to the 1970's. Anything after that is known as contemporary art. Jackson Pollock, Claude Monet and David Hockney are all considered to be 'modern artists' to illustrate the diversity we're talking about here. But to answer your question, I love most modern art. It pushes the bounderies, if it's any good.

2006-07-22 05:26:46 · answer #2 · answered by cutewildstyle 1 · 0 0

I think it has lost it's purpose largely because there is so little to be controversial about now. The Dadaists onwards were shouting out about the repressed closed world that their society lived in, our appreciation of the broad spectrum of what can be done, and that anything goes in todays society makes modern art seem dated, insofar as it needs to reinvent itself; find a new vocation if you will. It's very passe.
The skill in passing off 'modern art' lies in the reasoning behind the piece- not the actual aesthetic of the work itself...
I think it's - for the most part- junk these days...

2006-07-22 01:46:16 · answer #3 · answered by Vertigogo... 2 · 0 0

Modern art is also about storytelling. The artist told a story, expressed it in 2D,3D, color, texture,shape,contrast, etc. You as the viewer can now make up your own story by looking at it and also start asking questions.
Why a white cube and not a green one? what is inside the white cube,where did I see a white cube, the TV, computer? maybe the white cube represent the "space" (inside or beyond) the computer - cyberspace. What is it made of, why didn't the artist suspend it from the roof, why is in on the floor, why is it shiny and not textured etc.etc.If you start to do this modern art will become exciting to you!

2006-07-22 02:24:22 · answer #4 · answered by Sangoma 1 · 0 0

art is nothing else than expression. If a painter draws a picture, he expresses his feelings or his ambitions.

objective, there isn't a difference between e.g. the mona lisa and a painting with 3 red dots on a blue background on it, as long as it comes from heart and it shows some kind of emotion.

That's why everybody can be an artist, no matter if he/she is "good" in what he does.

2006-07-22 01:45:18 · answer #5 · answered by catcher_o_rye 1 · 0 0

SOME modern art is cool. (notice the stress on SOME) But most is just totally pointless and something that anyone with half a mind could do. Whereas impressionism actually takes talent.

2006-07-22 01:43:16 · answer #6 · answered by PeacefulThunder 2 · 0 0

Some is good some is awful. generally I have no idea why anyone would bother putting a shark in a bath of formaldyhide.

If it provokes a reaction it's doing it's job but I have no respect for cheap stuff like Tracey Emin. Personal opinion Trace but you're rubbish.

2006-07-22 01:48:25 · answer #7 · answered by INFOPOTAMUS 3 · 0 0

Personally. If I like it, I like it.

I really enjoy some modern art, especially some abstract work. While I must admit some of it can be truly bazaar. Art is a bout asthetics and feelings, how it looks and makes you feel.

2006-07-22 01:48:06 · answer #8 · answered by david w 1 · 0 0

The same as a I think of convetional art. Some I like, some I hate, some I'm indifferent to, some is thought provoking, and some is banal

2006-07-22 01:44:13 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

its supposed to be the artists own interpretation on the stuff nowdays. i mean i went to the guggenheim museum and i saw a plain white cube that was "art". I think modern art is sort of weird since you can call a plain white cube art.

2006-07-22 01:42:27 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers