Is modern art art?

Question

As a normal person I naturally find modern art rather a joke. The 'unmade bed', 'piles of bricks', even 'empty rooms with lights that go on and off' are shown as works of artt. Now I know that it is not easy to define art, and at the end of the day there is no good or bad art, good is what an individual likes and bad is what he doesn't like. But if, as it seems, anything is art, then everything is art, and so it becomes worthless, it's like saying a grain os sand is precious when there are countless millions of them. Phew! all rather profound that. Must go and lie down!

Answer 1

the Tracy Emin bed of course could have been made by anyone, but the point is as she put it ''no one else did, i did''.

If she can make money from it then why not after all i believe that art is about provoking reactions where it be good bad or indifferent, that's the whole point as long as you form an opinion.

Answer 2

First of all, that's not Modern Art. What you're thinking about is Contemporary Conceptual Art. Modern Art finished up in the 1950s or thereabouts, although many would disagree ...

Now with regard to Contemporary Conceptual Art, well, it's a bit of a laugh really, it certainly cracks me up when I see it, and I'm an artist myself. I mean, you have to admire the sheer neck of some of these people.

Recently I saw a brilliant exhibition in which the spectators were the subject matter - using quite advanced computer and audiovisual technology, two artists set up a show in which the viewers were 'drawn' or 'painted' onto a big white wall, and their movements captured, it was so very clever. There was also ordinary video in which viewers could see themselves walking around with people who had been in the room before, it was also quite good. I went back to see it three times, I liked it so much. And did the Birdy Song dance to see what the camera/ computer media would make of it. The results were just priceless.

This was in the Limerick City Gallery a few weeks back, if you're wondering.

Answer 3

The thing is, art is subjective like most other genres, and there's no reason why it can't be a joke. It depends on how you read the piece, or if you want an artist to be a philosopher, comedian or skilled craftsman.
And you can't call work by sculptors such as Ron Mueck and Anthony Gormley unskilled. Also there are lots of unheard of artists out there, not known sometimes because they are talented and don't cause enough controversy. For example,check out my mate's blog http://davemartist.typepad.com/artistonaquest/2006/07/the_inevitable_.html
There is good, bad and downright ugly artwork out there, but it mostly leads to social comment in one form or other, and will hopefully tell future generations a bit about how we do things just now, which is where the 'everything is art' comes in.
Also, strictly speaking, modern art isn't the art of today, but from a few decades back; we since then moved into post-modernism and now we are beyond that, but I have lost track of the different names of art eras and movements. I don't think it really matters how we categorise art, and I don't think you have to be arty or normal to know what you like and appreciate skill, talent or a clever idea. And you know what, a lot of artists do make their work as a bit of a joke, or at least have fun with their work, trying to shake up institutions a bit and get their ideas and points heard by not trying to be to traditional arty or anything really expect themselves, just exploring and exploiting their worlds.

Answer 4

You are confusing 'modern' art with 'contemporary' art. Modern art refers to art of Modernity. We are generally thought to be in the 'postmodern' age, therefore we describe art of this time - our time - as Contemporary.

In historical senses, it is too early to decide if what is being produced now will be seen as 'art'. The perimeters of the times change so rapidly and how those times are analysed changes also. It may be, in the future, that the death of art (as declared by Danto) could really have happened. Or it could be that there is a new age of art growing from the mass of new ideas and technology being used by so many that we are only now seeing a glimpse of.

What is absolutely certain is that contemporary art has provoked more discussion and debate in today's culture than ever before. Is that a bad thing?

Answer 5

The appreciation of any of the many forms of art is I think...just like beauty..it is in the eye of the beholder !! Look at a detailed work..say by the Dutch masters and note the light effects caught by the artist in landscapes and the shading on satin and velvet clothing etc;Then look at Modern art renderings using simple bold brushstrokes and vivid blocks of colour and I can see what many of these works are trying to say via the canvas!!There are so many offerings that are presented as art, but the halves of dead cows and piles of broken concrete blocks don't do anything for me I'm afraid.But having said that..there are many who see these works and find them artistic.. I am unfortunate that due to injury ..I have lost some of my sight and I now understand art more than at any other time of my life and will continue to do so ..till the lights go out..........

Answer 6

I asked the same question last week, you should see some of the pretentious answers I got. One person even said " the fact that you have even had to ask the question proves its art". What a complete pile of cr@p. I agree with you totally, these so called artists are nothing more than confidence tricksters, and whats sad is all the so called intellectuals are falling for it. Mind you if I could find someone daft enough to pay a million quid for a pile of bricks, I'm sure I could fake a pretentious attitude as well.

Answer 7

Well friend you do make alot of sense, your quiet ovservant at least you have a good value-judgment of your enviroment.

To be direct, art existed long before man realize that i was art. The word "ART" started as a label of anything higher than craft, thoughas time passed the general public started to accept craft as art. Later on people from the academe would argue to what standards should art fell, like wise primitive practicioners of this act did the same.

Well to be honest, art for me is anything that is man made and came about a cognitive process of arrangement. People most often times forget that ther are many forms of art.

To be specific lets start with the two most basic branches, FINE ARTS and APPLIED ARTS.

Fine Arts, are most basically concerns itself with thge experiment of aesthtics (beauty, what looks good, pleasing not pleasing, arrange, not arrange and many other)

Applied Arts is when the idea in the fine arts are applied to general living thus they are called "designs". The design of the chair you are sitting on, teh shirt you are wearing, shoes, the monitor the keyboard you are using the building you are living with.

This two branches co-exist and there is ambigious border among them, but aside from this we have the greatest brach, the mother branch. The WORLD OF ARTS, this is where music, dance or shall we say performace art, then we have liberal arts- the news papers, the writters the novelist not to forget we have the marshall arts, see art is art when man intended it be art, you are free not to label your act as art, but if one intended it to be art, then it is art.

Art came about when man said that it was art.

Answer 8

The kind of art you write about is installation art, when the artist uses the existing room or area to create their work. That way, the art transports you to a world where you can open your mind to a different way of thinking. Metaphors (like bricks) are often used.

This kind of work creates an atmosphere in which the artist can project his or her ideas.

Answer 9

Hope you've had a lie down and recovered!!!
Some of it can be a bit pretencions to say the least...Beauty is in the eye of the beholder...it's all down to personal taste, if I don't understand something, doesn't necessarily mean I don't like it. I won't read into a piece of art something I personally can't see. You can go to the Tate Modern and hear so much rubbish spouted about a red square painted on a white background....if I like to look at it then fair enough...but phewwwwwww.....I need a lie down now !!!!

Answer 10

I like classics more but i think that a lot of what is now classic was dismissed in its time and many have asked question similar to yours over centuries.
Future will tell us. Art reflects era it was created in and this is art of our time.
I do believe that there is good and bad art though - sometimes a painting is truly badly done and it means nothing - it is lower than kitch and a comic strip is beautifull and meaningful.

Answer 11

i do so totally agree with you. some "artists" can't draw to save their lives, and use other forms of "art" which can be rather beautiful, such as making an exquisite sculpture or something which really makes us think. Then along comes a computer worshipper who believe they can do ANYTHING on computers, even art, and they print off something they "sketched" with their mouse or some drawing programme, and call the computer's artwork, their artwork, and in so doing, claim a piece of fame for something which was really put together by a computer. its pretty much like any person painting by numbers, and saying its their work by virtue of them having changed one or two of the preset images.
I paint and would be extremely embarrassed to present a drawing which had been traced or fabricated by someone or something other than my own two hands, i think, an artist should be defined by that, when something is done by the hands of a person, or some body part (in case the person isnt able to use his/her hands for some or other reason).