Why is modern art so crap?

Answer 1

good call

Answer 2

As I see it, there is nothing wrong with modern art - people should have the freedom to explore the boundaries of art.

The problem lies with a certain segment of modern artists. Having studied it as part of my degree, I found works I thought were good and works that I thought were poor - it's personal taste. However, I also found an awful lot of very pretentious people, using big words to hide the fact that they had nothing original to say & looking down their noses at anything that the public in general might like, because it made them feel superior.

I fully support the idea that modern art should exist - unfortunately, a vocal group of modern artists believe that ONLY modern art has a right to exist. So, when people say their work is crap, they are basically getting their own prejudice thrown back at them.

Answer 3

perhaps the real question should be is why are so many people small minded about modern art. I for one think its great, there's a lot to be learnt from modern art and how artists progress their styles. Besides which asking such a question shows very little understanding of art. What exactly would you classify as modern art? The last 100 years, the last 50 the last 10. There is too much variety in any of these time scales for it to be clumped together as 'modern art'

Answer 4

It all depends what modern art you have been exposed to. If the only art you know is what you read about in the papers, who love to get hot under the collar about modern idiocy, then you might as well say that it is all tosh. The only stuff that gets publicity is the shallow contentious crud that the press likes to castigate and reinforce popular predudice about "Coxcomb's flinging a pot of paint in the face of the public" This sort of stuff has been going on for centuries. Cristopher Wren got it in the neck for his design of St Paul's Cathedral, nobody liked it when it was built. Even Michelangelo got stick for his statue of David. He dropped a favorite of the Pope for critisising it, but that is another matter.
But I digress. There is a lot of very good art around these days, (as there always has been) it is just that it is not publicised. The facile press loves to stir up self righteous indignation about rubbish art and have you believe it is all crud, but I can assure you that is not the case. Go out into a few galleries and exibitions around the country and I am sure you will see a lot you will like.

Answer 5

I never understood art, and it can be argued that I still don't. The first time I saw a Van Gogh though I was blown away. The point is that not representation of art can be considered and judged. You have to see the real thing for yourself. It also helps if you understand some of the underlying philosophies. Nothing exists in a vacuum, not ideas, and certainly not modern art.

Having said that, once you understand it, it still doesn't mean you have to like it!

Answer 6

Perhaps you are thinking of conceptual art? The finished product is not important in conceptual art; however, there are many different kinds of modern art. For instance, functional art, any well-designed product (the iPod had a place in the Museum of Modern Art for instance). Art is a reflection of a particular period in which the artists lived; so if you prefer to enjoy artists from the past, go ahead but it may do you good to know that there are those who appreciate the modern age of art even if you do not.

Answer 7

I like alot of the 'modern art'. However, as a few here have mentioned, if the 'artist' has taken the time and put alot of thought into what he/she has created using varying degrees of skill then, it is worth recognition. I may not like it but I understand the artists view.

What I'll never get to grips with is 'A White Square on a White Background' and 'Pile of Bricks' etc. No thought, no skill - just some eejit with too much time on their hands - and a few arty-farty friends in high-places.

Why do publicly funded galleries buy and exhibit such talentless crap?

Answer 8

Well, it isn't art, of course--any more than Bob Dylan's song lyrics are "poetry" or rock and roll is "music".

The illusory answer is that the plastic arts exhausted the limits of technique, and further advancement required creating new modalities (putatively more congenial to the post-modern angst).

The real answer is that modern "art" is commercial populism. Its practioneers and their agents become wealthy, the uninformed become aesthetes, and the post-modern deconstructionists and relativists advance their nihilist agenda.

Remember, diversity is our strength, anyone's values are as good as anyone else's values, and truth is relative.

Read a little Jaques Derrida or Michel Foucault if you don't think nihilism is the modern lethe.

Cheers.

Answer 9

I'm an artist of modern art-I create what I see from my dreams-surrealism
Some art can conceal many stories within the image; some people won't get past the first line, others will see the whole story and create their own from it.

The true beauty of art is the beholder will see what they 'want' to see in it

I am giving a link to some modern art, one image...
Do you see the story concealed within the picture?

Answer 10

Which part of modern art?

Answer 11

The artistic licence has been stretch too far by lazy people.

Although if the history of art has taught us anything, probably in a hundred years or so it will be extremely valuable (akin to abstract art).