The (Absolute) State of Literature and the Arts in General

[Anonymous No.18616759]

How do you explain the state of literature and art today? What do you attribute the decline to? If you don't perceive a decline, what do you take to be a truly great contemporary work (regardless of the medium) of art?

I just finished Krasznahorkai's The Melancholy of Resistance. It struck me in a way that very few novels of the past fifty years or so have managed, and reminded me of Faulkner is more than a few ways. Interestingly, Krasznahorkai has an interview which may indirectly refer to the present crisis (reduction to money-accumulation potentially notwithstanding):
>Returning to Sátántango more than 30 years after he first began working on it, Krasznahorkai is sad to see that "… this novel can work also today without big changes, because the essence hasn't changed – the world and the social system and human life basically haven't changed …" According to Krasznahorkai, the deepest loss is the loss of a culture of poverty – the ability to "sing wonderful songs when we are poor". Now, he says, "… we only have people who don't have money … everybody wants to be rich, everybody has only one dream, but people, do we really have one dream – I ask – is this the only aim in this shit, to have much more money?"

[Anonymous No.18616810]

>>18616759
>posts Fountain, an over one hundred year old work
>m-muh decline!!! muh state of the arts today!!!

i hate zoomer reactionary artlets like you cannot imagine

[Anonymous No.18616811]

>>18616759
thanks. I'm going to read this.

[Anonymous No.18616848]

>>18616810
The domain of art is not uniform in its themes; currents wax and wane and become dominant. There is no instantaneous change in art in much the same way that there is no instantaneous change in velocity that does not include every intermediate velocity.

Answer the questions or eat shit faggot

[Anonymous No.18616879]

>>18616810
You're right. Art was always terrible. Horrid copy of nature which is itself a shoddy knock off of the forms.

[Anonymous No.18616889]

>>18616759
>what do you take to be a truly great contemporary work (regardless of the medium) of art?
the Burj Khalifa

[Anonymous No.18616893]

k retard

>>18616879
unironically based

[Anonymous No.18616902]

>>18616810
>he thinks anyone pointing out the lack of great contemporary artists is advocating for a return to "trad" art
>>>/twitter/
Go back berniecel

[Anonymous No.18616904]

>>18616759
>i hate money
>i hate people not giving a shit about the arts
>meanwhile no major world wars since the 40s and general lifespan of a common man has improved beyond belief
FUCK OFF
Krasnza sounds like an old grumpy man whose books people don't read.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.18616909]

>>18616893
>muh vulgar graffiti

[Anonymous No.18616917]

>>18616909
Post tits.

[Anonymous No.18616926]

>>18616759
>what do you take to be a truly great contemporary work (regardless of the medium) of art?

[Anonymous No.18616942]

>>18616759

[Anonymous No.18616981]

>>18616759
>le urinal
Only faggot plebbitors hate that piece. That piece is proto-4chan shitposting.

[Anonymous No.18616997]

>>18616981
this, Duchamp was the greatest troll of the twentieth century.

[Anonymous No.18617011]

>>18616759
Literature has been obsolete for decades. Everyone who would have written great literature is applying their talent to new mediums instead, leaving lit with only the trash that couldn't make it anywhere else.

[Anonymous No.18617064]

>>18616759
Capitalism can't produce anything new as it is no longer a progressive force in the world.

[Anonymous No.18617074]

>complains about the state of literature
>cites a wonderful currently active author

[Anonymous No.18617082]

>>18616904
muhterialism

[Anonymous No.18617093]

>>18617011
No, that's not true. There will always be great literature. There is nothing about TV or film as mediums to make them inherently superior to literature. Yes, they are much more entertaining, as in they require much less work to be absorbing. They incorporate more mediums into themselves as well, the visual, the musical, and textual. It's all null. Books are the perfect medium for active learning. The TV encourages passivity. It never stops. 2 hours and no time to think. There is always new information being thrown at you. With a book, there is always time to stop and think.
So anyone who wants to create a work of art which can be eternal, they will make it in prose.

[Anonymous No.18617116]

>>18617074
Hungary is only nominally a Western nation. It's a totalitarian nation that for many hasn't significantly advanced economically from the Austro Hungarian period

[Anonymous No.18617134]

>>18617116
isn't Hungary fascist? i heard they kill gays over there

[Anonymous No.18617150]

>>18617134
basado
and no, hungry is a sensation

[Anonymous No.18617177]

>>18616926
based Chagall-poster
>>18616981
correct and shitposting-as-a-form-of-art-pilled
>>18617116
Hungary is part of Eastern Europe and influenced by all surrounding nations.

[Anonymous No.18617196]

>>18616909

[Anonymous No.18617209]

>>18616759
>yet another midwit thread lamenting the supposed decline of muh art
surely you neo-nazis at least appreciate your boy Beuys, no...?

or perhaps a Sterling Ruby is more your speed. key

[Anonymous No.18617288]

>>18617209
>decline of art is a neo nazi viewpoint
Sounds more like nazis live rent free in your head

[Anonymous No.18617301]

>>18617177
Magyars are notoriously violently resistant to outside influence.

>>18617209
Give me some contemporary masterpieces

[Anonymous No.18617316]

>>18617301
>Give me some contemporary masterpieces
Not that anon but pic related is from a photobook called A Shimmer of Possibility by an English photographer Paul Graham

[Anonymous No.18617318]

>>18617301
>Give me some contemporary masterpieces
Not the dude you're talking to but read Blood Meridian and Mason & Dixon and 2666. Come back after you've finished those. We'll talk again.

I know Bolano is dead but he was too young and would've been in his prime right now.

[Anonymous No.18617320]

>>18617301
Also read some Sebald.
Thank me later. His case is the same as Boalno's.

[Anonymous No.18617325]

>>18617318
>>18617320
All of these book were released 17 to 25 years ago.

[Anonymous No.18617327]

>>18617301
>Magyars are notoriously violently resistant to outside influence.
that is also true on another level.

[Anonymous No.18617341]

>>18617325
it takes time for works to mature into recognizable classics, in 20 years people will be saying there hasn't been any good literature in roughly 20 years

[Anonymous No.18617343]

>>18616759
There's no more "literate class" that would traditionally enable greater works of art to be produced. In the past you would have rich assholes who would pay top dollar to watch a new opera or look at a new Romantic painting. In modern times the richest and most educated and the poorest and dumbest all go home to watch the same mediocre Netflix show.

The causes of this equalizing of cultural intelligence are probably multifold, be it the disdain for the upperclass instilled in the American/French/Russian revolutions or the equalizing effects of modern technological forms. I don't really know.

[Anonymous No.18617373]

>>18617341
All of those writer have already published great books.
WG had Rings of Satrun, he was in his 40s
Pyn had Rainbow
Balan had Detectives
Mc had Suttree

Can you point me towards some young author right now same calibre

[Anonymous No.18617402]

>>18617288
the idea of degenerate art is a core nazi idea though. anon isn't reaching. you are just a faggot who doesn't know art history

[Anonymous No.18617405]

>>18617373
>Can you point me towards some young author right now same calibre
Me, just wait 5 years, you will see soon that I am the next Dante

[Anonymous No.18617420]

>>18617402
Hitler was a vegetarian too, so I guess that's out

[Anonymous No.18617422]

>>18617343
>There's no more "literate class" that would traditionally enable greater works of art to be produced. In the past you would have rich assholes who would pay top dollar to watch a new opera or look at a new Romantic painting. In modern times the richest and most educated and the poorest and dumbest all go home to watch the same mediocre Netflix show.
Literally the only reason. Tfw no more rich aristocratic art patrons to finance art magazines and art shows and no, like, Tsar Nicholas II + imperial court faggots to finance stuff like Russian opera and ballet representations in Paris... Feel like pure shit just want her back...

[Anonymous No.18617425]

>>18617318
I've read Blood Meridian and The Crying of Lot 49 but not Mason & Dixon. Blood Meridian is good, even great, but it's profundity is hampered by what I see as heavy-handedness, most evident in comparison to his most obvious influence, Faulkner: in my reading the coda of the novel is wholly extraneous for example. Faulkner at his best never made that mistake. The Pynchon was a good read, and undoubtedly a solid stage by which Pynchon struggled against the predominant style (to harken to Adorno's aesthetics), but all too easily the struggle turns into parody which in the last analysis does not go beyond mere style, unless to expound on a point similar to the OPs, and only in a roundabout way. I thought The Tunnel was a much more agile exemplar of this, and in general is a much more profound work.

[Anonymous No.18617427]

>>18617402
Very good, now if we criticize the direction of art as a whole we are neo nazis. The nazis have an exclusive claim on the criticism of art. Adorno must have been a nazi. Very good. Fucking idiot.

[Anonymous No.18617434]

>>18616759
Funny ot hear that from Krasznahorkai, considering that he's arguably a frankenstein monstrosity of post-WW2 euro literature.

[Anonymous No.18617446]

>>18617422
Not quite accurate: the top-level bourgeoisie and modern aristocracy of our times, as well as multimillion-dollar cultural institutions, pour tons of money into supporting a small handful of artists. However, this is mostly done for three main reasons:
a) to invest in the speculative asset of artworks, presuming their value will increase in time, ie art as shitcoin;
b) to promote globohomo/neoliberal cultural values by propping up mediocre artists of color etc. to fill 'representation quotas';
c) to flaunt wealth and gatekeep what is considered tasteful.

Nonetheless, good art is still being made and the discursive questions of western art history are still being relentlessly pursued by a small handful of artists, many of whom are far under the radar of the above mentioned collectors and institutions. I'm curious to know which works will be remembered 100, 200, 500 years from now, and which will fade into the dustbin of art history.

>t. NYC artist.

[Anonymous No.18617454]

the donating of art is a tax deduction. the value of art being speculative, means any old 'art evaluator' can say any peice of shit that was bought for 100 thousand dollars is now worth 40 million dollars after being stored in a warehouse for 10 years.

[Anonymous No.18617459]

Last really cool piece I remember seeing was a Richard Mosse installation showing the Congo war in infrared film from multiple perspectives at once. There's still plenty of cool stuff out there.

[Anonymous No.18617466]

>>18617402
Retard
The most popular critic of art today was Mark Fisher who was a communist. Don't you know about Blindpill? Leftists attacked the very roots of neolib cultural bullshite and heavily critiqued the normative assumptions of capitalist society. The only people who see nothing wrong with current state of the world are centrist Steven Pinkers type shills. Both far leftists and far rightists shit on current state of things.

[Anonymous No.18617469]

>>18617459
>Richard Mosse
I got drunk with that Mick bastard before Covid. The fellow sure likes to pop a cork. Damned good photographer though.

[Anonymous No.18617477]

>>18617469
Really? How is in real life?

[Anonymous No.18617488]

>>18617427
>Adorno must have been a nazi.

Reminds me of one of my favourite amazon reviews, about The Authoritarian Personality

>Adorno kicks ass man!!

>One of the best autobiographies I have ever read. Yes, you too can go around telling everybody about the evils of capitalist commodification of culture whilst cashing in with books like this. You too can go around consigning various artists and composers to the aesthetic gas chamber simply because they don't tickle your particular joystick. You too (a failed composer)can agree with Hitler (a failed artist) about Jazz and still be worshipped by the "high" left. It is all explained here. Buy now, you won't regret it.

[Anonymous No.18617490]

>>18617466
Meaningless waffle. Fisher wrote for OpenDemocracy.

[Anonymous No.18617496]

>>18617469
He's cool. Funny, nice, borderline(?) alcoholic. He's seen a lot of shit being in war zones and all. Ran into him at some random bar in Brooklyn and got to hear some of his stories. NYC is serendipitous like that.

[Anonymous No.18617522]

>>18616759
Tom Wolfe "The Painted Word" from 1976 talks about this. Basically the whole thing about contemporary art was a fraud scam by a few Jews (all last names BERG) that started the pseudo "art critic" trend that was basically used for money laundering. Almost all aspects of modern art is literally money laundering scams and schemes pushed by Jewish art critics without exception.

[Anonymous No.18617540]

>>18616893
this is complete, kindergarden-tier garbage lmao
imagine posting this as a defense of modern art, holy kek

[Anonymous No.18617545]

>>18617522
this

[Anonymous No.18617549]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_Greenberg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Rosenberg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_Steinberg
The 3 BERGS who helped to turn art into a Jewish money laundering scheme and to undermine Western aesthetics. Not only them, there was another famous Jewish art critic who was the "founder" of this scam known as "non-representational art": Bernard Berenson. Berenson was kind of the mastermind behind this and it's now known that Berenson was responsible for countless frauds where he over valued fraud paintings for the sole purpose of money laundering.

So anyway any artist you see today is actually just some burnout hippie loser who was selected probably for his complicity in the scam and milked by Jewish art critics to be used as a money laundering scheme. That's all there is to known about any contemporary artistic trend and why you see them also pushing such heinous insults to beauty and aesthetics. Jews get a real laugh out of this like when the Jewish New York Times C.L. SulzBERGer (Jew York Times) writer helped spread propaganda during the Battle of Monte Cassino that the Germans were using a 1400+year holy site that was, during WW2, an Abbey with civilians and monks living there. Well this Jew et. al. spread so much venom and lies and propaganda that the abbey ended up being completely destroyed. Funny thing: The Germans made a public agreement with the Monks that they would NOT use the abbey as a military object. So the Jew was able to con the Allies into mass murdering a bunch of italian civilians and monks. Sulzberger was also a pusher of "non-representational art" so his legacy is literally blowing up beautiful works of architecture in Europe.

[Anonymous No.18617555]

>>18617549
Just note that "Abstract Expressionism" and "Pop Art" etc were all Jewish art critic creations to push money laundering scams.

[Anonymous No.18617558]

>>18617549
Walk into a contemporary art gallery and yell "Open borders for Israel" and see how fast police will come for you. I know because I've tried it. Totally insane.
Captcha failed 4 times despite me perfectly spelling this before it let me even post this.

[Anonymous No.18617564]

>>18617558
>Walk into a contemporary art gallery and yell "Open borders for Israel" and see how fast police will come for you. I know because I've tried it. Totally insane.

Dangerously based.

[Anonymous No.18617573]

>>18617549
>>18617522
>>18617549
>>18617522
Your /pol/ tier ranting, like Wolfe's, shows your lack of knowledge about art history. Art movements are created and spearheaded by artists, not critics.

Canonical western painters such as Caravaggio, Titian, Delacroix, Blake, Van Gogh, etc. were all derided and considered "bad" and "insulting to the canon" in their times. Now they're revered. This is just the way art history works. Innovative artists come along and undermine what came before them. Oh and by the way, "conceptual art" ended in the 80s and it's been replaced by many other new movements, including plenty of representational/figurative work. Although I personally find that shit intellectually boring, like your cringe and uninformed /pol/ posting.>>18617549
>>18617522
Your /pol/ tier ranting, like Wolfe's, shows your lack of knowledge about art history. Art movements are created and spearheaded by artists, not critics.

Canonical western painters such as Caravaggio, Titian, Delacroix, Blake, Van Gogh, etc. were all derided and considered "bad" and "insulting to the canon" in their times. Now they're revered. This is just the way art history works. Innovative artists come along and undermine what came before them. Oh and by the way, "conceptual art" ended in the 80s and it's been replaced by many other new movements, including plenty of representational/figurative work. Although I personally find that shit intellectually boring, like your cringe and uninformed /pol/ posting.>>18617549
>>18617522
Your /pol/ tier ranting, like Wolfe's, shows your lack of knowledge about art history. Art movements are created and spearheaded by artists, not critics.

Canonical western painters such as Caravaggio, Titian, Delacroix, Blake, Van Gogh, etc. were all derided and considered "bad" and "insulting to the canon" in their times. Now they're revered. This is just the way art history works. Innovative artists come along and undermine what came before them. Oh and by the way, "conceptual art" ended in the 80s and it's been replaced by many other new movements, including plenty of representational/figurative work. Although I personally find that shit intellectually boring, like your cringe and uninformed /pol/ posting.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.18617578]

>>18617558
Mike Ma is that you?

[Anonymous No.18617582]

>>18617549
>>18617522
Your /pol/ tier ranting, like Wolfe's, shows your lack of knowledge about art history. Art movements are created and spearheaded by artists, not critics.

Canonical western painters such as Caravaggio, Titian, Delacroix, Blake, Van Gogh, etc. were all derided and considered "bad" and "insulting to the canon" in their times. Now they're revered. This is just the way art history works. Innovative artists come along and undermine what came before them. Oh and by the way, "conceptual art" ended in the 80s and it's been replaced by many other new movements, including plenty of representational/figurative work. Although I personally find that shit intellectually boring, like your cringe and uninformed /pol/ posting.

>revering le heckin nazerinos
The Nazis were the biggest art thieves in Europe. Also, clearly you don't know about Joseph Beuys. The founder of conceptual art was a volunteer for the Luftwaffe and never really gave up his sympathies for the Reich. You brainlet.

[Anonymous No.18617602]

>>18617582
Magnifique!

[Anonymous No.18617604]

>>18617573
>copypasta spamming
>doesn't refute anything i said
>pilpuls by bringing up "canocial western painters" that had problems in their life as if it is remotely related to the scams of contemporary art
Not my problem and I'm guessing you never went to any contemporary art events where "non-representational" pieces were being sold for several millions of dollars by faceless bureaucrats, do your best to attend one of these and it will be a catalyst to a whole new vision. then again you may also be a shill i don't really know given the botspam you're sposting

[Anonymous No.18617611]

>>18617602
>he thinks that's a big gotcha
>he doesn't even post the Manzoni
>he doesn't know shit
come on /pol/. you can do better than that

[Anonymous No.18617618]

>>18617582
>Art movements are created and spearheaded by artists, not critics.

Not him, but how can you be so naive? Isn't the patron-artist system one of the first things they explain in art history class, how art isn't made in a vacuum, but is rather enmeshed in a system?

>Canonical western painters such as Caravaggio, Titian, Delacroix, Blake, Van Gogh, etc. were all derided and considered "bad" and "insulting to the canon" in their times. Now they're revered.

Art is particular rather than general, so I don't see how this is supposed to make your point seem right. In what way is the situation in which Caravaggio's works were evaluated relevant to the modern art market beyond that you think the latter will go through a similar process of acceptance?

Have you ever thought that it's not change that people are opposing, but the particular sort of change that is happening?

[Anonymous No.18617620]

>>18617611
>everyone is /pol/ that raises eyebrows at Jewish involvement in contemporary modern art money laundering scams
You're just mad because you don't want to admit what growing numbers of people know. It's not even a conspiracy when guys like Berenson themselves even openly admitted it. Why do you try to defend this so fanatically? Your uni professor tell you to do this or something? lmao

[Anonymous No.18617621]

>>18617604
The faggot new captcha forced me to use a different browser, which fucked up my post; I edited and reposted it here>>18617582 you dummy.

I am >>18617446 and of course there's plenty of scammy bullshit in the art market, just like any speculative market in late hypercapitalism, but that doesn't invalidate ALL nonrepresentational artwork. Only a weak-minded aestheticslet such as yourself (or your dear leader, a failed and shitty painter himself, mind you) nostalgises 19th century romantic painting as the height of aesthetics. Massive KEK.

[Anonymous No.18617624]

>>18617611
>posts more faeces
>beauty BTFO!
scurry off back to your spirit cooking session you Satanist hack

[Anonymous No.18617629]

>>18617621
>immedatiely derails all conversation showing blatant overrepresentation of Jews involved in art critic money laundering scams into "hypercapitalism"
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[Anonymous No.18617638]

>>18616759
>>18617611
I love that even after 60 or 100 years, these pieces still manage to make midwits seethe to no end.

[Anonymous No.18617769]

>>18617490
How does it disproves the things he said about degeneracy of music?

[Anonymous No.18617778]

...
I like modern art, but I can see why a lot of people don't. It's often very pretentious. It's also really cringe to call people who don't like it nazis, and that seems to be in vogue right now.

[Anonymous No.18617805]

>>18616893
This is Bladee right

[Anonymous No.18617807]

>>18617621
This is good painting
Can you recommend me some other artists?

[Anonymous No.18617815]

>>18617402
>if you don't like this canvas filled with solid red wallpaint, you are literally hitler

[Anonymous No.18617818]

>>18617778
>art
Not really. More like "interior design".
It should be classed somewhere with Ikea glassware shapes and towel patterns.

[Anonymous No.18617825]

>>18617818
Ikea glassware and towel pattern rarely start a massive controversy that involves political, social, and cultural debate
unlike that painting I posted

[Anonymous No.18617841]

>>18617825
So it's art because bunch of faggots from the "art world" pretended to like it to stir up controversy?

[Anonymous No.18617846]

>>18617301
There's plenty of great contemporary art, you are just an uninformed retard.

[Anonymous No.18617851]

>>18617825
Controversy, politics, sociology and debate have literally fuckall to do with art.

[Anonymous No.18617856]

>>18617841
No
It's art because some /pol/nigger took it upon himself to slash it up, thus proving the artist 100% right
The painting is called "Who's Afraid of Red, Yellow, and Blue?" pro-tip: it's literally you

[Anonymous No.18617859]

>>18617846
Was that supposed to be an example of "great contemporary art?"

[Anonymous No.18617882]

>>18617856
Contemporary national socialism could be considered a long form collaborarive performance piece that generates far more controversy.

[Anonymous No.18617889]

>>18617851
>he thinks that older art from previous epochs was about painting pretty flowers
You people are retarded. Look at this Delacroix painting. It's not about the artistry, it's not about the color palette, it's not about perspective. It's about making an argument, namely that the French revolution was good and should be commemorated. Good modern art does exactly the same thing, with different utensils.

[Anonymous No.18617900]

>>18617882
>moving the goalpost
Thank you for conceding

[Anonymous No.18617905]

>>18617859
Yes

[Anonymous No.18617907]

>>18617856
> wanting to take out the trash means you're afraid of it
Shit, good one, I'll use this next time my wife starts nagging me.

[Anonymous No.18617918]

>>18617900
Is he wrong? If you think that art exists solely for "controversy" and "political arguments", then how in the world is the Neo-Nazi party not performance art?

[Anonymous No.18617920]

>>18617907
>be this Anon
>my wife
>posts on 4chan
Uh... Anon, I...
>>18617905
based gigachad answer. That was a great example.

[Anonymous No.18617926]

>>18617905
What's great about it?
>>18617920
faggot

[Anonymous No.18617928]

>>18617900
I mean the guy who slashed it is equally the artist by that standard, you just don't think so because that's not what you were told to think by the wankers you look up to.

[Anonymous No.18617931]

>>18616810
>REE REEEEactionary!
Fuck off to your breadtube hugbox tranny

[Anonymous No.18617932]

>>18617918
Well, I suppose it can be, anon. I don't think the artistic intend is there, but it could be. Is this supposed to be some kind of gotcha? The futurists were right-wingers, too, and they were pretty enthusiastic about modern art.

[Anonymous No.18617939]

>>18617425
WHAT A FUCKING PRETENTIOUS POST. FUCK YOU CUNT. WHO THE FUCK ARE YOU THEN?

fuck Adorno and his theories
He has nothing of substance. Any fucking serious artist will tell you that. Even fucking Bernstein killed his ass by a simple demonstration of a few simple chords.

McCarthy is not heavy handed. He's unique and of course influenced by Faulkner and others.. who the fuck isn't? You're either confusing him with DFW Or you're fucking Kieth Richards calling Bonham heavy handed. Fuck off matey. Guess what? You're not a drummer. You don't shit about drumming. Stay in your fucking lane.

Tunnel is garbage. It has the depth of your mum's vagina.

Your post is weird and confusing. I don't know why you're phrasing your MFA tier bullshit like that. Perhaps you have nothing to say.

PEOPLE LIKE YOU ARE CANCER WITH HAIR ON THEIR NECKS.

[Anonymous No.18617941]

>>18617856
So it was the art equivalent of pretending to be retarded, then going "the joke's on you lmao"?

[Anonymous No.18617943]

>>18616981
The OG shitposter

[Anonymous No.18617950]

>>18617932
It's not a gotcha, merely a demonstration of the degree to which your demented mind is corrupted; you don't even know if art exists or not.

[Anonymous No.18617967]

>>18617932
The artistic intent is definitely there with some of them. Their lives are a shitpost.

[Anonymous No.18617979]

>>18617926
If you don't understand how powerful the dark color palette and piramidal motiff is in relation with the broken urns scattered on the floor then you obviously are incapable of understanding art, so I won't bother explaining the painting's significance. Telling you that the painting is called Shevirath Ha Kelim won't bring you any closer to understanding it, seeing how much of uncultured you appear to be.
You are a literal NPC, one of those hylics that cums buckets to kitsch.

[Anonymous No.18618013]

>>18617979
Sorry to say, but the unfortunate diagnosis is in: you talk like a fag and your shit's all retarded.

[Anonymous No.18618025]

>>18617943
Based
Every conceptual piece should be banned after these two pieces.

[Anonymous No.18618039]

>>18616759
>what do you take to be a truly great contemporary work (regardless of the medium) of art?
Do videogames count? If so then Deus Ex and MGS.

[Anonymous No.18618063]

>>18618013
chaps please calm

[Anonymous No.18618066]

>smartest board on 4chan, allegedly
>gets filtered by Duchamp

[Anonymous No.18618078]

>>18618066
>a literal toilet
I have one already. It looks very nice. Don't see the point in going to the art gallery to see this guy's one.

[Anonymous No.18618098]

>>18617979
>You are a literal NPC, one of those hylics that cums buckets to kitsch.
This thread in a nutshell.

[Anonymous No.18618108]

>>18616759
It seems mostly like a struggle to find a unique voice under the generous lens of expressive art, imo

[Anonymous No.18618129]

>>18617939
which mccarthy book is this from?

[Anonymous No.18618394]

Every single person that shits on "modern art" lacks the proper tools to understand and appreciate it and is hoplessly ignorant of the whole field.
You can be a strong critic of conceptual, or of certain currents of contemporary art, but if you are one of those retards that laughs at the memes of monkeys painting or unironically says that "a child could have painted it" then you should either
A-be ashamed of your ignorance and start studying and thoroughly exploring different art currents, their evolution and the relations between them
Or B- kill yourself inmediatly since you clearly possess subhuman aesthetical (and cognitive) capabilities and will never be able to understand the true nature of beauty, meaning or art itself.

If you enter into the Rothko Chapel and don't inmediatly sense the powerful energy impregnating the room, both of devotion and hopelessness, of wanting and longing, of otherworldly energy; if you don't see the meditative nature of the space and start contemplating existence and nothingness, then I am irrevocably convinced that you don't have a soul, you are a literal subhuman in the truest sense of the word.

[Anonymous No.18618421]

>>18618394
If you enter into the 4chan Chapel /b/ and don't inmediatly sense the powerful energy impregnating the room, both of devotion and hopelessness, of wanting and longing, of otherworldly energy; if you don't see the meditative nature of the space and start contemplating existence and nothingness, then I am irrevocably convinced that you don't have a soul, you are a literal subhuman in the truest sense of the word.

[Anonymous No.18619308]

>>18617488
So holding the same views as Hitler on art makes you a nazi
I wanna hear you say it
You won't because that's fucking retarded

[Anonymous No.18619354]

>>18618394
>A-be ashamed of your ignorance
I'm not
>and start studying and thoroughly exploring different art currents, their evolution and the relations between them
No
>Or B- kill yourself inmediatly since you clearly possess subhuman aesthetical (and cognitive) capabilities and will never be able to understand the true nature of beauty, meaning or art itself.
This is just incel seethe anon
>If you enter into the Rothko Chapel and don't inmediatly sense the powerful energy impregnating the room, both of devotion and hopelessness, of wanting and longing, of otherworldly energy; if you don't see the meditative nature of the space and start contemplating existence and nothingness, then I am irrevocably convinced that you don't have a soul, you are a literal subhuman in the truest sense of the word.
It's just a room
three (3) walls can be seen
and four (4) benches
The roof of the room is also weird
That
is
it

[Anonymous No.18619358]

>>18619354
>It's just a room
And all of literature are just words.

[Anonymous No.18619372]

Not a single person has posted music

[Anonymous No.18619409]

Duchamp was a genius. The real decline came with the people who followed Warhol (and to a much lesser extent Warhol himself).

[Anonymous No.18619429]

>>18619354
This is why autism is considered a handicap.

>>18619409
This.

[Anonymous No.18619444]

You see it everywhere with leftism.

Wherever leftism takes root, everything rots.

[Anonymous No.18619462]

Seems like the point of liking "modern art" is to feel superior to people who "don't get it". People ignore their gut instincts and convince themselves to be smarter than their fellow men.
This hierarchical thinking is what's corrupting society lately.

Everything is about winning or losing and if you want to win in the eyes of society you need to please the media or some jewish critic, thus reinforcing their influence.

[Anonymous No.18619474]

>>18616759
>How do you explain the state of literature and art today?
tax evasion
you pay a piece of art at a ridiculous price and have no profit that quarter/year -> no taxes
you donate a piece of art (which you arbitrarily decided has risen in value) to a museum/school/whatever -> donation can be reduced from taxes -> no taxes

also works for money laundering

[Anonymous No.18619481]

>>18616759
Music is shit
Traditional painting is dead (bc it can be mass produced? )
Sculpting is dead
Literature is mediocre
Architecture is alright
Conceptual art is usually awful but has a few great pieces

It's crazy to say there's no decline in art from say, a hundred or hundred - fifty years ago.

[Anonymous No.18619495]

The more interesting question is why conservative retards can't make even mediocre art.
Let's be honest, the only art conservatives have is black metal, which is just really bad hardcore punk riffs played monotonously through poorly chosen and cared for instruments, trying to delay the start of the song over and over again, and then with autistic screeching to cover up the fact that there is no actual song. The music isn't ever going anywheres because it can't even begin to begin with. All the worst aspects of intros and choruses and without any of the benefits of fading out. Each time it takes nearly ten minutes.

It's literally a microcosm of conservative art, that is if they had any conception of art beyond mere criticism and autistic sceeeching.
And now even this 'art' is being taken over by trannies, because well there's nothing inherently traditional about it. In fact, it's the least traditional of all art because there's no skill, no aesthetics, and no meaning. There's nothing. It's just juggalo for incels. no festivals, not even any cheap consumerism. The shows are so bad that you have to take pictures in the woods of your Kiss larp and post it to instagram. Imagine ethot simps in the age of boomer losers. That's what black metal is.
I mean, they don't even use tube amps. If you can't understand the musical aspects of your own time, and be able to uphold its traditions, how could you ever go beyond that? People complain about rap but really just take a look at metal, it's like one tape poorly recorded over and over again but you can't even tell the difference because there are no musical aspects to begin with.The
Just imagine the iq of the average person passing this shit on. Just watch Varg's youtube to see what they think a genius is.The

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kL6-7bWNyAY&t=17s

[Anonymous No.18619504]

Test

[Anonymous No.18619508]

>>18619481
>Architecture is alright
I guess I don’t mind it that much, but I can’t think of any recent buildings that have really wowed me.

[Anonymous No.18619539]

>>18619495
based post, vargniggers btfo’d

death metal will always objectively be the superior musical genre and it was invented by a BASED KIKE (pic related)

[Anonymous No.18619552]

>>18618394
>If you enter into the Rothko Chapel and don't inmediatly sense the powerful energy impregnating the room, both of devotion and hopelessness, of wanting and longing, of otherworldly energy; if you don't see the meditative nature of the space and start contemplating existence and nothingness, then I am irrevocably convinced that you don't have a soul, you are a literal subhuman in the truest sense of the word.

Hahaha

[Anonymous No.18619563]

>>18616759
The venn diagram of those who do not perceive a decline in art and those who are ideologically invested in the status quo is a circle. If a work of art is an expression or struggle between an individual and the hegemonic culture, it is no wonder that anti-cultural influences both of capitalism and of the new left have left true works of art with only universal constants to use as subjects: sex and death. Aside from this art can only appeal to the meaninglessness that pervades Western culture.

[Anonymous No.18619581]

>this fucking thread
god you people are sad and boring and have no taste and lame opinions and are full of seethe and ressentiment. i don’t know why i still bother coming to the insipid cultural backwater that is this board

[Anonymous No.18619588]

>>18618394
>sense the powerful energy impregnating the room,
Oh I would sense it, if by "powerful energy" you mean saturation by a demonic substrate. I would be out of there quicker than you could blink.

[Anonymous No.18619596]

>>18619588
mommy’s widdle conservative kang is afraid of a few monochrome color field paintings? KEK

[Anonymous No.18619607]

>>18619581
Give us some good contemporary art then. Or are your tastes just too sophisticated for us plebs?

[Anonymous No.18619608]

>>18619596
Scared, no, repulsed, yes.

[Anonymous No.18619611]

>>18619607
>are your tastes just too sophisticated for us plebs?
Yes, they are.
>>18619588
>demonic
Filtered forever and ever until the end of time. Eat a dick, Christchud.

[Anonymous No.18619612]

>>18619581
>God u guys have horrible taste, mine is much better
Thanks for the input faggot, get the fuck off this board

[Anonymous No.18619614]

>>18619611
>Filtered forever and ever until the end of time.
Not a Christian. Demons are attested to in virtually every tradition. You'll find out soon enough.

[Anonymous No.18619617]

>>18619539
Death Metal is just thrash metal riffs but played on low-tuned guitars.

[Anonymous No.18619622]

>>18616879
Retarded
Art has reached its peak and then declined to modernism

[Anonymous No.18619625]

>>18619495
>Black Metal is is just really bad hardcore punk riffs played monotonously
Tell me how i know how hopelessly stupid you are.

[Anonymous No.18619628]

>>18619614
>Posts cringe /pol/tier picture.
My bad, you're not a Christchud, you're just a regular chud. Eat a dick, faggot.
>>18619481
>>18619462
>>18619444
>>18618025
>>18619612
https://vimeo.com/255697901

[Anonymous No.18619635]

>>18619628
If you think that picture is cringe you have incredibly poor taste in aesthetics.

[Anonymous No.18619637]

>>18619607
>Or are your tastes just too sophisticated for us plebs?
Perhaps. Or perhaps “you plebs” have calcified your butthurt ressentiment into a willful ignorance and refusal to educate yourselves about contemporary art and develop your own tastes. Don’t get me wrong, I hate 95% of contemporary art. Likewise, 95% of art in 1555 or 1657 or 1849 or 1922 was also shit. DYOR and stop being a “pleb” by your own design.

[Anonymous No.18619646]

>>18619614
>>18619617
>>18619622
Seems like it’s just a handful of retarded /pol/niggers shitting up this thread with muh jooz and muh torchlight rallies and muh nostalgia for 19th century art movements they know literally nothing about.

[Anonymous No.18619654]

>>18619635
>If you think that picture is cringe you have incredibly poor taste in aesthetics.
What about this one, instead?
It's also a military march, at night time.
Oh wait, that doesn't work because they're North Koreans and they haven't "le epic nostalgic analog filter" of my ass.
Wake up, /pol/chud, your taste in aesthetics is even more laughable than mine if it's limited to old pictures of Nazi German marches.

"There's a man alone, without family, without children, without God ... He builds legions, but he doesn't build a nation. A nation is created by families, a religion, traditions: it is made up out of the hearts of mothers, the wisdom of fathers, the joy and the exuberance of children ... For a few months I was inclined to believe in National Socialism. I thought of it as a necessary fever. And I was gratified to see that there were, associated with it for a time, some of the wisest and most outstanding Germans. But these, one by one, he has got rid of or even killed ... He has left nothing but a bunch of shirted gangsters! This man could bring home victories to our people each year, without bringing them either glory or danger. But of our Germany, which was a nation of poets and musicians, of artists and soldiers, he has made a nation of hysterics and hermits, engulfed in a mob and led by a thousand liars or fanatics." ― Wilhelm on Hitler, December 1938.

[Anonymous No.18619659]

>>18619646
The beauty of art is that you don't have to know about it to know its quality. Art presents itself directly to you, as it is. Whether one finds rubbish attractive, or beauty attractive, is a reflection of the soul of the individual.

[Anonymous No.18619663]

>>18618394
The Rothko Chapel is quite literally the only place I want to visit in the US, nowhere else in that country interests me.

[Anonymous No.18619667]

>>18619646
Shut up or disprove that: Marcel Duchamp is inferior Michaelangelo

[Anonymous No.18619668]

>>18619659
Indeed.
Therefore, if this thread is any indication, some souls are clearly far more developed and nuanced than others.

[Anonymous No.18619671]

>Whether one finds peepee poopoo, or poopoo peepee, is a reflection of the soul of the individual.

[Anonymous No.18619673]

>>18618394
Midwits don't understand why THIS is a religious experience. They will seethe, cope, dilate, cry and piss their pants. But they will never "get up with it".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ks_mZJR-lAQ

[Anonymous No.18619676]

>>18619667
>James Joyce isn’t the same as William Shakspeare so he must be inferior
Do you comprehend the profound idiocy of your statement? Because everyone reading it does.

Also, Michelangelo was a huge faggot and “sinner.”

[Anonymous No.18619677]

>>18619654
The lighting is totally off, the photograph doesn't have the awe-inspiring blend of red-and-black with light gradually emanating from the background torches, there is no symbolism (lions with a background of torchlit eagle-stands in mine). There is a freaking floodlight almost shining directly onto the camera, ruining what otherwise might have been an OK shot with overexposure. There are ugly metal scaffolds littering the background. I could go on. There is simply no comparison.

[Anonymous No.18619681]

>>18619668
There is no art posted here so far which is an indication of that, I'm afraid.

[Anonymous No.18619687]

>>18619659
Yeah, I have to agree. Attitudes like this one >>18619637 are are particularly harmful to the arts.
That being said, you can still get a lot out of art by thinking about it, so to dismiss someone like Duchamp offhand is still foolish.

[Anonymous No.18619689]

>>18619667
>Michaelangelo
>Marcel Duchamp
One is an Italian Renaissance sculptor and painter of the 16th century.
The other one is a Post-Modern French "ready-mader" of the early 20th century.

>Shut up or disprove that: Pecan pies are inferior to brownies

[Anonymous No.18619696]

>>18619676
Joyce is a uniquely terrible and despicable artist. If anything Shakespeare has been made worse because of the way Joyce invoked Hamlet in his trash novel.

[Anonymous No.18619705]

>>18618394
>>18619663
Based and Rothko-pilled

[Anonymous No.18619715]

>>18619681
>filtered by Bacon, Charlesworth, Rothko, Duchamp
Perhaps the likes of Thomas Kinkade would be more on your level.

[Anonymous No.18619722]

>>18619677
That's exactly what I was talking about, you dense moron.
If it wasn't for the garbage projectors and the way the shot is established, the picture would have been a failure.

You're looking at a fucking propaganda pic, where Geobbels and his goons used post-prod effects in order to make it look better.

The Nazi German elites HAD TRASH TASTE IN EVERYTHING. The plans for Germania looked gaudy as hell. Music was non-existent. Literature was banned in all of its forms.

Basically, North Korea is what Nazi Germany always wanted to be. You exchange Juche and Songun by racial policies and Lebensraum.


>inb4 muh degenerate
>inb4 muh Der Sieg des Glaubens

[Anonymous No.18619736]

>>18619722
Kek, but don't bother. You're clearly dealing with an insecure retard who thinks Nazi "aesthetics" are the height of beauty; video games are art; and Fight Club is the greatest film ever made. Let's leave the retard to his seething and move on.

[Anonymous No.18619749]

Everyone who doesn't think I'm right should be put to death

[Anonymous No.18619757]

>>18619687
I don't dismiss art if I have a chance to see it and judge it myself. The problem is having to wade through piles of rubbish to find nuggets of gold. I can't bring myself to do it. It's easier and ultimately more valuable, for me, to stick to more fruitful pastures. Especially when much of it is downright repulsive, and potentially psychologically damaging, so not only is the endeavor not fruitful, it's actively harmful. Many people are not aware of the effect of their environment on their own minds. People who are more sensitive pick up on this fact very quickly, provided they are the reflective type.
>>18619715
There is nothing to be filtered by, the Rothko chapel is simply repulsive at a spiritual level for example. The appeal is only to those with a soul which is almost entirely devoid and formless, which finds similarity therein and classifies it as beauty. Of course, even these people could detect the sinister element of that artwork, which constitutes its only artistic merit in my eyes, provided it was intentionally constructed with that artistic goal in mind. However, I suspect it's also possible it was the artist working from an "emotional" substratum which did not have a conscious goal in mind while creating it, and is therefore a reflection of something genuinely subhuman/subpersonal which he allowed expression.

[Anonymous No.18619764]

>>18619722
>That's exactly what I was talking about, you dense moron.
How so?
>You're looking at a fucking propaganda pic
And?
>Music was non-existent. Literature was banned in all of its forms.
Both wrong btw.

[Anonymous No.18619785]

>>18619736
Thanks Anon for your message.
That's what /pol/chuds don't get. They're cherrypicking motherfuckers who have never stepped in a museum or read an art book, and secretly indulge into trashy mass entertainment like the hypocrites they are.

>>18619757
I can understand why Rothko looks like trash to you. It's brutal, nameless, abstract, with no limits.
But i don't stress it that way. IMO, it's a violent, dark, total piece that tries not too hard, but just enough to give you a feel of bleakness but superiority.

See picrel? That's Gesaffelstein, the French DJ. He incorporated a lot of aesthetics in his image too. In fact, his use of Ventablack for his recent performances is really reminiscent of how Rothko used colours.

Even better, if you don't get Rothko, you should check out the work of Pierre Soulages irl. It's more than just "black".

[Anonymous No.18619792]

>>18619495
Holy based.

[Anonymous No.18619802]

>>18617116
>It's a totalitarian nation that for many hasn't significantly advanced economically from the Austro Hungarian period
learn what words mean or gtfo back to plebbit

[Anonymous No.18619812]

>>18619802
Viktor Orban is literally a cartoon bad guy, a Hitler if you will

[Anonymous No.18619830]

>>18619764
>>18619764
>And?
Agitprop ≠ good taste.
Compare this to Stalinist posters of the same time. They suprisingly look the same.
Picrel is an example of many. You could cherrypick and notice that Hitler looks "drawn" unlike Stalin's brutal minimalist approach, sure. But it doesn't change the fact the message it doesn't represent reality. It's a drawning that is used for massive brainwashing. That's it. The message will never be subtle or intricate.

Also, look for Argentinian and Chilean agitprop posters of the 1970s, during the era of the far-right dictatorships. They look like trash : the colors, the atmosphere, the fonts, the structure, everything.

>How so?
>There is a freaking floodlight almost shining directly onto the camera, ruining what otherwise might have been an OK shot with overexposure.
You responded your own question. The fact you're thinking that the DPRK example i've shown you is an "OK shot" is miserable.

Parallelism ≠ good art.

>Both wrong btw.

Alright then. Go ahead. Name me a composer, singer-songwriter and/or writer that had any kind of success at the time in Nazy Germany and remained revelant by the early 1950s... and didn't back track on national socialism too. Because if not, the game wouldn't be fun.

>inb4 muh Strauss

[Anonymous No.18619834]

>>18619830
Here's said picture.

[Anonymous No.18619849]

>>18619830
Heidegger

[Anonymous No.18619857]

>>18619830
Strauss was brilliant. Metamorphosen for 23 Strings is one of the great musical works of the 20th C. Relevant to this thread, it’s an impassioned refutation of his former admiration of the Nazis. It reflects the decline (how topica) of the illusion of the Great Reich into squalor and bestial savagery. Perhaps some of the uncultured /pol/ types shitting up this thread should give it a listen. If it doesn’t move them, their souls must be lacking

https://youtu.be/7jwml0jevv0

[Anonymous No.18619862]

If we say that the historical realm of aesthetics (art and literature, in this conversation) is determined by what is given acclaim and renown then we can say that the contemporary state of historical art and literature is mostly garbage.

In this way we do not need to say that aesthetics themselves have declined: multitudes, perhaps at an increasing scale and quantity, of masterpieces get created at an increasing historical pace. They have just been denied entry into the machinations of history; have not been renowned or acclaimed or recognized by history.

It is more correct to say that the decline is evident in history's recognition of ascendant aesthetics. It is accurate to tie this in with Nietzsche's existential philosophical observation that "God is dead." He means the completion of the entire mapping of belief's structure within metaphysics; aesthetics followed that path of belief to the top and fell when belief did. The improper reaction of the 20th and beginning of the 21st century was to allow the preeminence of sentiments such as "ugly can be beautiful" etc to dominate aesthetics.

So how do we account for History's erring in regards to aestheitcs? Its all speculation, obviously. I could only suggest a beginning would be to examine the unending exponential growth off worldliness in general - that the paradigm of human's connection to knowledge, self and others has accelerated and continues to accelerate so wildly that History and aesthetics lost their proper relation to each other.

[Anonymous No.18619876]

>>18619849
OH. I GET IT.
The game was too easy. The answer was obvious, wasn't it?
Everyone can quote philosophers who were Nazis.
Now, name me a NOVELIST who had any kind of success at the time in Nazy Germany and remained revelant by the early 1950s... and didn't back track on national socialism.

Also, picrel 1.

[Anonymous No.18619886]

>>18619495
Rock music is not, was not and will never be art. The left may like to pat themselves on the back about controlling artistic institutions, but they have next to nothing to show for it. There’s something weird and sad about it.

[Anonymous No.18619895]

>>18619886
>Rock music is not, was not and will never be art.
where exactly do you draw the line here. can songs be art?

[Anonymous No.18619897]

>>18619876
Junger, whose backtracking was not on national socialism but on the specific implementation by the Nazis

[Anonymous No.18619901]

>>18619849
Enjoy your (You)s, dumbass.
One last thing, Jacques Derrida, the ultimate commie in chief, destroyed his thought holdings by reversing the expression of existentialism. Sartre, Camus, Scruton, Carnap... all these guys trashed his work.

In fact, you sound like a pseud. A phoney pseudo-intellectual. A grifter for sure.

[Anonymous No.18619912]

>>18619897
>name me a NOVELIST
Have you even read the question?
We get it, muh Hegel struggle, muh dasein, muh place in the universe.

What about a novelist? Or a poet, while we're at it?

[Anonymous No.18619932]

>>18619912
Note : Jünger was the obvious answer for you.

It's like if you told me you listened to jazz and said "Yeah, Kind Of Blue and A Love Supreme are my favourite albums."

[Anonymous No.18619943]

>>18619897
Jünger was a notorious drug addict.
His books are irrevelant to the world of today.
I remember the prose of The Glass Bees, which i enjoyed a lot...but the dude is now treated as fringe.

I could be wrong, you will never see an academic/21st century writer quoting Jünger as a "source of inspiration".

[Anonymous No.18619953]

>>18619912
Celine, Pound (though not really a novelist)

[Anonymous No.18619957]

>>18619912
You're retarded. Jünger was an author at first.
>>18619897
You're also retarded. It doesn't change the fact he was (and still is) the uncool racist grandpa version of Huxley.

[Anonymous No.18619958]

>>18619901
And yet Heidegger is still studied in philosophy and Derrida has been relegated a framework to read whatever you want into or out of a work of literature? Okay lol

[Anonymous No.18619967]

Damn these anti nazi people sure get their panties in a knot
Pic related is proof contemporary art is alive and well

[Anonymous No.18619980]

>>18619895
In the past sure. I don’t consider popular music as it has been developed over the past century or century and a half (jazz, rock, hip hop, various forms of electronic music, etc) to be art. Music as a whole seems to be so thoroughly industrialized that it’s hard to imagine any music truly qualifying as art today. Even the field of art music has had a number of people dedicated into turning art music traditions into pop songs (Gershwin, Sibelius, etc.), and by the mid/late 20th century composers of any significant fame were just glorified pop musicians (Glass, Reich, etc.). I don’t think it’s a coincidence that composers whose works seemed to resist mass consumption had their ideas so easily easily implemented in music designed for just that purpose (Like Cage and Stockhausen).

[Anonymous No.18619982]

>YOU CAN'T THINK ART IS IN DECLINE
>YOURE JUST A NAZI
>YOU CAN'T EVEN ASK THE QUESTION OR DISCUSS IT

[Anonymous No.18619983]

>>18619953
Nobody gave a shit about Céline during the Occupation. Dude got mogged TF by the Nazi elites.
He's only remembered for one book only : "Voyage au bout de la nuit".

And like you said, Ezra Pound was not only AMERICAN, but also a schizoid that was let down by his friends when he joined Mussolini.

[Anonymous No.18619999]

>>18619897
Junger was never a national socialist you retard

[Anonymous No.18620011]

>>18619980
>Reich
>glorified pop musician
What?

VN4SX

[Anonymous No.18620014]

>>18619943
>notorious drug addict
Nice slander faggot. What triggered you?
>fringe
And look what is popular drag queen realism

[Anonymous No.18620021]

>>18619980
>In the past sure.
where does the cutoff date occur?
>I don’t consider popular music as it has been developed over the past century or century and a half (jazz, rock, hip hop, various forms of electronic music, etc) to be art. Music as a whole seems to be so thoroughly industrialized that it’s hard to imagine any music truly qualifying as art today.
seems like a weird distinction. madame bovary isn't a lesser work of art because it's issued as mass market paperbacks and adapted into a horrible movie every once in a while

[Anonymous No.18620024]

>>18619967
>>18619982
samefag
>>18619958
Derrida's deconstruction remains insanely popular in academic and literary circles.

Here are some good articles about here. You might not agree, but the proof is in the pudding:
https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/jacques-derrida-philosopher-not-overrated
https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt18dztjp
https://literariness.org/2017/05/14/key-theories-of-jacques-derrida/

>>18619980
>glorified pop musicians
Well, thanks god for Glass and Reich. They tried to avoid the bullshit pretentious arrogant modern-classical "milieu" they were thrown into at the beginning of their careers. Not everything they did was golden (especially Glass' awful opera on Disney), but some of their compositions are exquisite.

Once again, different folks, different strokes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=heu9tD0dzkY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pANyhXRsp2g

[Anonymous No.18620036]

>>18620014
>Nice slander faggot. What triggered you?
>And look what is popular : drag queen realism.
Holy fucking shit, you're the chud meme incarnated.

[Anonymous No.18620037]

>>18619983
Completely wrong about Celine. And he still causes you people to seethe endlessly.

[Anonymous No.18620039]

>>18619757
That's the point of Rothko's art you moron, it's devoid of the form to portray the pure idea, it's raw emotion, pure experience, like zen meditative practices. It's almost platonic in a sense.
Rothko is actually closer to the soul than the aesthetically armonious Renaissance sculptures. Maybe you can disagree on that, but you have to atleast acknowledge that his works are a representation of pure spiritual power devoid of any distractions.

[Anonymous No.18620042]

>>18618394
A child could paint it though lmao

[Anonymous No.18620045]

>>18620024
You posted a magazine article that is literally called "he's not overrated" and an academic article on literary criticism. The proof is in the pudding

[Anonymous No.18620049]

>>18620024
>minimalism

[Anonymous No.18620058]

>>18620039
The point that he's making shit and repulsing me? Wow. Great Art already.

[Anonymous No.18620065]

>>18620042
A child could not paint like Rothko you dipshit

[Anonymous No.18620070]

>>18619982
You can ask and there are plenty of good explanations on why that's not the case, it's simply that you are too small brained to understand the answer.

[Anonymous No.18620072]

>>18620065
Yes they could. If I gave them the same paint and canvas and told them to make it all black they could

[Anonymous No.18620076]

>>18616759
Can someone post a book or online course or something on art history where we can get some legs to stand on when we talk about art and whether or not it is declining

This thread is sad

[Anonymous No.18620083]

>>18618394
These type of schizos are what turned me from a centrist liberal into a right winger. Eventually you realize you can't change the sheep and you just have to believe in might makes right.

[Anonymous No.18620087]

>>18616879
Almost got it
world of the forms < Nature > art

[Anonymous No.18620090]

>>18619943
>irrevelant to the world of today.
Only because aristocratic art is taboo

"Something to keep in mind with Jünger is that he was a complete anachronism, but also one of the very few who saw the age for what it really is. Stylistically he may seem out of date, stuck in the 19th century, but most of the popular works of this time are almost entirely subjective works, concerned more with technical innovation and novelty than ideas. The novel of private concerns will, and this is already happening to a great degree, lose its status and be seen as a curiosity - a sort of comic nihilism.
Jünger had a lot in common with other underrated and less well-known authors, some who wrote the best novels of the century but received little recognition. In time this will change and people will read these works while seeing the curiosities for what they really are.
Jünger's journals alone have far more value than some entrepreneur of words writing fictional journals for the masses."

[Anonymous No.18620097]

>>18617177
>>18616926
Chagall isn't even close to contemporary

[Anonymous No.18620103]

>>18620049
>You posted a magazine article that is literally called "he's not overrated" and an academic article on literary criticism.
God damn it.
The point of the article is to explain why Derrida isn't an overrated writer because of his work being useless and forgettable, but because it still is used as a basis of modern philosophy and study on politics.
You could say the Beatles are overrated. That might be true, but not because their songwriting is awful, but because of their massive popularity.
You could go out with the "lowest common denominator" argument, but it ends up as ad-hominem and pretentious.

Also, where are the popular Nazi singer-songwriters i've asked about earlier? You forgot about that, chud?

>>18620037
>Completely wrong about Celine.
Care to explain more?

>>18620049
>ONCE AGAIN, DIFFERENT FOLKS, DIFFERENT STROKES.

[Anonymous No.18620105]

>>18620076
Shock Of The New Series

[Anonymous No.18620109]

>>18620072
>A TINEE WEENEE BABEE COULD HAS DONE THE SAME THANG HAHAHAHA

[Anonymous No.18620117]

>>18617979
What's your pic?

[Anonymous No.18620119]

>>18620090
Where did you get that quote?

[Anonymous No.18620121]

>>18618394
What a cringe post. You've been shitting up aesthetics threads with this abstract pasta for years

[Anonymous No.18620127]

>>18620083
>These type of schizos are what turned me from a centrist liberal into a right winger.
>Eventually you realize you can't change the sheep and you just have to believe in might makes right.

[Anonymous No.18620132]

>>18620076
I think "Story of art" by Gombrich is a good introduction. It's recommended reading for most art history students and it shows plenty of example artworks ranging from prehistoric to contemporary art while also explaining the reasons behind the developments that constitute art epochs and so on.

[Anonymous No.18620134]

>>18617846
>posting Kiefer and not Richter

[Anonymous No.18620138]

>>18620076
"The Story of Art" by Ernst Gombrich.

[Anonymous No.18620142]

>>18620134
sauce of picrel?

[Anonymous No.18620145]

>>18620109
It's true though and you know it. We could get a 7 year old to paint a blank canvas and you know 90% of the public would say "Yes that looks like a Rothko" but you couldn't do the same for Rembrandt. Even the best of the living postmodern painters couldn't make anything resembling the past masters.

[Anonymous No.18620147]

>>18619673
What is this racket? Complete trash

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.18620149]

the french have never created anything of value

[Anonymous No.18620151]

>>18620127
Wow good one

[Anonymous No.18620161]

>>18620138
>There really is no such thing as Art. There are only artists
Cringe

[Anonymous No.18620162]

>>18620142
Gerhard Richter, Venice series
THIS IS NOW AN ART THREAD, EVERYONE POST ART

Super high-res of one of my favorites of his here: https://www.sfmoma.org/artwork/97.36/

[Anonymous No.18620172]

>>18620132
>>18620105
>>18620138
thanks anons

[Anonymous No.18620176]

>>18620162
Eh, photography does this way better

[Anonymous No.18620178]

>>18620145
>Even the best of the living postmodern painters couldn't make anything resembling the past masters.
You know nothing...

[Anonymous No.18620186]

>>18620147
>>18620145
Rothko and Feldman were studying the ugly, the dissonant, the awful. They wanted to make the "bad" look/sound good.

Of course, you could say it's trash because it's not the usual Van Eyck technique - Mozart/Bach piece, the world has moved on. Without sounding pretentious, enjoying Rothko/Feldman's output means that you already understand the codes, but you go beyond that.
One more thing, unlike the "Artist's Shit" box of earlier, Rothko/Feldman came from a position of genuosity and love for their respective medium.
These guys knew more on their subjects than anyone browsing this thread ever will.

[Anonymous No.18620187]

>>18620119
Junger thread
>>/lit/thread/S18505512

[Anonymous No.18620199]

>>18620117
That's from the series of paintings called Insecticide by Matt Collishaw,like picrel. I don't know the specific numbers of the pieces.
He is a minor contemporary artist far from being the best the medium has to offer, but his works are very aesthetically pleasing even for the type that would shit on modern art.
Also they are much larger than they appear, so it's a great experience seeing them in person.
>>18620121
I just typed that cause I'm tired of the absolutetly retarded conservative takes on art.

[Anonymous No.18620201]

>>18620178
That looks terrible lol

[Anonymous No.18620203]

>>18620162
Posting art.
God I hate culturelets like you would not believe

[Anonymous No.18620206]

>>18620178
Also this dude isn't even postmodern you retard. None of his paintings are black canvases. Don't move the goalposts

[Anonymous No.18620211]

>>18620186
It means you fell for CIA funded propaganda and get rick quick schemes. You actually have a mental illness.

[Anonymous No.18620215]

>>18620186
>These guys knew more on their subjects than anyone browsing this thread ever will.
>make the ugly beautiful with shill tricks
Clearly they did not.

[Anonymous No.18620216]

>>18620206
>thinking postmodern art means black canvases
this "discussion" is over, you obviously have zero idea of what you are talking about and are just shitposting out of bad faith

[Anonymous No.18620222]

>>18620203
When are you going to post good art?

[Anonymous No.18620228]

>>18620216
Yeah concede when it gets tough. You're the one who posted someone who makes entirely different art from Rothko to justify Rothko.

[Anonymous No.18620231]

>>18620162
His Seascapes are also incredible. Probably the only artist since Rothko that has actually hypnotized me; that is, an actual, all-consuming hypnosis, where you are drawn physically into the reality held like a sheet before you by the thin, wobbling fingertips of the artist--where you can see their silhouette slightly upon the canvas back, backlit by God.
It does not matter that he's a self-professed atheist (any modern German wishing to appear in the public eye must be)--this man is touched, which becomes plain when seeing his works in the flesh.

[Anonymous No.18620239]

>>18620222
Sorry I don't have a bunch of cringe pastoral 19th century romantic bullshit saved on my computer, but a quick google search could yield your "tastes".

>>18620228
Rothko was an abstract expressionist ie a modernist. Verlato is a postmodernist. I simply posted his work to show your lack of understanding of the distinction ie. your utter retardation and ignorance.

[Anonymous No.18620249]

>>18620199
Neat, thanks. I'd love to see them in person.

[Anonymous No.18620255]

>>18620239
Are we classifying Bacon as contemporary?

[Anonymous No.18620266]

>>18620255
Of course not, he exists at some strange and unique juncture between surrealism and abstraction; but the ignorant retards in this thread would likely consider him such because he was born after 1900 and employed abstraction, negative space and "ugliness" in his compositions.

Imagine being filtered by "ugliness." Polniggers really are the intellectually and spiritually lowest of the low.

[Anonymous No.18620270]

>>18620176
I disagree. Painting is far better at capturing reality and direct emotion. Great photography is about the manipulation and destruction of reality.

[Anonymous No.18620275]

>>18620239
Stop getting into semantics and answer the original argument. Don't play dumb

[Anonymous No.18620287]

>>18620211
>CIA funded propaganda
as opposed to the despot funded propaganda of previous centuries?

[Anonymous No.18620290]

>>18620266
Brother, while I agree with you, I think you might need to take a couple breaths

[Anonymous No.18620301]

>>18620211
>>18620215
>CIA funded propaganda
>rich quick schemes
>Clearly they did not.
Rothko killed himself after years of intense depression.
And just like Feldman, he grew up in total poverty, as Jewish immigrants.
At this point, you smug morons should read their dedicated Wikipedia page.
Or anything related to them.

But please, don't ever use /pol/ tier meme phrasing like this. Or at the very least, use it on Warhol, Rauschenberg and Roy Lichtenstein. These guys were into the money.

[Anonymous No.18620308]

>>18620270
I was specifically talking about that painting.
Also you're assuming that books, paintings, sculptors etc. don't manipulate reality. What the fuck?

[Anonymous No.18620311]

>>18620287
Yeah but at least they had good taste

[Anonymous No.18620317]

>>18620301
Yeah intense depression from selling out his fellow jewish comrades to bourgeoisie overlords

[Anonymous No.18620332]

Meme review: this thread edition
> if you don't like modern art (like pic rel) you're a nazi
> here's this one piece of good modern art so you're not allowed to dislike the other 99% of it that's trash
>jews jews jews jews (forgot to mention their anglo enablers)
> pol pol pol pol (arguably more retarded than yelling jews cause at least those people have evidence
> "To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand contemporary art"
> "get educated chud"
> cringe pastas on both sides

[Anonymous No.18620336]

>>18620301
There is nothing that makes that art good. He could have single handedly started a world revolution and come up with a perfect utopia through his suicide. The art would still be bad.

[Anonymous No.18620338]

>>18620187
Dude, you're quoting a total nobody. While i agree with his/her opinion...he/she's still a biased Anon. It doesn't really back the point you're trying to make.

[Anonymous No.18620345]

>>18620187
Very based

[Anonymous No.18620350]

>>18620162
In this painting he is mooching off pictorialist photographers like Sarah Moon
>>18620231
In this he is clearly mooching off seascapes series by Hiroshi Sugimoto.

Wow such """originality"""

[Anonymous No.18620352]

>>18620332
based and neutral-pilled. Some fights are a waste of time.
imma go back to masturbate to my chinese cartoons

[Anonymous No.18620360]

>>18620317
Where did you get that info?
>>18620336
Meh. I guess we won't agree on a common point here. At the end, different folks, different strokes.

[Anonymous No.18620361]

>>18617434
>considering that he's arguably a frankenstein monstrosity of post-WW2 euro literature.

Could you expand on that?

[Anonymous No.18620368]

>>18620338
What is some good art today? Probably only being done by some nobody

[Anonymous No.18620369]

>>18618394

>YOU JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND

[Anonymous No.18620375]

>>18620369
This but unironically.

[Anonymous No.18620378]

>>18620368
I guess so. I give you that.
Jannies, can we close this thread now please?

[Anonymous No.18620385]

>>18620360
>Where did you get that info?
Cultural Cold War

[Anonymous No.18620396]

>>18620301
>>18620266
>>18620239
>>18620360

Ok, I admit there are some really good contemporary artists, but that doesn't change that most contemporary art really is lacking. Also it doesn't refute arguments other anons have made against contemporary art, especially about how rich people and critics they own can declare literal trash 'art' and use it to launder money or get tax breaks or whatever. Like it's easy to defend Roktho (thanks for introducing me to him), but can you defend Banksy? Or that guy who taped a banana to a wall a while back? That's the stuff most people think of when they hear "modern art", not Roktho. Also I think your arguments would be more convincing if you stopped strawmanning all your opponents as "poltards" who only like romanticism, but admit that they do have some valid points.

[Anonymous No.18620410]

>>18620375
In this case, I honestly think he might have a point. That person is arguing how intense and powerful the experiencing one of Rothko’s paintings is, yet at the same time arguing that one needs to go through a great deal of aesthetic conditioning (or what he calls education) to appreciate them. If the latter is true, the. I honestly think that the claim to the former is little far from the truth.
As much as he might want to complain about conservative tastes, he himself is making a great case for their complaints about contemporary art and the culture surrounding it.

[Anonymous No.18620433]

>>18616759
as evidenced by this thread, the Western mind is so thoroughly colonized by the Nazis that it has become incapable of producing good art

[Anonymous No.18620443]

>>18620396
You're 100% right, Anon.
What shocked me however was this :
>can you defend Banksy? Or that guy who taped a banana to a wall a while back? That's the stuff most people think of when they hear "modern art", not Roktho.

The problem comes from the media.
No, i'm not joking. The media and scholar institutions are to blame, not the plasticians themselves.

>"OH MY GEHD, THEY PUT A BANANA ON DA WALL"
-> This is how your average NPC reacts. He/She is outraged, because nobody clearly explained what was the point of that.

The exposure of Maurizio Cattelan's banana ("Comedian") and Banksy are interesting.

Cattelan haw been a troll for 25 years at this point, and yet, nobody in the public eye seems to remember his name despite all of his stunts.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comedian_(artwork)

And for Banksy, well, the dude hates the "counter-culture" movement he initiated. "Exit Through the Gift Shop" was a mockery of that. That's why since the Walled Off Hotel installation 5 years ago (his latest major project), he hasn't done anything major.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.18620453]

you need to pay $200k for zoom lessons in order to appreciate rothko, pleb. if you aren't a rich trust fund kid then you will basically never understand art. gabish?

[Anonymous No.18620455]

>>18620199
>>18620186
It is funny that you keep attributing words like conservative without their first having been mentioned. To agree on the existence of a canon of art at all is to speak of conserving that which came before and to be suspect of that which comes now. If enjoying Rothko's output means you already understand the codes, then understanding those codes is understanding and respecting conventional (dare I say traditional?) art, and you could not be sincere if you so flippantly accept something which moves beyond those codes without serious examination and discussion. It is clear that Rothko's work, to the extent that it moves beyond what was before it, maintains a connection and respect for it, even if that respect is borne of animosity or rejection (and not so much with Rothko as with his contemporaries).

But it almost seems like you reject any and all criticism of art at all, especially of suspicion of new art. This seems disingenuous. Take the Center Pompidou, or Burden's Shoot. I personally find Verlato to be comically base despite his obvious talent. You seem any and all dislike of art boils down to a failure to understand it.

[Anonymous No.18620457]

>>18620453
shut the fuck up tripfag

[Anonymous No.18620464]

>>18620410
Every single aesthetic and intellectual pursuit needs a great deal of previous conditioning, and premodern art that you seem to regard as self evident won't move an uneducated peasant either.
I have seen people wait in line to go closer to the Pietà, arguably one of the greatests artistic expressions in the whole of human history, and inmediately turn their back on it to take a selfie with a shit eating grin.
Retards who disregard contemporary art are just one step above of the idiotic masses, but they are still pretty far down the ladder.

[Anonymous No.18620466]

>>18620338
>appeal to status
Shouldve read Plato retard.

[Anonymous No.18620467]

What do we think about Jon Rafman?

He fucked around 4chan a lot and even released a /b/core music video in collaboration with Oneohtrix Point Never on /mu/ back in 2012 I think.

[Anonymous No.18620470]

>>18620467
>Jon Rafman
>Daniel Lopatin

Pretty damn good, but maybe to repetitive for my taste. I'm more of a Squarepusher/A Guy Called Gerald type of dude.

[Anonymous No.18620474]

>>18620470
*typo : maybe too repetitive for my taste

[Anonymous No.18620484]

>>18620455
>You seem any and all dislike of art boils down to a failure to understand it.
If it only were something beyond the usual "IT'S UGLY AND MY KIDS COULD HAVE DONE THIS" rhetoric, well...

You'll never hear a NPC explaining why he/she hates a piece of art beyond the predictable excuse "i don't like it".

[Anonymous No.18620489]

>>18620249
They are not paintings but photographs, I misstyped. Still a good example of interesting contemporary art.

[Anonymous No.18620501]

>>18620378
MODS!!!! ANON BTFO ME!! MOODDDDDDSSSS!!!!

[Anonymous No.18620522]

>>18620443
>"Comedian"
Yeah I get it, it's supposed to be ironic and meta and witty or whatever. Problem is 1. all that's already been done to death and 2. There are greentexts that are better at doing those kinds of things than art that gets sold for millions of dollars. I mean it feel completely arbitrary, and more like rich people circlejerking each other about how sophisticated they are than anything that really merits praise. Don't tell me actually you believe the reason artists like those's works get sold for milllions of dollars is because they're objectively worth that much, they're just that good, etc. I think the reason your "poltards" gravitate towards more realistic art is because it at least has some benchmark of how "good" it is (ie it''s good because it's so beautiful or so realistic or conveys such and such emotion so well etc). Sneering at them about how their "uneducated" for having tastes like that just makes it worse really.

[Anonymous No.18620527]

How do declinists fail to notice the elephant in the room (American hegemony)? Americans are largely soulless and incapable of producing high culture - it is hard to see how a world strangled by these people wouldn't experience a decline in the arts.

[Anonymous No.18620533]

>>18620484
>IT'S UGLY AND MY KIDS COULD HAVE DONE THIS
Is a legitimate excuse for normal people who just want some art they can appreciate, that speaks to them, without having to read books on it. Hating them for that and branding them NPCs is really counterintuitive.

[Anonymous No.18620542]

>>18620527
The exhaustion of culture in the West (or its mass-reproduction) is the basis for experimental art in general. The world isn't so much strangled by American culture as left unguided and undirected by it.

[Anonymous No.18620546]

>>18620076
Very few could explain this. Even those teaching art today know very little about the problem.
Look up their definitions of art first, none of them come close to the old aesthetic philosophers, it's just self-fulfilling abstraction.

[Anonymous No.18620568]

>>18620533
You make the mistake of believing that art should be accessible to the masses. High art has always been the domain of the élite and I would like to keep it that way. The masses can keep their visually comprehensible and emotionally facile entertainments; I'm not a socialist, I am elitist and aristocratic by nature, so I am drawn towards work that is challenging, difficult, inaccessible and complex. I find the study of this kind of work rewarding and interesting. It's not for everyone and I never said it was; I am not a socialist, kek.

Like I said, 99% of contemporary art sucks ass, and my friends and I often visit galleries solely to mock the work contained therein. But like I said, it's always been like that at every point in art history. In every era there have been a small minority of artists making excellent work. Those with a truly artistic temperament will seek out that excellence.

It's not for everyone. I defend my right to be a gatekeeping elitist.

[Anonymous No.18620574]

>>18620527
didn't notice that at all. i agree. Where did you get that idea?
>>18620522
same. Cattelan isn't smart at all. Comedian was nothing short of a publicity stunt. He's a cunning grifter. A real modern art appreciator.
I also think the idea of subversion has lost its meaning too. At some point you need to go back to some solid "classical" art in order to understand "aesthetics".
But this type of thinking only leads to cringe thought process, like the dude who talked about "demonic influences" in modern art (lol) and thought a random German Nazi propaganda picture was the epitome of "beauty".
This video gets it, especially towards the end with the pathetic Trump artwork. Normies are fucking drones lacking in self-awareness for buying this type of shit in their home, just like what the "noovo rishe" does with their shitty overrated pop-art thingie.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYnbCRrZn54

>>18620533
I also agree with that. You're 100% right (and i'm not kidding you). I'm the smug douchebag in this scenario. But that's also the problem. Normies don't care about art, they just want to consume "pretty" comforting pictures. There is 0 challenge into that.

[Anonymous No.18620596]

>>18620338
Jünger is actually very poignant, particularly in regards to something like pic related, which is even uglier than a bunker.
>[T]he famous reinforced concrete is a typical workshop material in which what has occurred is, so to speak, the complete dissolution of building stone into mortar – a material which suits the construction of trenches, but not of churches.

[Anonymous No.18620598]

>>18619444
rent free

brain rot

reddit spacing

[Anonymous No.18620613]

>>18620568
>>18620574
Please tell me you're not the guy that's been arguing this entire thread that it's not in decline and posting Rothko's Chapel and all that

[Anonymous No.18620632]

>>18620613
I'm not.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.18620634]

>>18620568
you're definitely elite bro

[Anonymous No.18620670]

>walk into art museum
>see this
I guess I'm too stupid to "get" art

[Anonymous No.18620676]

>>18620574
>didn't notice that at all. i agree. Where did you get that idea?
I opened the thread, recalled how much I hate America (I am American) and how much of a cultural desert it is, and concluded the obvious...

[Anonymous No.18620688]

>>18620598
I don't think he's necessarily wrong. Art used to be moored to a practical purpose, whether that be building of cathedrals or painting of religious scenes, the remembrance or glorification of the dead, or mere celebration of wealth (among many other purposes). Tradition weighed heavily on the production of art. A central tenet of liberalism is the liberation of individuals from their circumstances, and this in real effect eroded tradition. Today art is not moored to a purpose (beyond potentially being worthy of purchase, depending on the medium) nor to a tradition. It is the definition of style without substance; mere skill and talent are put to work with no external goal, whether that be enforced by a real purpose or even just a tradition, which often would seek to employ that talent in new and interesting ways (hence the development of oil painting). It would be folly to not place blame in the ascendancy of liberalism.

[Anonymous No.18620692]

>>18620090
Excellent post. Thanks.

[Anonymous No.18620706]

>>18620670
You probably are, yeah.
It's not particularly good, though.

[Anonymous No.18620720]

>>18616759
It's not worse than in the past we are just alive for all the art and literature right now instead of only having the best (and luckiest) pieces. I bet the Greeks wrote a lot of garbage and made a lot of really fucking terrible statues and frescos that people didn't bother saving or it didn't last past the fad. With all that was lost do you really think everything was good? We're losing a shit load of film right now and that's a very new medium. The sucky ones were just forgotten or ignored. Today everything is more easily saved but in the coming centuries the garbage will probably be forgotten as well.

[Anonymous No.18620730]

>>18616909
Don't knock street art, it's the soulful expressions of the downtrodden and he passionate that will never make it to the gallery.

[Anonymous No.18620773]

new postmodern painting what u guys think

[Anonymous No.18620790]

>>18620464
>Every single aesthetic and intellectual pursuit needs a great deal of previous conditioning, and premodern art that you seem to regard as self evident won't move an uneducated peasant either.
I’m not exactly sure about that for all cases. From the descriptions of from the defenses of Rothko’s art in this thread seems that their power comes from an immediate intensity felt when experiencing it. You could maybe make that point about something like Ulysses or Fountain, but I really don’t think it does here. Having to train yourself to get such a thing out of artwork like this honestly seems to defeat the point. I honestly kind of liked
Rothko before, but your posts are making good case for his work being a collection of failures.
I also think your judgement on those viewing the Pieta is just harsh. I’d seriously wager that those people got more out of that sculpture than you’ve ever gotten out of any artwork. I can guarantee you that no matter how garish you found their behavior, they were engaging with that work in a more sincere way than the kinds of people who like to huff and puff about others interacting with art wrong.

[Anonymous No.18620800]

>>18620484
You can't tell me someone like Jackson Pollock, whose works had to have an Authentication Board created because they are so easily reproducible (or forgable), can be free from that obvious criticism

[Anonymous No.18620831]

>>18616759
Women, activist LGBT gnomes and "diversity" types are usually mediocre and the ones who made culture shitty and boring nowadays. This too shall pass.

[Anonymous No.18620847]

>>18620730
Your pic is terrible, and I say this as a big fan of graffiti

>>18620688
Baby-brained and power-worshiping conception of art. Shove those cathedrals up your ass.

NJA0D

[Anonymous No.18620856]

>>18620730
I don’t think there’s anything inherently valuable about a work that comes from the suffering of its creator. Oppression seems to inspire narcissism, cliche, and half-assed sentimentalism in the arts more than anything else

[Anonymous No.18620878]

>>18620847
Post your idea of good graffiti

>>18620856
That's a very shallow take in my opinion. Art is about expression and feelings of anger or despair can make excellent art pieces. Just painting a portrait of some noble or king or even Jesus over and over would just feel soulless to me.

[Anonymous No.18620904]

>>18620467
Rafman is cool, especially his Dream Journal videos. Of course they tried to cancel/metoo him...
Here's a good piece on him: https://caesuramag.org/posts/notes-on-jon-rafman-dream-journal
(also liked the interview he did with Spike Art mag last year or so)

[Anonymous No.18620911]

>>18620878
>Art is about expression and feelings of anger or despair can make excellent art pieces.
“Can” is the key word here. Never said they couldn’t. Just that they have a tendency to seem uninspired, which isn’t surprising give. Just how formalized the discourse around the subject is. If anything it seems like you find it engaging for the same reason a religious person would a great portrait of Christ. Nothing wrong with that, but you should recognize it.

[Anonymous No.18620915]

>>18618025
I mean, kinda. Better than Kosuth's autism.

[Anonymous No.18620920]

>>18620790
You are missing my point. The effect of the artwork is instantaneous, pure expression and evoques feelings in a way that doesn't need to be explicetely intellectualized, even if it can (and should) be done at a later time. In contraposition, a piece like a book fron the sky by Xu Bing is not evocative nor instantaneus, it's purely intellectual and the sense of the piece is only accesible via the intellectual discourse created around it, it would need an analysis to complete it, while a text would only muddy the experience of the Rothko.
The piece being pure emotion doesn't mean that everyone has the aesthetic sensibility to appreciate it, in fact I would say that very few people do.
It would be the same with a Coleridge poem, even if a 12 years old knows the meanings of all the words, he won't be able to feel the pure emotion and significance that the poem will convey to a more learned reader.
By the way, don't get too hung up on Rothko, he is just another person on a line that goes back for thousands of years. There are plenty of others both before and after him that can serve as an example of my points.

[Anonymous No.18620935]

>>18620911
I am religious I just think decrying art expressing a people's pain is more in line with not being comfortable with realities of this world. Not everything is happy and a people aren't wrong for pointing out how it's not good for them.

[Anonymous No.18620956]

>>18618394
Looks like its made for people that hate nature.

[Anonymous No.18620988]

>>18620145
>doesn't know that Rothko used layering techniques that are very hard to reproduce
(still, think about him what you will)
>doesn't know that "postmodern painting" usually refers to neo-historicist hyperrealism
ngmi

[Anonymous No.18620991]

>>18620920
>evoques

[Anonymous No.18620998]

>>18620988
>doesn't know that Rothko used layering techniques that are very hard to reproduce
Because the faggot didnt tell us how he did it like its some fucking magicians trick.

[Anonymous No.18621000]

>>18620206
>Also this dude isn't even postmodern you retard. None of his paintings are black canvases
that's modernism

[Anonymous No.18621070]

I like the DMT inspired stuff like this. It moves a lot when you're tripping.

[Anonymous No.18621087]

>>18618394
It takes decades of pretending you know what you're talking about, agreeing with people you consider superior based on a mere hunch, and generally being mentally stuck in high-school to look at any of this and think of it as something worthwhile.

[Anonymous No.18621088]

>>>18615900

[Anonymous No.18621089]

>>18620935
I’m not decrying anything. I’m only claiming that such things do not make a work inherently good (which is not to say they make it inherently bad), and that they are often accompanied by negative qualities that go overlooked.

[Anonymous No.18621101]

>>18620730
>""""street art"""
>posts this toy shit
>muh downtrodden
Writing is about the ego, not some left wing faggotry.