EBSQ Self-Representing Artists Community Forum Forums  Register  Login  My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums 

Chat  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ  Ticket List  Log Out

RE: Non Art

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Art-Specific Topics] >> Abstracts (public) >> RE: Non Art Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Non Art - 8/13/2008 11:43:19 PM   
ilex9


Posts: 1027
Joined: 7/30/2005
From: NE Tenn.
Status: offline
I have to wonder at any reaction as strong as relating something to "garbage".  Abstract art that causes such a strong reaction is probably pretty effective if not, dare I say it, "good"?

_____________________________

~ Caroline
These are not the droids you are looking for.

(in reply to Vfem)
    Post #: 21
RE: Non Art - 8/14/2008 12:21:39 AM   
toucanne


Posts: 10585
Joined: 10/5/2005
From: Pahrump, Nevada
Status: offline
Good point, Caroline. Art only fails when it provokes no reaction.

ROFL, Shannon.

_____________________________

As we are destined to live in the prison of our minds, it is our duty to furnish them well.
~ Peter Ustinov

My LiveJournal

(in reply to ilex9)
    Post #: 22
RE: Non Art - 8/14/2008 9:45:30 AM   
platypus


Posts: 2949
Joined: 7/30/2005
From: New Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ilex9

I have to wonder at any reaction as strong as relating something to "garbage". Abstract art that causes such a strong reaction is probably pretty effective if not, dare I say it, "good"?


I don't know - I disagree that causing a reaction makes it good or even effective. I've seen some abstract art that bothered me because I thought all that canvas & paint could have been put to much better use. Same thing when I see non-abstract art that's poorly executed (e.g, poorly drawn when it's obvious that wasn't the artist's intention). I don't think that my "reaction" to makes it good art! A lot has to do with the intention of the artist.

quote:

ORIGINAL: toucanne

Good point, Caroline. Art only fails when it provokes no reaction.



Again I disagree, reactions are subjective anyway. I don't know if we're just talking about abstract art here, but there's a ton of extremely well executed realistic work out there that I have absolutely no reaction to, but that doesn't mean it failed; it just means that it's boring to me & is not my taste. Same with a lot of abstract art, I think of much of it as decorative & very little moves me at all.

(in reply to toucanne)
      Post #: 23
RE: Non Art - 8/14/2008 11:15:43 AM   
ilex9


Posts: 1027
Joined: 7/30/2005
From: NE Tenn.
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: platypus


A lot has to do with the intention of the artist.

... it just means that it's boring to me & is not my taste. Same with a lot of abstract art, I think of much of it as decorative & very little moves me at all.


This is what I find the most interesting about the differing of opinions on this subject.  How much has to do with the intention of the artist?  I've always seen it as a 2-way street where they viewer vicariously interracts with the artist through the art, which acts as a door or filter for the intent.  For example, many people say Rothko's work makes them feel uplifted, etc.  when the metaphor he often used for them was tragedy.  Even though his intent was different than the viewer's reaction, the lines of give and take opened by the artwork remain active.  A viewer glances at the work, moves on and summarily forgets about it, those lines of communication are pretty much closed,so the work has not been effective for the VIEWER.  The artist may have goten a lot out of it - even if it is a "failed" attempt at realism, moving through the process may have been significant for the artist.  Likewise, someone may be cranking out bubble wrap prints and sending them off to buyers - not really getting any more out of the process than a worker on a factory line assembling widgets.  The viewer may just be trying to match their sofa, but they also might have an actual deep reaction (those colors/shapes remind them of something, give them a feeling...  or, what a waste of paint! I-an elephant- a 3 year old could do that!).  In the case of the latter, the viewer has made the connection with the original process, so in a way the door is still open.  A good question here is do you remember the work you're referencing when you say 'that blank canvas', 'that piece where they were trying too hard and failed', or is it just an amorphous melange that signifies 'bad art'?

Another is what context did you see them in?  Is the location of the "door" as important as the art itself?  The first time I ever saw a lot of minimalist and abstract work was in a large, dead quiet museum setting.  I wonder if my reaction would have been different if I was in a different setting (restaurant, office, model home, someone's living room)?

A lot of questions remain regarding what IS "Art" or what constitutes "good" or "bad" art.  The fact remains that one person's bad may be another's good.  The problem is if we are going to define "Art" as something that requires "genius" (not necessarily the case?) who gets to decide?  A lot of the reactionary stuff happened because of who got to decide the answer to that (do you have $?).

er... sorry to meander and babble.

_____________________________

~ Caroline
These are not the droids you are looking for.

(in reply to platypus)
    Post #: 24
RE: Non Art - 8/14/2008 12:34:32 PM   
platypus


Posts: 2949
Joined: 7/30/2005
From: New Jersey
Status: offline
Caroline,

You have some good points & I only have time right now for a quick reply -

You're right, it really is a two way street between the artist & viewer - and I think my comment about the artist's intentions was directed at failed attempts at realism as opposed to abstract art. I don't have a specific example of it in mind, but I've seen some on ebay, some of which to me is dreadfully awful yet still seems popular for some reason. That doesn't mean the work might not have its own charm & appeal to the viewer, but probably not for the reasons the artist intended. Again it all comes down to personal taste.

Regarding abstracts, actually I do remember probably the first instance where I thought "what a waste of canvas", it was about 23 years ago & I believe it was at the Whitney, we saw this huge painting (maybe 6' x 6' or even bigger) that just had a bunch of white or off-white paint covering it (I forget the artist). I have an aversion to pretentiousness & this seemed to be the the height of of "the Emperor's New Clothes" syndrome. Since then I've seen other abstract work that I didn't care for & had similar thoughts (I can't stand Robert Motherwell's work either), but that's personal opinion again.

(in reply to ilex9)
      Post #: 25
RE: Non Art - 3/28/2009 8:17:00 AM   
peggy8751

 

Posts: 5
Joined: 7/30/2005
From: Philadelphia
Status: offline
Who is to say what ART really is???? Art is in the eye of the beholder

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Peggy Garr

(in reply to robertracy)
       Post #: 26
RE: Non Art - 4/11/2009 3:32:11 AM   
KingDavid


Posts: 309
Joined: 7/30/2005
From: Bridgeport, CT
Status: offline
I want to start by saying that I love that term "anti-art" ... I think that is brilliant ... hell, I might even coin that one if it already hasn't been trademarked.

At this point in my art "career", being relatively new, I can say that achieving satisfaction with each piece of mine is my main goal. It might take me a day or a week or a month to do a painting, but it will always have my seal of approval. During that creation period, I might endure challenges, but the feeling I get, when I know that I have created something ... that I am happy with ... tells me that I am on the right track. If I was to constantly "fail" at my objective, I would still paint. I find pleasure in conquering fears & shortcomings. My art or anti-art is probably garbage to some of you, but it isn't to me. And that's all that matters. If I never sold another painting or was never told that I was talented, it wouldn't matter. Those things only motivate me, not deter me. But somehow, through all this, I HAVE sold paintings. So that gives me a little pat on the butt .... along with an attaboy. If I really work at this thing, I might even develop into a REAL artist someday.

On what real art is ... anything that someone deems relevant to their life ... from a visual, emotional, spiritual point of view. So that's pretty much anything ... including found objects & splashes of paint.



_____________________________

Visual Shrapnel - Art that remains embedded in the viewers mind.

http://www.twitter.com/VisualShrapnel

(in reply to peggy8751)
      Post #: 27
RE: Non Art - 4/18/2009 10:06:15 PM   
pvtts05

 

Posts: 58
Joined: 4/23/2006
Status: offline
I suppose i'll throw in my two cents. I believe that it is not only the result of painting but the action and purpose (to why it was painted). Putting paint on any kind of surface is an emotional act. People do it for different reasons (ie. it gives them pleasure, it helps them to deal with something, it fills time, they feel the need to do it). Though he didn't do abstract art, i'll use my favorite artist Egon Schiele as an example. In his short time (only 27 years) he painted over 200 self-portraits. Why you ask? Because he needed to, it was the only way he knew how to help find himself. Therefore, when it comes down to it, in my mind the end result doesn't really matter that much, as long as the intentions were genuine, then I would consider it art.

(in reply to KingDavid)
    Post #: 28
RE: Non Art - 7/17/2009 12:58:48 PM   
Panchromatica

 

Posts: 7
Joined: 5/13/2007
From: Wiltshire, UK
Status: offline
I don't believe that 'abstract' art per se is empty or non-art. I think we as human beings have a physiological reaction to certain combinations of pattern, shape and colour. The abstract artist is trying to access that reaction - or at least should be. I know looking at my own work, that I feel some sort of gut response to some pieces and not to others. I haven't figured out what triggers that response or if it is unique to me. I see my role as trying to find out.

There is also often a confusion between abstract - ie totally non-representational, and abstraction - ie a simplification or reduction of 'reality'. Sometimes of course our response to an abstract comes from seeing links to the real world that the painter didn't put there!

(in reply to pvtts05)
     Post #: 29
RE: Non Art - 7/17/2009 2:15:43 PM   
toucanne


Posts: 10585
Joined: 10/5/2005
From: Pahrump, Nevada
Status: offline
quote:

There is also often a confusion between abstract - ie totally non-representational, and abstraction - ie a simplification or reduction of 'reality'. Sometimes of course our response to an abstract comes from seeing links to the real world that the painter didn't put there!

You only have to look at EBSQ's 3 Abstract galleries to see the confusion in people's minds between abstract art and abstraction of representational shapes. But sometimes the lines blur, as in space images or microscopic images. It has been said that all forms are rooted in reality in some way.

A lot of people, especially those not trained in looking at art (I don't mean just by schooling, but in any way) have an impulse to see familiar objects in abstract art. They look for them even if they don't see them at first, perhaps to ease their discomfort at seeing something totally unfamiliar.

_____________________________

As we are destined to live in the prison of our minds, it is our duty to furnish them well.
~ Peter Ustinov

My LiveJournal

(in reply to Panchromatica)
    Post #: 30
RE: Non Art - 7/17/2009 3:48:52 PM   
Panchromatica

 

Posts: 7
Joined: 5/13/2007
From: Wiltshire, UK
Status: offline
quote:

You only have to look at EBSQ's 3 Abstract galleries
quote:

ORIGINAL: toucanne

I'm still finding my way around here so hadn't looked at these, but having done so I agree entirely.

(in reply to toucanne)
     Post #: 31
RE: Non Art - 7/17/2009 4:38:11 PM   
christi13


Posts: 1162
Joined: 4/5/2008
From: in.
Status: offline
Everyone has there own opinions,thats one thing that goes against new artist with no formal training or a degree,just when you think,okay i'm doing alright,then you think,maybe i'm not,i do things i like,i like puting colors together,even if they'er not correct.i think art IS in the eye of the beholder.
                  christi

_____________________________

www.redbubble.com/christi13
bonanzle.com/booths/christi1319
http://christi13art.blogspot.com

(in reply to Panchromatica)
      Post #: 32
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [Art-Specific Topics] >> Abstracts (public) >> RE: Non Art Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts





EBSQ Artists GroupEBSQ Self Representing Artists - A division of EBSQ, LLC  Privacy Policy  Contact EBSQ
© 2000-2005 EBSQ, LLC - All rights reserved - Original artists retain All rights

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5.5 Unicode