Modern Art woo

[Pappa]

But there's no danger, no risk. What's the Darwinian appeal?

As a means of signaling to potential mates and other members of our species what our fitness is (in any of it's many ways). It could be purely economic fitness, but lots of other things can be signaled too, such as our empathy or any other trait we wish to display.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

But there's no danger, no risk. What's the Darwinian appeal?

As a means of signaling to potential mates and other members of our species what our fitness is (in any of it's many ways). It could be purely economic fitness, but lots of other things can be signaled too, such as our empathy or any other trait we wish to display.

Would the obviously easily led factor outweigh the financial attractiveness factor or not?

[Trolldor]

But it doesn't display anything. There's no empathy, no economic fitness, no physical danger, no social danger. There is nothing in there to demonstrate a 'darwininan superiority' to others.

[Pappa]

But there's no danger, no risk. What's the Darwinian appeal?

As a means of signaling to potential mates and other members of our species what our fitness is (in any of it's many ways). It could be purely economic fitness, but lots of other things can be signaled too, such as our empathy or any other trait we wish to display.

Would the obviously easily led factor outweigh the financial attractiveness factor or not?

Not to the people who the signaling is directed at.

[Drewish]

[AshtonBlack]

More Markoe:

I had an artist mate of mine do a pic that I hang on my wall based on this one:

He used coral instead of stone and I like the end product:

http://www.bigsurgallery.net/bigsurarti ... G_6691.jpg[/imgc]


To me it could be a sat photo, or a rock pool with a wave about to crash into it. I see many different things in her work. It is abstract, it's modern and it's not shit.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

[floppit]

Well this thread has been a pleasant morning surprise! The pleasant bit being seeing Chuck Close's work and Markoe's.

Not everyone is going to like the same thing but if we managed (albeit impossible) to prevent 'modern art' we'd kill art itself because it was never supposed to fit it any one person's box - the whole bloody point is choice and expression. There's plenty of it I can't stand, some that I love but my opinions aren't exactly a definition of good art, the fact that there's choice enough around to be able to choose IS what keeps art alive, discussed, worked at, ranted at, loved, treasured and binned.

As for Chuck being paralysed, just personally that does add something to it for me, although I went and googled his images so didn't know till I'd already decided I liked it. I see people day in day out and being able to see what I respect and what I don't in how they go about life adds something to my own life. It might be cheesey to say someone is an inspiration but being inspired by people isn't.

[Trolldor]

More Markoe:

I had an artist mate of mine do a pic that I hang on my wall based on this one:

He used coral instead of stone and I like the end product:

http://www.bigsurgallery.net/bigsurarti ... G_6691.jpg[/imgc]


To me it could be a sat photo, or a rock pool with a wave about to crash into it. I see many different things in her work. It is abstract, it's modern and it's not shit.

Except I've seen school kids do remarkably similar things with blue paint, sand and rocks. Why is hers 'skilled' and theirs not?

[floppit]

Except I've seen school kids do remarkably similar things with blue paint, sand and rocks. Why is hers 'skilled' and theirs not?

Really? Can't wait till my nipper gets older then, her's still look like the puddy tats!

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Except I've seen school kids do remarkably similar things with blue paint, sand and rocks. Why is hers 'skilled' and theirs not?

Really? Can't wait till my nipper gets older then, her's still look like the puddy tats!

Hence the relationship to "modern" art.

[Rum]

For my sins I went to Art College before I saw sense and did something useful a bit later..but I did at least get some of the theory so I am going to wade in here and upset some of the nay-sayers.

Firstly the 'market' has always been part of what defines art. If we look at the post ancient world originally the only people who would pay for paintings was the church of course. Talented monks did the first paintings, which were all of religious topics and then individuals were able to sell direct to powerful local clergy. They knew exactly what they wanted and that drove the development of style and subject. Eventually rich nobility and then tradespeople commissioned paintings, usually of themselves, family or property. The artists who did well were those who gave the rich what they wanted - accurate or sometimes flattering pictures of them and theirs.

It was not until the mid to late 19th Century (discounting Turner perhaps who painted during the 18th and early 19th) that the notion of anything abstract came into the whole idea of art. When people started painting the nobility in the Renaissance there was a big hoohah in some quarters, just as there was when the French Impressionists decided that they wanted to represent more than what was apparent to the naked eye. This happened at a time when ideas to do with existentialism, psychology and the explosion of thought in France at that time were happening and were part of that context. Even so the 'market' was not ready - Van Gough could not sell his paintings. Many of them struggled and it was not until the 1920s and onwards that people started to find this stuff, much of which I personally regard as beautiful, of 'value' and some of it is now literally priceless.

Art is not somethign one can pin down and that is a good thing. A child can paint something that looks like somethign painted by a 'professional' , for sure, but that misses the whole point of context - the market, the intention and the perception.

I have a personal dislike of the London school of the 80s because I think it was an artificial market and about a gang of inward looking chancers who were all fucking each other and out to fuck 'the market', which they did. On the other hand one might admire that as part of their skill and talent.

You can say 'modern art is crap' quite freely - it is a free forum after all. But it is wrong to be overly simplistic about it.

[Drewish]

Thanks, I've been having trouble beating Castlevania: Symphony of the Night. That map should come in handy.

[Trolldor]

Thanks, I've been having trouble beating Castlevania: Symphony of the Night. That map should come in handy.

Oh shi---

[Rum]

Barbarians! Read and admire!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Klee