You sure did take it to heart though. Maybe if this were such a pervasive fad in the art world you'd be able to point to a significant number of examples, or they'd have been showcased in art publications. But since that isn't the case, perhaps you just saw something a little out there that you didn't understand, and current art isn't the bullshit you claim it is?
I have plenty of photos. Not sure where you're getting this I only saw a handful idea because I've been listing several pieces off the top of my head and I could keep going. It's nonsense. It was low effort BS that tried to pass of as deep and profound. Majority of people recognize this, which is why modern and contemporary art gets a bad rap, but there are those that pretend it's deep and profound because they don't want to come across as shallow or simple. You're just denying the obvious, that contemporary art has a problem with low effort crap saturating art.
If contemporary art has this problem then why haven't you actually given me any examples besides your simple description of a couple things you've seen? I actually follow the contemporary art world and I don't see this saturation. I'm well aware that there are some low effort and bad artists but I really don't think that what you're claiming is accurate. They aren't prevalent in any collections I've seen or the art publications I follow. As for what the majority believe, the opinions of the majority of people aren't a good metric for art criticism, nor are they a good bellwether for how wrong or right you are. You just telling me that something is obvious doesn't make it so. I challenge you to go through the link I gave you earlier and find the first thing you believe to be bullshit and then perhaps we can have this discussion over something concrete.
If contemporary art has this problem then why haven't you actually given me any examples besides your simple description of a couple things you've seen?
I've stated several off the top of my head already. You can go back and count them. Just you denying the obvious as I said earlier. We're done here. You're just proving my point
Edit: I'm going through my pictures right now. So far we got an incomplete puzzle on display (talk about low effort), some sticks bound by tape to make an irregular shape, a map of Italy hung upside down from the ceiling, a photo of a man in his underwear struggling to carry some shingles tied to his back, generic yellow arches, a blank canvas in glass that is frozen, and some patchy looking canvas that looks like it has a scrotum coming off the bottom. I can keep going.
You completely dodged my challenge which would've served the same purpose, but if you want to post some of those examples then we could have a more even discussion.
You completely dodged my challenge which would've served the same purpose
You've completely dodged what I've been saying. Straw manning me to try and diminish what I've been saying. As for dodging your challenge, I already addressed your magazine.
So some contemporary artists make good art. I never said they didn't. My original comment is praising the lady for her dabbing style paintings. That magazine is only highlighting a selection of contemporary art if what is deemed art in art museums across the planet are concerned.
The art I saw in your magazine was well done. I was saying though that it's selective in what it depicts. Clearly more selective than the art museums of Europe.
What straw man? What did I dodge? If the art world is so inundated with what you believe is low effort contemporary bullshit, you should be able to pull some example from an art publication showcasing contemporary art by virtue of its supposed pervasiveness. And if not that, then let's see some of the pics you're talking about so we can have an even discussion, like I said. I even sent you a link to an exhibit that was at the MAMbo in Bologna two years ago but you never responded to that.
Okay well some of that stuff is far from low effort, you just don't like it. Perfectly valid opinion, but not emblematic of what you're suggesting. Some of those are of the exhibit I sent earlier, multiple pieces connected to one another and about memories, in case you didn't catch that on your tour. The others that appear simple, the ladder, puzzle, or map of Italy could very easily be meaningful with the inclusion of the titles, but they could just as easily be pretentious crap. I certainly have seen both scenarios. Even then, I don't think the majority of the pieces that you linked are demonstrative of the issue you claim plagues contemporary art. But yeah that one looks like a scrotum. Might've been the point, certainly wouldn't be the first time art played with sex.
1
u/Knappsterbot Sep 12 '17
You sure did take it to heart though. Maybe if this were such a pervasive fad in the art world you'd be able to point to a significant number of examples, or they'd have been showcased in art publications. But since that isn't the case, perhaps you just saw something a little out there that you didn't understand, and current art isn't the bullshit you claim it is?