What's with modern art?

[Frederick Skelly]

<begin rant>
I was shanghai'ed into seeing some modern art today. Most of it was horrible.

There was a wire sculpture that looked like a 6 year old twisted 2 wire clothes hangers together and added a 6 inch piece of red insulated wire just for color. Some rich lady donated it. (I figure she got drunk at an art show, bought it, woke up the next day, uttered an expletive, and then donated it to the museum to get a tax deduction.)

There was another piece that looked like the dude came home from work, took off his sweaty T-shirt and hung it on a nail in the wall. I kid you not. And it was on display, like this was some brilliant breakthrough.

There was a regular old farm tractor. The "artist" glued sea shells to the tires, then painted the whole thing white. This was on display as "art".

But the craziest one was 3 frames that were each about 5 ft square. There was no painting in any of the three. No image. No kidding. Just a frame around a big white piece of paper or canvas. (There was no hidden image, no "white on white" image, no texture, no nothing. The canvas was blank.) It was commissioned by the National Endowment for the Arts.

I never saw so much ugly stuff in one place in my life. It made my head hurt.
<end rant>

Do people really like this stuff? Or are they just pretending?
Fred

[Edit. Yes, I realize I probably sound like a Jeff Foxworthy CD, but man it was awful.]

[Barry McFadden]

Not just modern art....take a look at a Jackson Pollock painting!!!!!!!

[John K Jordan]

For many years I attended the annual Siggraph Convention (Special Interest Group on Computer Graphics) and watched the evolution, or devolution, of art over time. The showcase for animators and schools from all over the world was always displayed on a huge screen with an audience of several thousand. There were both high end "professional" and amateur entries concerning things like new modeling and rendering techniques, technical and scientific visualization (my field), humor, education, academic advances, storytelling, and art.

Over the years I could tell by the reactions of those seated near me how what they thought of specific clips changed. Often some of the "art" was met with grunts/groans or more telling, silence from the dozens of people around me. The worst came from the big art schools, where I suspect students were rewarded by how far they were from anything in collective memory, apparently the more jarring and chaotic the better, esthetics not needed. Plenty of random throwing digital paint and surfaces at the electronic canvas. I, and I expect I wasn't the only one, started asking aloud "Is it art or is it stupid?"

I wish I could give some particularly memorable examples but apparently I've successfully purged them from memory. I can imagine that some really liked much of what I didn't, but there's no accounting for taste in things like art, just as with music. As for the serious followers of the nonsense I can't help but be reminded of The Emperor's New Clothes. I personally prefer elegance, beauty, and harmony.

The Siggraph convention itself was always amazing, held in different cities around the country and always in a huge hall with lots of lecture rooms, the big industry and studio names and little guys, the latest products, the evolving technologies (motion capture, 3d scanning, printing, vr, etc), and a strong community of some amazing people, some of them famous pioneers in the field.

JKJ


<begin rant>
I was shanghai'ed into seeing some modern art today. Most of it was horrible.

There was a wire sculpture that looked like a 6 year old twisted 2 wire clothes hangers together and added a 6 inch piece of red insulated wire just for color. Some rich lady donated it. (I figure she got drunk at an art show, bought it, woke up the next day, uttered an expletive, and then donated it to the museum to get a tax deduction.)

There was another piece that looked like the dude came home from work, took off his sweaty T-shirt and hung it on a nail in the wall. I kid you not. And it was on display, like this was some brilliant breakthrough.

There was a farm tractor. The "artist" glued sea shells to the tires, then painted the whole thing white. This was on display as "art".

But the craziest one was 3 frames that were each about 5 ft square. There was no painting in any of the three. No image. No kidding. Just a frame around a big white piece of paper or canvas. (There was no hidden image, no "white on white" image, no texture, no nothing. The canvas was blank.) It was commissioned by the National Endowment for the Arts.

I never saw so much ugly stuff in one place in my life.
<end rant>

Do people really like this stuff? Or are they just pretending?
Fred

[Thomas McCurnin]

There were similar rants when Pablo Picasso got out of his classical genre into modern art as well as Bosch, all in the 1920-1930 era, and they are now considered priceless pieces. Then there is Andy Warhol as another example.

[Frederick Skelly]

There were similar rants when Pablo Picasso got out of his classical genre into modern art as well as Bosch, all in the 1920-1930 era, and they are now considered priceless pieces. Then there is Andy Warhol as another example.

Well, I know you're right Tom. But at his worst, Picasso never did anything as ugly as a couple of things I saw today. :) :) :)

[Mel Fulks]

Frederick….not bad ,for a first rant !
The T shirt was the one the guy , Brando …I think, wore in “A Street-car Named Shabby- Sheik Attire”.

[Mel Fulks]

I remember reading about a rolled up abstract painting that was set down on the floor of a modern art museum by staff . The place was
getting a re-arranging and the painters ( the big wide brush type painters) got it mixed up with one of their drop-cloths ! What I don’t
remember is whether I read it in the news-paper, or a Playboy cartoon.

[Bill Dufour]

What about the one that was hung upside down for 47 days until someone noticed.
Next thing you know people will want architects to design building with roof s that don't leak unlike almost all of frank loyd wrights stuff. Its not a leak, it's a feature.
Bill D.

https://news.artnet.com/art-world/moma-hangs-matisse-upside-down-683900

[Jim Koepke]

There was a wire sculpture that looked like a 6 year old twisted 2 wire clothes hangers together and added a 6 inch piece of red insulated wire just for color.

I have seen stuff like that at incredible prices. Maybe it is for rich people to purchase for donations for tax write offs.

It seems some art is a statement on how foolish the people who buy it must be.

This quote always comes to mind when the subject of art comes around:


“A man who works with his hands is a laborer;
a man who works with his hands and his brain is a craftsman;
but a man who works with his hands and his brain and his heart is an artist.”

― Louis Nizer

It seems some of what is called art doesn't involve the use of the brain or heart unless the brain and heart are only trying to figure the least amount of effort for the highest price.

This seems more artistic to me than some twisted wires:

484994

Usually the makers of Garden Art aren't asking hundreds or thousands of dollars for their creativity.

There are other whimsical art forms:

484995

Some are made one at a time and some production line art.

I guess it is all in the eye of the beholder. Maybe we cannot define art, but we know what it isn't when we see it.

jtk

[Anuj Prateek]

Kind of related.

Yesterday we visited a t-shirt shop on Vancouver Island. We did not plan visiting them but the advertisement along side the road and in front of shop attracted us enough to make a quick stop.

It was for all intent and purposes a grand display of "creativity".

A small selection had rock bands related stuff printed on them. They looked ok.

A big selection had explicit phrases or images printed on them.

Largest selection were artistic. They looked no different than how clothes look after playing Holi (a festival that includes throwing colors on each other).

T-shirts were priced starting $15 going up to $90. Anything, that was wearable was on upper end. Ended up not buying anything.

[Mel Fulks]

Picasso was married a bunch of times . Each wife got multiple portraits. They got uglier and more weird with each new masterpiece.
Not the greatest painter , but dog-gone good ,talented amateur divorce lawyer .

[Rob Luter]

To each his own I guess. I majored in Industrial Design in college and one of my minors was in art. I was exposed to all manner of traditional and non-traditional artworks. Modern art can be just as expressive and visually stimulating and the classics. That said, I don't have much use for most of it. While I can appreciate the visual impact and respect the reflection of the artist's creativity, it just ain't my bag. I feel the same way about Opera.

Too often art is elevated to mythical status by pretentious devotees trying to out condescend one another. You know the type, dressed in all black with black art goggles and a perpetual sneer, rolling their eyes every time any lower form of life "doesn't get it". Whatever. I like what I like and have no apologies to offer.

https://theartgorgeous.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Feature_ArtCritics_theartgorgeous-1.jpg

[Rich Engelhardt]

Personally - I just laugh at it -if someone wants to throw money away on it, that's fine with me.

I don't laugh when it's funded by tax money though. That's just wrong.

[Jim Becker]

Art appeal is purely subjective. Sometimes it's hard to understand at piece at first visually, but hopefully there's an accompanying explanation from the artist or gallery/event. In the end, it's perfectly fine to say "I don't like that". :)

[Mark Hennebury]

pretty sure that this sums it up.

485005

[John K Jordan]

... Sometimes it's hard to understand at piece at first visually, but hopefully there's an accompanying explanation from the artist or gallery/event. ...

I am mostly of the opinion is that art that suffers without an explaination is missing something.

Much sculpture and painting is accompanied by a a label with a title which should be sufficient. A piece titled "torture", "my brain on drugs", "hate without prejudice", "my tuesday dream", or "artist's block", etc. could open the viewer's mind . Ideally the art (or music or interpretive dance, or poetry, etc) should stand on it's own but a simple title can guide the viewer into the frame of mind to grasp a hint of the inspiration or goal.

Maybe the three frames with white canvases (that's been done before, BTW, sometimes with one canvas, sometimes with a different solid color or subtle gradient) could be titled "Vision of the Afterlife" or somesuch. Or hey, instead of a title provide a whiteboard on a stand and a dry erase marker for visitors to provide interpretations. That could provide an dynamic creative perspective for viewers and artist alike for otherwise inscrutable pieces.

[Frederick Skelly]

Maybe the three frames with white canvases (that's been done before, BTW, sometimes with one canvas, sometimes with a different solid color or subtle gradient) could be titled "Vision of the Afterlife" or somesuch. Or hey, instead of a title provide a whiteboard on a stand and a dry erase marker for visitors to provide interpretations. That could provide an dynamic creative perspective for viewers and artist alike for otherwise inscrutable pieces.

Good thoughts John. Thanks!

[Thomas McCurnin]

I'm barely old enough to remember a similar rant about Elvis and how disgusting his music was and obscene. You couldn't hear the melody! I'm definitely old enough to remember similar rants about the Beatles. Yeah Yeah Yeah. Frank Sinatra though they had no talent. Buddy Rich said Ringo was a terrible drummer. Quincy Jones said they were terrible songwriters and musicians.

[Frederick Skelly]

I'm barely old enough to remember a similar rant about Elvis and how disgusting his music was and obscene. You couldn't hear the melody! I'm definitely old enough to remember similar rants about the Beatles. Yeah Yeah Yeah. Frank Sinatra though they had no talent. Buddy Rich said Ringo was a terrible drummer. Quincy Jones said they were terrible songwriters and musicians.

Well, you've got me on this point. :)

[Mark Hennebury]

What's your point?

I'm barely old enough to remember a similar rant about Elvis and how disgusting his music was and obscene. You couldn't hear the melody! I'm definitely old enough to remember similar rants about the Beatles. Yeah Yeah Yeah. Frank Sinatra though they had no talent. Buddy Rich said Ringo was a terrible drummer. Quincy Jones said they were terrible songwriters and musicians.

[Thomas McCurnin]

Art, Music, Architecture, and yes Furniture are all subjective as pointed out by Jim. Just because the OP doesn't like modern art doesn't mean the artist is bad. And tastes change. What is awful art (Picasso, Bosch) in the day turns out to be a priceless masterpiece now. The same can be said about music. My Dad hated Elvis and the Beatles. Turns out their works are priceless classic masterpieces now. Ray Eames furniture was widely criticized in the day and again, its now a priceless masterpiece.

[Mark Hennebury]

Popularity dictates the price, not the quality.

Crap that later becomes collector pieces is still crap , just more expensive crap. Ringo may be the most famous drummer but that has zero to do with his "talent"


Art, Music, Architecture, and yes Furniture are all subjective as pointed out by Jim. Just because the OP doesn't like modern art doesn't mean the artist is bad. And tastes change. What is awful art (Picasso, Bosch) in the day turns out to be a priceless masterpiece now. The same can be said about music. My Dad hated Elvis and the Beatles. Turns out their works are priceless classic masterpieces now. Ray Eames furniture was widely criticized in the day and again, its now a priceless masterpiece.

[roger wiegand]

Now, as ever, 90% of everything produced is crap. In a hundred years or so it will be discarded and, just as we know think that everyone who painted in the Renaissance was wonderful, only the good stuff will be seen. And, just as then, it won't necessarily be what's most popular today.

Art schools place a very high premium on originality and doing something "new", hence a lot of failed experiments. OTOH, at least in science, failed experiments are key to making progress. I suspect that is true of art as well. I'm not, and never will be, an artist.

[Roger Feeley]

I read once that when Stravinsky premiered Rite of Spring, there was a riot.

[Bill Dufour]

I read that when. a British county mansion was built(1600?) in red brick it had to be covered in sandstone cladding . This was due to fears the bright color would drive the locals into a frenzy of over excitement.
Bill D

[Maurice Mcmurry]

I try to keep an open mind... Basquiat is one who's work I just do not care for.

[Mel Fulks]

I read that when. a British county mansion was built(1600?) in red brick it had to be covered in sandstone cladding . This was due to fears the bright color would drive the locals into a frenzy of over excitement.
Bill D
My guess is the bricks were not fire baked ,the sandstone was pre-baked.

[Mel Fulks]

I read once that when Stravinsky premiered Rite of Spring, there was a riot.

yeah, I heard that from the school music teacher years ago. Pretty sure most of us were thinking , “ Wow! , Wish I could have been part of
that !

[Jack Frederick]

I see different…compositions and wonder where the excitement comes from. If I am able to witness it in person sometime I am just astonished at its power. In ‘70 standing before Mona Lisa, closely, before everything had to be protected I was stunned at the beauty. Van Gogh, so many others, Esherick, thankfully. I love Winslow Homer’s work. How do you judge taste or excellence until you see it up close. The popularity of any creation matters little to me. I have gotten to the point that I can make my own choice as to what I like. I am so very gratified that people just continue to produce. Hell, it gives us something to laud or jump on, over or up & down about. I tell my grandkids, 6, 8 & 10, do what you like. Make it! Just make something. Express! Why not, it is what keeps us here, isn’t it?

[Bill Dufour]

Background information on the paintings "the scream" adds quite a bit to it. The subject is on a bridge walking back from the insane asslyeum at the far end of the bridge. I believe his sister lived there for a while.
Bill D

[Mel Fulks]

Popularity dictates the price, not the quality.

Crap that later becomes collector pieces is still crap , just more expensive crap. Ringo may be the most famous drummer but that has zero to do with his "talent"

Ringo replaced a drummer
whose work ….was not working. Recently I read the sad reflections of the guy Ringo replaced...he was sad about being fired.
But the Beatles prospered . Not sure any Rock drummers are being courted by any of the “great orchestras” , or that any
orchestras are making more money than the Beatles made. I think they did pretty well.

[John K Jordan]

…In ‘70 standing before Mona Lisa, closely, before everything had to be protected I was stunned at the beauty. …

Hey, have you seen Mona recently? A small painting at the end of a large room packed with 100s of people, most trying to get closer, some pickpockets. (in the hallway outside I walked behind two teen girls pulling their take from shoulder bags to give to their handler - phones, cameras, wallets, jewelry.)

After about 20 minutes inside I gave up trying to get closer. Digital and printed reproductions are far easier to appreciate.

In contrast, my last experience at the Galleria dell'Accademia di Firenze (Florence, Italy) was incredible. We had tickets for the first entry of the day and the statue itself, unlike past visits packed with visitors all the way around, had NO others viewing for a while. The sparse attendance also made experiencing the other sculptures and paintings far more enjoyable. (BTW, don’t skip the music instrument wing - expanded from my previous visits.)

[Mark Hennebury]

Civilization functions by control. It runs on the understanding the people are gullible, easy to manipulate. unable to make individual judgements and will follow the crowd whilst all the while proclaiming that it was there own well thought out idea.

The great users of this knowledge are religion, politics, business, arts, fashion, entertainment etc.

When referring to art; the classics, like Michelangelo, Leonardo, required immense talent and skill and a lifetime of commitment to learning and refining their skill and knowledge compare that to modern art where anyone can call themselves and artist, have zero skill, knowledge or training and all you have to do is come up with a gimmick to shock people, and talk a bunch of BS about it.

The fact that modern art sells for so much money is reflective of the gullibility of people not the quality of the work or the mystical genius of the "artist"
If some people want to stare at splat of paint on the wall in an art gallery and convince themselves that they alone are at that moment communicating with the other side, and that they understand what the artist struggled to show them, that's their choice.

If you want to believe that Ringo must be a great drummer because he is famous and made a lot of money, enjoy the delusion.

485071



Ringo replaced a drummer
whose work ….was not working. Recently I read the sad reflections of the guy Ringo replaced...he was sad about being fired.
But the Beatles prospered . Not sure any Rock drummers are being courted by any of the “great orchestras” , or that any
orchestras are making more money than the Beatles made. I think they did pretty well.

[Steve Demuth]

I am mostly of the opinion is that art that suffers without an explanation is missing something.


My working-class midwestern farm boy brain feels this way. My grown-up, mathematician, engineer brain tells me that the things I find most beautiful and inspiring all required some explanation. The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus is a transcendent truth to me, but only because I understand it, and the Enlightment mindset that gave it birth. I'd like Shakespeare, and Homer, say, without knowing the history behind them, but I find them so much more because I have that. So, to me, great art is great if it serves as a gateway to understanding, and is itself enhanced by understanding.

Most of the modern art I've ever seen in a museum flunks this test, badly. I think that's because most of it is only expressing the angst, or maybe even random wanderings, of a single mind, searching mostly to distinguish itself from the crowd, and never tapping into anything greater. The problem is not that it needs explanation, but that the explanation itself is trite and banal. Of course museum curators have to display something, to draw crowds, and rather by definition, modern art museum curators are trying to guess what of the ocean of trite and banal "striving" art will actually speak to the ages. They're not very good at it.

But, one level down, the world is full of art that is pleasing, well-crafted, and rather common. I appreciate this for it's pleasing quality and the craftmanship that goes into it. It doesn't require much understanding beyond that, but I still want to be surrounded by it. It will never grace a great museum's galleries, but it is a great boon to me, nonetheless.

[Jim Koepke]

Popularity dictates the price, not the quality.

Crap that later becomes collector pieces is still crap , just more expensive crap. Ringo may be the most famous drummer but that has zero to do with his "talent"


Ringo replaced a drummer
whose work ….was not working. Recently I read the sad reflections of the guy Ringo replaced...he was sad about being fired.
But the Beatles prospered . Not sure any Rock drummers are being courted by any of the “great orchestras” , or that any
orchestras are making more money than the Beatles made. I think they did pretty well.

Ringo Starr was a member of the band, not the leader by a long shot.

Gene Krupa and Buddy Rich were much more. From Wikipedia:


Eugene Bertram Krupa was an American jazz drummer, bandleader and composer who performed with energy and showmanship. His drum solo on Benny Goodman's 1937 recording of "Sing, Sing, Sing" elevated the role of the drummer from an accompanist to an important solo voice in the band.


Bernard "Buddy" Rich was an American jazz drummer, songwriter, conductor, and bandleader. He is considered one of the most influential drummers of all time. Rich was born and raised in Brooklyn, New York, United States. He discovered his affinity for jazz music at a young age and began drumming at the age of two.

Some of my college classes were in art. One of the lessons from the instuctors was an artists work often tells of the times they are in.

People mention not liking or understanding the work of Picasso. His Guernica communicated the atrosity of war to many:


Guernica is a large 1937 oil painting on canvas by Spanish artist Pablo Picasso. It is one of his best-known works, regarded by many art critics as the most moving and powerful anti-war painting in history.

Perhaps the artist who twists up a couple of coat hangers and tosses in a splash of red is commenting on their own feelings toward life. Perhaps nobody cares to see or hear about it.

jtk

[Mark Hennebury]

Far more talent than Ringo.
https://fb.watch/f9-5oOqqsU/

[Edwin Santos]

If you want to believe that Ringo must be a great drummer because he is famous and made a lot of money, enjoy the delusion.



Whatever your other larger points may be, suggesting Ringo's greatness is a delusion is not helping you.

Here's a simple test - try and find an actual working drummer who will say something unflattering about Ringo Starr. Add the bassists in the mix too if you like. I think you'll have a hard time finding a critic.
Butchers, bakers, candlestick makers and woodworkers maybe, but actual drummers have mostly admiration for Ringo.

This is because Ringo's greatest gift may not have been drumming skill in the direct layperson's sense. What was it? Timing.
It was his impeccable timing that allowed the Beatles to become the groundbreaking artists they became in the studio. Due to the technology available at the time, the Beatles would sometimes do 50-60 takes of a song and splice together various takes to create the final piece. The key ingredient that allowed them to do so was Ringo's timing. Computer analysis has revealed his timekeeping to be about perfect, almost a human metronome. Even the slightest timing change would have prevented the splice from working. To be capable of drumming 50 takes with identical timing is basically superhuman.

Rant over - just felt moved to step up to Ringo's defence.

BTW, if this inspires anyone to know more, there is an excellent documentary that was produced by BBC in 2017 called Sgt. Pepper's Musical Revolution with Howard Goodall. It can be found through a Google search.
About an hour long, it dives into the technical work the Beatles did in the production of the album, much of which had never been attempted or even contemplated before. Really fascinating.
Anyone who thinks of the Beatles as merely "popular" would walk away with a whole new appreciation for their level of craftsmanship and artistic innovation, even if you don't particularly like their music.

[Mark Hennebury]

Thought for the day: So he could actually have been replaced by a metronome and no one would be the wiser. Somehow doesn't strike me as a good metric.




Whatever your other larger points may be, suggesting Ringo's greatness is a delusion is not helping you.

Here's a simple test - try and find an actual working drummer who will say something unflattering about Ringo Starr. Add the bassists in the mix too if you like. I think you'll have a hard time finding a critic.
Butchers, bakers, candlestick makers and woodworkers maybe, but actual drummers have mostly admiration for Ringo.

This is because Ringo's greatest gift may not have been drumming skill in the direct layperson's sense. What was it? Timing.
It was his impeccable timing that allowed the Beatles to become the groundbreaking artists they became in the studio. Due to the technology available at the time, the Beatles would sometimes do 50-60 takes of a song and splice together various takes to create the final piece. The key ingredient that allowed them to do so was Ringo's timing. Computer analysis has revealed his timekeeping to be about perfect, almost a human metronome. Even the slightest timing change would have prevented the splice from working. To be capable of drumming 50 takes with identical timing is basically superhuman.

Rant over - just felt moved to step up to Ringo's defence.

BTW, if this inspires anyone to know more, there is an excellent documentary that was produced by BBC in 2017 called Sgt. Pepper's Musical Revolution with Howard Goodall. It can be found through a Google search.
About an hour long, it dives into the technical work the Beatles did in the production of the album, much of which had never been attempted or even contemplated before. Really fascinating.
Anyone who thinks of the Beatles as merely "popular" would walk away with a whole new appreciation for their level of craftsmanship and artistic innovation, even if you don't particularly like their music.

[Edwin Santos]

Thought for the day: So he could actually have been replaced by a metronome and no one would be the wiser. Somehow doesn't strike me as a good metric.

No quarter for Ringo Starr with you Mark

[Edward Weber]

Art is subjective, period.
I certainly agree with some that many of the "modern art" displays are just ridiculous, whether they can be explained or not. Often the explanation doesn't do anything to improve the aesthetics or the allure of the piece.
Some nut fills a toilet with pine cones, and we see it and think "what the heck is that".
After it's explained to us that it's a commentary on how we're flushing the forest away, etc. Now that we understand the thinking behind the artist's vision, it makes more sense, but it's still just a hopper filled with pine cones. The explanation doesn't always help.
JMO

[Frederick Skelly]

485071

This is sooo timely. A friend of mine's husband just paid $500 for a brick with a pile of uncooked spaghetti epoxied to the top. She was pretty upset. Felt like he "had to" buy it because the "artist" worked for him in their day job and this was their first gallery show.

[Mark Hennebury]

Edwin, my only point is that anything that is not measurable gets given a false measure of value, by those that stand to gain by doing so. Guernica is a large 1937 oil painting on canvas by Spanish artist Pablo Picasso. It is one of his best-known works, regarded by many art critics as the most moving and powerful anti-war painting in history.
The value is totally made up horse **it But if enough "important" people tell you that it is so, we are inclined to believe it.



Metronomes don't actually play the drums, so no a metronome itself could not replace him.

[Mel Fulks]

Frederick, please tell her about my open-work tooth pick holders made from toe-nail clippings.

[Jim Koepke]

Far more talent than Ringo.
https://fb.watch/f9-5oOqqsU/

That was amazing, thanks for sharing Mark. Maybe there will be a Chinese revival of the Big Band Sound and she can rival Krupa & Rich for some amazing sounds.


Thought for the day: So he could actually have been replaced by a metronome and no one would be the wiser. Somehow doesn't strike me as a good metric.

So I am not familiar with a metronome that can swing a couple of sticks at different rhythms while working a bass drum with on foot and a top hat with the other.

Can you provide a link for this amazing piece of equipment?

jtk

[John K Jordan]

Frederick, please tell her about my open-work tooth pick holders made from toe-nail clippings.

Ooo, and how about the incredible artwork left in all my fields by horses, donkeys, and llamas. Each work is unique but with a constant theme. I've got a great sale going now.

JKJ

[Jim Koepke]

Far more talent than Ringo.
https://fb.watch/f9-5oOqqsU/


Thought for the day: So he could actually have been replaced by a metronome and no one would be the wiser. Somehow doesn't strike me as a good metric.


Ooo, and how about the incredible artwork left in all my fields by horses, donkeys, and llamas. Each work is unique but with a constant theme. I've got a great sale going now.

JKJ

I hear dried cow pies pressed in to the shape of a Frisbee are big in Texas.

jtk

[Jim Becker]

Um...folks...are you really trying to torpedo this thread? Nearly everything about art including musical art is subjective. Opinions are normal. How they are expressed is there things can go downhill fast.

Jim
Forum Moderator.

[Mel Fulks]

I’m guessing some here are wondering why the “explorers” grabbed all the gold …and left all the wonderful hand woven mats made by
“self taught indigenous artisans”. (that means that they were born here and did not have a Walmart)

[Jim Koepke]

You are right, I got it wrong it seems the Contest's World Capital of the event to which was intimated is in Beaver, Oklahoma.


Beaver is a town and county seat in Beaver County, Oklahoma, United States. The community is in the Oklahoma Panhandle. As of the 2010 census, the town population was 1,515, a 3.5 percent decrease from 1,570 at the 2000 census. The city is host to the annual World Cow Chip Throwing Championship. Held in April, "Cow Chip" brings attention from nearby cities with a parade, carnival, and cowchip throwing.

jtk

[Mark Hennebury]

So I am not familiar with a metronome that can swing a couple of sticks at different rhythms while working a bass drum with on foot and a top hat with the other.

Can you provide a link for this amazing piece of equipment?

jtk

Sure can; https://www.musicca.com/drum-machine?data=%224.0.1-4.2.1-4.4.1-4.6.1-4.8.1-4.10.1-4.12.1-4.14.1-5.4.1-5.12.1-6.0.1-6.8.1-m.-t.4-tmp.90-s.0%22

[Mark Hennebury]

There were hundreds of great bands in the 60's in England, most never became famous, a few fell into some mysterious slipstream and skyrocketed to astronomical fame and fortune. The ascent to the stars was more like a highly contagious debilitating mental virus that swept over the population robbing them of the ability to reason, pushing the few lucky groups to superstardom, regardless of their actual musical abilities. It seems that once launched in that slipstream there is simply no stopping the rise as each watcher passes the virus onto those close by. The spread of the disease is expediential and unstoppable, and becomes entrenched in the mind of population, as they are assimilated into the hive. Resistance is futile, but a few of us try.

Give me one logical reason why Picasso's Guernica is considered the best anti-war painting in history...other than that's what they tell us.

I could paint Guernica! I couldn't paint the Mona Lisa.

[Frederick Skelly]

Sometimes it's hard to understand at piece at first visually, but hopefully there's an accompanying explanation from the artist or gallery/event.

I normally agree with John Jordan that if it needs an explanation, the work missed the mark for me. But I I have to say you are right in at least one example Jim. I normally dislike Picasso - I find his style chaotic, confused and indecipherable. So I'd never seen "Guernica". But seeing it mentioned above, I just looked it up. Reading about what it is supposed to convey, I "get" that one. I still don't like his style, but it works for that one topic. But I would not have understood it if it was hanging in a museum with just the title. No way.

Changing gears..... In my first post, I mentioned a wire sculpture I thought was horrible. Seaching around, I found it. (Or one that looks close by the same artist - "Gego". In this image it's in front of some odd background). Come on guys, this isnt something like Ringo or Guernica. To me, it looks like something that's broken and ready to be recycled.

485082

[Mel Fulks]

He might have meant “Metro- Gnome”. And I DO remember hearing one , at New York street corner . Real short guy ,chubby ,with long
beard ….only time I ever saw a professional drummer banging on the bottom of an empty trash can!

[Jim Koepke]

Sure can; https://www.musicca.com/drum-machine?data=%224.0.1-4.2.1-4.4.1-4.6.1-4.8.1-4.10.1-4.12.1-4.14.1-5.4.1-5.12.1-6.0.1-6.8.1-m.-t.4-tmp.90-s.0%22

It looks like it has to be programed instead of being able to create or follow a beat.

Maybe in a few years they will have that kind of ability. Then there will likely be full orchestras of automatons playing music for audiences.

jtk

[Jim Koepke]

…
Give me one logical reason why Picasso's Guernica is considered the best anti-war painting in history...other than that's what they tell us.

I could paint Guernica! I couldn't paint the Mona Lisa.


This may explain it much better than my abilities are able > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guernica_(Picasso)

Maybe you could have painted Guernica without seeing it, but someone else did. Besides, the event leading to the painting took place in April of 1937. Were you around at the time?

Some people understand Van Gough and other artists of his time, some don't. Some called them "les fauves" or "the wild beasts":


Modern art begins with the heritage of painters like Vincent van Gogh, Paul Cézanne, Paul Gauguin, Georges Seurat and Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec all of whom were essential for the development of modern art. At the beginning of the 20th century Henri Matisse and several other young artists including the pre-cubists Georges Braque, André Derain, Raoul Dufy, Jean Metzinger and Maurice de Vlaminck revolutionized the Paris art world with "wild", multi-colored, expressive landscapes and figure paintings that the critics called Fauvism.

Some people get Picasso and others do not.

If you do not like one artist, there are plenty more to go around.

jtk

[Bill Dufour]

I normally agree with John Jordan that if it needs an explanation, the work missed the mark for me. But I I have to say you are right in at least one example Jim. I normally dislike Picasso - I find his style chaotic, confused and indecipherable. So I'd never seen "Guernica". But seeing it mentioned above, I just looked it up. Reading about what it is supposed to convey, I "get" that one. I still don't like his style, but it works for that one topic. But I would not have understood it if it was hanging in a museum with just the title. No way.

Changing gears..... In my first post, I mentioned a wire sculpture I thought was horrible. Seaching around, I found it. (Or one that looks close by the same artist - "Gego". In this image it's in front of some odd background). Come on guys, this isnt something like Ringo or Guernica. To me, it looks like something that's broken and ready to be recycled.

485082
Looks like the guy who spent his life mapping all the nerves and pathways of a lamprey fish. Only about 1,000 nerves but lots of interconnections to follow.
Bill D

[Jim Koepke]

…
To me, it looks like something that's broken and ready to be recycled.

485082

That is the reason there are starving artists, they really do not understand the difference between art and something a dog left on the sidewalk.

jtk

[Mel Fulks]

Einstein was driven by desire for women….just like the rest of us. He knew was not handsome and would have to be rich and famous. He
did come up with some quips . I think he sold the joke Mark posted to one of the late-nite TV guys. That nuke stuff was not cheap !

[Mark Hennebury]

Mel, this thread is a laugh a minute.

Jim: "Some people get Picasso and others do not."


This is an interesting point that you have bought up, the big questions is who really "get's" Picasso?

Some think that he is some genius, struggling to bring you into a new frame of consciousness, and you believe that you are one of the elite few smart ones that understand him.
Then there are people like me that think that he, early on in his career, realized just how gullible people are and that there are no limits what foolish crap they would believe, and played it all the way to the bank.

I never said that I would have painted Guernica, merely that I, or for that matter anyone, could. As for it being unique...so what? I could throw a bucket of paint on the wall and it also would be unique and something that Picasso could copy but not replicate.

It's all a good laugh and all, but there are some real points here.

If we were not influenced would we pick Picasso's "Geurnica" out of all others as the best, would we pick Sam Malloof as the greatest if we were not told that he was. We are all influenced, and "our" opinions are manipulated.
Bob Beaman was the greatest Olympic long jumper in the world, because he jumped further than anyone else. simple!
Sam Maloof is called the greatest American furniture maker.....because he has been called the greatest American furniture maker, there is a big difference! One is fact one is fiction.

[Jim Koepke]

…

[/COLOR][/I]This is an interesting point that you have bought up, the big questions is who really "get's" Picasso?
…
Bob Beaman was the greatest Olympic long jumper in the world, because he jumped further than anyone else. simple!
Sam Maloof is called the greatest American furniture maker.....because he has been called the greatest American furniture maker, there is a big difference! One is fact one is fiction.

Some of Picasso's work appeals to me, some does not.

Uniqueness does not create value. Many artists tend to present a depiction of their perception. It can be anything from photorealism to abstract. Picasso must have had a skill of some kind if he was able to convince people if they bought his work they would be considered so highly. Some of his work, at least for me, evoke different feelings. Works like The Old Guitarist and The Tragedy can be felt. Some of his ceramic work also appeals to me.

Records or sporting competition almost always fall when the next greatest in the world at whatever comes along. There are players like Babe Ruth who may actually have his pitching records still standing. Which makes him great because there likely won't be any one person to break his hitting and pitching records.

I think Sam Maloof is considered the greatest American furniture maker because he made incredibly beautiful chairs. He was honored with more awards than any other 20th century craftsman. One of my favorite comments heard about his work is the wood looks the joints grew that way.

I wish I could make a chair like Sam Maloof made.

jtk

[Maurice Mcmurry]

I enjoyed getting to know J.J. Froese. He taught me a few things about woodworking, handsaws, paint brushes, etc. I think his online gallery is fun to look at.

James Joe Froese Fine Arts (http://jjfroese.com/wp/)

[Jim Becker]

I think Sam Maloof is considered the greatest American furniture maker because he made incredibly beautiful chairs. He was honored with more awards than any other 20th century craftsman. One of my favorite comments heard about his work is the wood looks the joints grew that way.

But even there, subjectivity is key. While I greatly admire Sam's craftsmanship and and ability to create what are iconic pieces of furniture to the world, I'm really don't like the style at all and have no desire to emulate it. It was pretty kewel being able to actually sit in one of his rockers, however, as David Elsworth has one and I had the opportunity when I was there for a turning class years ago.

The bottom line is art is interpretive from two directions...that of the artist and that of the viewer. Sometimes their individual ideas are in agreement and sometimes they are divergent. I really do try to understand "what is the artist trying to convey. Sometimes it comes to me; sometimes it doesn't.

[Maurice Mcmurry]

Much in this thread reminds me of the sentiment conveyed by the Dire Straights song "In The Gallery"

[Mark Hennebury]

How long a sports record stands is not the point. The fact that a record is achieved means that it was one in competition against ones peers. It was measured and found to be better than all of the rest. The best! That's what makes it real.

Art; people tell you who's great. No measurement, no competition. no evidence, no proof.

Woodwork; people tell you who's great. No measurement, no competition, no evidence, no proof.

In an imaginary world were no one had heard of Picasso, would his work get chosen above all others?
In an imaginary world were no one had heard of Sam Maloof, would his work get chosen above all others?

Would either of them even be known without all of the publicity and promotion?

"He was honored with more awards than any other 20th century craftsman. " Sam Maloof never won anything, he didn't win in competition against his peers, he was promoted, marketed and given awards. And we were told of his greatness and like any contagious virus that nonsense continues to spread.

Don't get me wrong I am not saying he was a bad woodworker, he made a nice rocking chair, was a competent woodworker....just like tens of thousands of others.
Many people make Maloof chairs, It's not that difficult, I made a few myself decades ago, I also made Nakashima and Krenov stuff. We are all influenced by what's promoted in the media.
The problem is when we get to a point where we can no longer be objective.

Sam Maloof was great at getting promoted and being given awards. By that standard he was better than any other woodworker.




Some of Picasso's work appeals to me, some does not.

Uniqueness does not create value. Many artists tend to present a depiction of their perception. It can be anything from photorealism to abstract. Picasso must have had a skill of some kind if he was able to convince people if they bought his work they would be considered so highly. Some of his work, at least for me, evoke different feelings. Works like The Old Guitarist and The Tragedy can be felt. Some of his ceramic work also appeals to me.

Records or sporting competition almost always fall when the next greatest in the world at whatever comes along. There are players like Babe Ruth who may actually have his pitching records still standing. Which makes him great because there likely won't be any one person to break his hitting and pitching records.

I think Sam Maloof is considered the greatest American furniture maker because he made incredibly beautiful chairs. He was honored with more awards than any other 20th century craftsman. One of my favorite comments heard about his work is the wood looks the joints grew that way.

I wish I could make a chair like Sam Maloof made.

jtk

[Jim Koepke]

Art; people tell you who's great. No measurement, no competition. no evidence, no proof.

Woodwork; people tell you who's great. No measurement, no competition, no evidence, no proof.

In an imaginary world were no one had heard of Picasso, would his work get chosen above all others?
In an imaginary world were no one had heard of Sam Maloof, would his work get chosen above all others?

The proof in art is a century later people still admire an artist's work. Not because someone told them to, but because it appeals to them. In some paintings I have seen a vitality in the brush strokes. Others look at the same painting and say, "gee, that doesn't look like the wheat fields back home in Kansas."

In woodworking the evidence is in the pieces that have survived through many generations. For craftsmen like Townsend and Goddard the competition was finding people who would purchase their work. The measurement and evidence is how their work was treasured by families, passing it through generations instead of putting it in a barn to rot.

That is measurement and proof enough for many folks.

As far as competition there are many contests in the woodworking and artistic fields. As a matter of fact, at least one of the members here on SMC has won at least one award at such competitions.

jtk

[Jim Koepke]

Then after all the above a surfing trip over to the NY Times finds this > https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/25/magazine/cecilia-vicuna-art.html

485103

Maybe it is Avant-garde, or is it advanced garbage?

Some things will last, some won't.

jtk

[Maurice Mcmurry]

Thanks to a client I recently discovered Egon Schiele. Much of his work is not for me. I like his "City In Twilight". An unfortunate way to have your work appreciate in value is to have it stolen by natzis.

[Kev Williams]

I have a great appreciation for things I consider "art", such as a finely restored old International Harvester, or watching an old 1940's 30' long paper bag machine turn 4 rolls of paper and plastic lining into 4 large paper bags per second, flowing slowly down a horizontal conveyor belt for about 20', where a vertical belt grabs them and moves them upward, then deposits them on another horizontal belt where they travel almost 200' just under the building's ceiling where they go down the next vertical belt, with someone waiting below to stack them all on pallets, and then moved and hand loaded onto another conveyor to where workers glue valves into them, and I wonder, WHO thought this up?? And BUILT it? And this was just ONE machine's operation out of dozens in the St. Regis Paper plant I used to work at just out of high school. I'm fascinated with the "art" that goes into creating machinery...

But my BIGGEST mind-blower on the opposite side of the "art" spectrum, was this 3 foot tall, inflatable stainless steel rabbit, that sold for....HOW MUCH?????
485124485126 I'm kinda at a loss...

[Mel Fulks]

Guy who bought it must have really bad TV reception !

[Jim Koepke]

I have a great appreciation for things I consider "art", such as a finely restored old International Harvester, or watching an old 1940's 30' long paper bag machine turn 4 rolls of paper and plastic lining into 4 large paper bags per second,

As one of my college art instructors often said, "art is everywhere."

jtk

[Frederick Skelly]

485103

Maybe it is Avant-garde, or is it advanced garbage?

I vote "advanced garbage".

[Michael Drew]

A couple friends and I were in San Francisco a few years ago, wandering around the city. It started to rain, so we ducted into the Museum of Modern Art..... I happen to like art, as well as music. I have prints all over the walls in my home. I believe I have a pretty open mind and can appreciated the effort and artistic rational of most things, but this place was filled with stuff that was just simply - ridiculous. There was one piece that was quite literally, a framed canvas. No texture, nothing. It was painted white. Just white. Sorry - it wasn't "art". Never will be.

[Jim Koepke]

To paraphrase Albert Einstein, If a cluttered canvas is the sign of a cluttered mind, what is a blank canvas?

It may be a statement to any. If it made a statement intelligent people enjoyed they would go to the nearest art supply store, buy a frame and a canvas and do the same thing much cheaper.

Some people will look at an artist's work and possible think there is genius in the way expression was captured. It could be capturing the movement of wind, sea, light or time.

Other people might look at another artist's work thinking they are a genius if they can con people into buying their work.

Just because I "don't get" it doesn't mean it isn't art.

jtk

[Mark Hennebury]

Watch the Genius at work creating a masterpiece! Simply stunning!
https://youtu.be/Nxes8pyHkJc

[Mel Fulks]

Looks ,to me like Picasso was drawin’ a picture, stopped to go to the bathroom…then a kid armed with a bucket of crayons finishes it off.

[Mel Fulks]

Mark, your thread has given us a : “a rollicking …frolicking, anything can happen and does !…. When these wise men trade wit and
wisdom to become the “very best” Art Experts !”
Yes , I borrowed that from an old Disney movie commercial. And I hope that by giving them credit, I can avoid going to prison.

[Mark Hennebury]

An interesting part of life is in seeing the absolute absurdity of it. People are both intelligent and stupid at the same time, it's quite fascinating really. Examples are everywhere, and the tenacity in which people will fight to hold onto and defend their chosen absurdity is somewhat scary. It is quite amazing how logic, reason, facts and evidence can be packed into a compartment and locked away.

Picasso's work is infantile garbage, Leonardo would have beaten him to death with a blunt instrument, yet here we are the sharpest in the history of mankind, the highpoint of human civilization, hailing Picasso as the artistic genius of all time, and lining up to view his great masterpiece's, convinced that we are smart enough to decipher the secret message that only the smart ones can see. Truth is it is just infantile meaningless scribble, you can of course convince your self that it is anything you want I guess, but that doesn't change what it is.

Classic art is incredible; modern art is like a project to see just how stupid humans really are, and apparently they haven't reached the end yet.

I have to admit when I first saw Picasso's work, I thought that it was stupid, It wasn't until people explained it to me that I realized it wasn't the work that was stupid, it was them.:D

[Edwin Santos]

the tenacity in which people will fight to hold onto and defend their chosen absurdity is somewhat scary.

Truer words were never spoken!

[Jim Koepke]

An interesting part of life is in seeing the absolute absurdity of it. People are both intelligent and stupid at the same time, it's quite fascinating really.

Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects. --Will Rogers


… hailing Picasso as the artistic genius of all time, and lining up to view his great masterpiece's,


So have you built an estate that appraises anywhere near $250 million?


According to one person familiar with the estate, there was $4.5 million in cash and $1.3 million in gold. There were also stocks and bonds, the value of which was never made public. In 1980 the Picasso estate was appraised at $250 million, but experts have said the true value was actually in the billions.

He must at least have been a genius con man to build such an estate out of "infantile garbage." Just because it doesn't please me, and some of Picassos work doesn't appeal to me, it doesn't mean it isn't art.

For Picasso, once his work was selling life was pretty much doing what he wanted to do, art.

It may not be your cup of tea or mine but this teapot would likely start a conversation at afternoon tea:

485176

Though most working folk likely wouldn't be in the market for one.

jtk

[Mel Fulks]

Some art is anti- art . No one has ever spoofed hifalutin stuff better than Al Capp ! Makes me laugh just thinking about it . Extremely
bitter …. but hilariously funny! Many times I have seen Little Abner wake up from a nap to ogle a neighbor lady who looked exactly like his
wife . With different color hair ! Oops ! left out the names of the Dogpatch people. Daisy -May was his blonde wife and Moon- Beam
Mc Swine was his neighbor lady who looked exactly like his wife …except she had DARK hair …and smoked a pipe ! Of course we more
modern guys have congured up much nuttier stuff.

[Mark Hennebury]

Hi Jim, always fun having a debate with you.

Okay; I said Stupid, not ignorant.

"Infantile" has nothing to do with whether or not you like it. We have already established that "everything" is art. I cleaned up some of my dogs artwork from the yard this morning.

Bernie Madoff the "Genius" investor made a lot of of money too.





Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects. --Will Rogers



So have you built an estate that appraises anywhere near $250 million?



He must at least have been a genius con man to build such an estate out of "infantile garbage." Just because it doesn't please me, and some of Picassos work doesn't appeal to me, it doesn't mean it isn't art.

For Picasso, once his work was selling life was pretty much doing what he wanted to do, art.

It may not be your cup of tea or mine but this teapot would likely start a conversation at afternoon tea:

485176

Though most working folk likely wouldn't be in the market for one.

jtk

[Jim Koepke]

Okay; I said Stupid, not ignorant.

To paraphrase Will Rogers, Everybody is stupid, only about different things.

How is that?

jtk

[Mark Hennebury]

Modern art is business! it's about money, a lot of money, and maximizing return on investment is the goal. To that end they put a lot of effort into marketing. Convincing the public that nothing is something, like all snake oil sellers, it's all in the marketing. I certainly don't expect to change any ones mind, there is no way that you can combat that kind of brainwashing with logic and reasoning, but it is always interesting listening to people trying to defend the indefensible. "some people get it some don't" "He must be a genius, because everybody said so", " he's got more money than you" etc..

485190

Pablo Picasso,
Head of a Warrior, 1933. Plaster, metal, wood and found objects. MoMA.
485191

September 18, 2015 By Roni Feinstein (https://www.ronifeinstein.com/author/roni-feinstein/)

"All hail the genius of Picasso! When visiting Picasso Sculpture at The Museum of Modern Art, it is impossible not to stand in awe before the work of an artist who, although primarily a painter, revolutionized for all time what a sculpture can be. At the same time, as this survey exhibition well demonstrates, he produced a host of the 20th Century’s most iconic sculptures using an inconceivably wide range of materials, processes and forms. While Picasso’s achievements in his work in three dimensions are of high seriousness and continue to be of formidable influence (more on this later), it is clear that his attitude in making sculpture was often remarkably casual–at times, he appears to have been just fooling around."

[Frederick Skelly]

September 18, 2015 By Roni Feinstein (https://www.ronifeinstein.com/author/roni-feinstein/)

"All hail the genius of Picasso! When visiting Picasso Sculpture at The Museum of Modern Art, it is impossible not to stand in awe before the work of an artist who, although primarily a painter, revolutionized for all time what a sculpture can be. At the same time, as this survey exhibition well demonstrates, he produced a host of the 20th Century’s most iconic sculptures using an inconceivably wide range of materials, processes and forms. While Picasso’s achievements in his work in three dimensions are of high seriousness and continue to be of formidable influence (more on this later), it is clear that his attitude in making sculpture was often remarkably casual–at times, he appears to have been just fooling around."

Looks like Pablo's estate has been sharing his halucinogens with that critic. :) :) :)

[Steve Demuth]

So have you built an estate that appraises anywhere near $250 million?

He must at least have been a genius con man to build such an estate out of "infantile garbage." Just because it doesn't please me, and some of Picassos work doesn't appeal to me, it doesn't mean it isn't art.


I suspect that much of art in today's world is in fact a con - a way of worming some meme into our consciousness so that we (or some subset of we that has money to burn) value it, despite it having no actual value. You win at this game if you can hook the consciousness of enough people with enough money, and it doesn't matter whether your work has discernable meaning, admirable craftmanship, or exceptional aesthetic beauty. Find the right hook, and you don't need any of those things to be "art." The "art" is in fact in the discernment of the hook that works - the ability to exploit the nooks of others minds with whatever you can put together.

[Mark Hennebury]

Fascinating and scary to think that "our" thoughts, opinions and beliefs may actually not be ours, but ones that were put in our heads by some form or manipulation and we are living under the influence!

Trust no one...least of all yourself.

[Greg Funk]

I suspect that much of art in today's world is in fact a con - a way of worming some meme into our consciousness so that we (or some subset of we that has money to burn) value it, despite it having no actual value. You win at this game if you can hook the consciousness of enough people with enough money, and it doesn't matter whether your work has discernable meaning, admirable craftmanship, or exceptional aesthetic beauty. Find the right hook, and you don't need any of those things to be "art." The "art" is in fact in the discernment of the hook that works - the ability to exploit the nooks of others minds with whatever you can put together.All the metrics you mentioned for valuing artwork are subjective though. There is no objective standard for 'admirable'. Some people admire Ringo Starr's abilities, some don't.

[Mark Hennebury]

Try this for metrics;

Could your average child do something recognizably equivalent to this?485193

Could your average child do something recognizably equivalent to this? 485194




All the metrics you mentioned for valuing artwork are subjective though. There is no objective standard for 'admirable'. Some people admire Ringo Starr's abilities, some don't.

[Greg Funk]

Try this for metrics;

Could your average child do something recognizably equivalent to this?485193

Could your average child do something recognizably equivalent to this? 485194Michelangelo's work was revolutionary at the time but that style could be created by many now and it wouldn't have particularly high value.

[Bill Dufour]

Modern art came about because around 1880 anyone could buy a camera and take a picture as good or better then a painting or sculpture.
Bill D

[Mark Hennebury]

Not going answer my question hey?

How about another; 100 random people asked to paint a picture in the style of Picasso, 101 pictures exhibited, one is by Picasso (previously unknown painting, so you can't cheat) can the general public pick out the Genius, could you?


Michelangelo's work was revolutionary at the time but that style could be created by many now and it wouldn't have particularly high value.

[Mark Hennebury]

I guess that you could apply that anywhere;

Michelangelo's . Picasso's work was revolutionary at the time but that style could be created by many now and it wouldn't have particularly high value


Michelangelo's work was revolutionary at the time but that style could be created by many now and it wouldn't have particularly high value.

[Mel Fulks]

Michelangelo's work was revolutionary at the time but that style could be created by many now and it wouldn't have particularly high value.

Yeah, wouldn’t have great value, because it would be made out of modeling clay ! NOT MARBLE. Marble sculpture is now pretty rare !
And “bronze” statues are made of modeling clay ,and then sent to the plaster guys ,then on to the bronze pourers .

…and EVERYONE who helps gets a Trophy made of “space age plastic”

[Steve Demuth]

All the metrics you mentioned for valuing artwork are subjective though. There is no objective standard for 'admirable'. Some people admire Ringo Starr's abilities, some don't.

To some extent, you are of course right, and you rightly point out my use of clearly subjective adjectives. But the presence or absence of meaning is not entirely subjective - meaning (at least in the sense I intend) is jointly held, social construct. It is not necessarily absolute and inherent, but it's deeper than a trick of an individual mind. Craftsmanship is definitely a decidable question. Some things are difficult, take talent, skill and attention to detail in the work. I have no doubt that given selection of people across society, one can get a reasonable consensus on what constitutes craftsmanship, independently of whether they are attracted to a particular style, medium, or work. Wouldn't be perfect, but it'd serve. Beauty, of course, is largely in the eye of the beholder. But even with beauty, there are threads of commonality held across large elements of society, so that it's not entirely subjective.

My comment was meant to invoke the sense that much of what happens, particular in the more outre precincts of modern art are meant to somehow tap into our desire to appreciate something, without actually engaging those threads of shared meaning, craftsmanship, and beauty - indeed may be self-consciously violating them - in order to "con" us into appreciating and paying for - something.

(For what it's worth, I feel the same way about "fine" dining - at the 3 or so Michelen star level. I've eaten the occassional multi-hundred dollar meal at such establishments, and I'm pretty sure the whole thing is based on mutual self-delusion, and is basically a con. The food was good, and the service ok, but not better than a lot that I've eaten for 1/10th the price.)


.

[Edwin Santos]

Sometimes art (and food) is a relationship between the artist's work and the viewer. Either side of the equation can be lacking. Or both.

Let's talk about food, since Michelin starred restaurants came up. In culinary school the chef told us that there are times that the sophistication of the food can be too far above the sophistication of the diner's palate and vice versa. A good dining experience can't be carried off by one or the other, it requires a match.
There are many reasons why a menu's price is what it is, but one of them is to screen out the diner who would be happier with a Philly cheese steak. This might sound pretentious, but it's really not.
As a clumsy example we recently had an occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave who declared a preference for cheeseburgers and french fries. Nothing wrong with that at all. But compare it to 1960 when Mrs. Kennedy ushered in an environment of etiquette, refinement and gourmet dining, recruiting in the first WH French chef (an amazing chef named Rene Verdon btw). Nothing wrong with that either, but I'm simply contrasting two palates of differing levels of sophistication. Each would probably be unhappy with the other's food choice.

Take literature for example. If I hand a 5th grader any Shakespeare play, they're going to tell me how boring it is. This is mostly because the child is not nearly at the level of being able to understand the emotional themes let alone the technical aspects of the writing. Maybe they'll think it's a lot of nonsense and can't understand what the fuss is all about.
I minored in English Literature, and it wasn't until some of my advanced undergrad classes that I came to appreciate the complexity and human emotion of Shakespeare's plays even though I had read most of them before. Was I merely brainwashed by what a professor told me? Or was it I who needed to grow to fully see and appreciate the genius that was available to me all along?

Wine is yet another example. I've known people who think red wine is red wine, what's the difference? Then there are enthusiasts who will revel at the characteristics of one certain varietal, vintage and terroir. Is the latter person just brainwashed, or do they have a palate that can detect (and appreciate) what the first person can't?

I can give you similar examples in music, film, and architecture.

So it goes with all forms of art. If you think some example of art is garbage, yet it is acclaimed by others, then you're probably in a place where you don't belong.
So just leave, and let other people enjoy what they enjoy, and spend their money as they please. No skin off your nose.
No reason for either crowd to judge the other IMO.

We've all heard the saying "beauty is in the eye of the beholder". Beauty isn't measurable. It's for you to see beauty where you do, but it shouldn't piss you off if someone else sees beauty where you don't.

[Steve Demuth]

... In culinary school the chef told us that there are times that the sophistication of the food can be too far above the sophistication of the diner's palate and vice versa...So it goes with all forms of art. If you think some example of art is garbage, yet it is acclaimed by others, then you're probably in a place where you don't belong.

So just leave, and let other people enjoy what they enjoy, and spend their money as they please. No skin off your nose.
No reason for either crowd to judge the other IMO.

We've all heard the saying "beauty is in the eye of the beholder". Beauty isn't measurable. It's for you to see beauty where you do, but it shouldn't piss you off if someone else sees beauty where you don't.

I think you're right in outline here, but I'm pretty sure that you need to replace the word "sophistication" with "pretension" to get at the real truth.

But yeah, if the restaurant, or museum, or whatever is not to your liking, just leave. Can't argue with that.

I at least, am not, pissed off at modern art, or 5 star Michelin food, or $400/bottle wines. As you say, nobody is forced to look at, eat, or drink ti, or to pay for it. (Well, in fact, I had little choice at the meals I mentioned - if the client executive says dinner at L'Ambroisie, then you eat dinner at L'Ambroisie, but the company was paying, not me, so no skin off my back). It is in the nature of a con that the mark takes the bait willingly - otherwise it's extortion, not a con.

[Mel Fulks]

I certainly agree with Mark, but no one should attempt to copy that highly vandalized sculpture of George Washington ! Do A New One!

[Mark Hennebury]

Your whole argument is based on the Arrogant BS that if you don't get Picasso its because you are too dumb to understand it!

The Problem is not Picasso.

Did you ever see the movie "Being there" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DajOOB5sC0E

I grew up in England and my sister who was 10 years older than me went to art school in the 60's and studied Picasso, she had a portfolio of Picasso reproductions that she did, I watched her do many of them, so I have had some exposure to his work, not in any way an expert at all, but familiar with his stuff. I was also into art as was my brother.

So I asked few easy questions which no one has chosen to answer, probably for good reason, that you cant answer them honestly and hold on to your point view. So I will answer my own questions.

Can random everyday people with no training recreate a Michelin star meal? NO, Why not? it takes Skill, knowledge and training.
Can random everyday people with no training recreate a Shakespeare Play? NO, Why not? it takes Skill, knowledge and training.
Can random everyday people with no training recreate a Michelangelo sculpture? NO, Why not? it takes Skill, knowledge and training.
Can random everyday people with no training recreate a Picasso Sculpture? YES, Pretty much explains the issue!

Is there a difference in wine, of course, there is a lot of variables in making and marketing wine, the cost reflects that, to discern the subtle difference in taste you probable need, skill, knowledge and training, and people can still get it wrong in blind taste testing, even the experts.

If you couldn't pick out an expensive bottle of wine, it of course doesn't mean that there is not a difference, just maybe because you don't have the skill, knowledge and training to do so. fair enough, but there is a difference that can be measured, recognized and explained.

If you couldn't pick out the real Picasso from the 100 copies, whether you are an expert or layman, it's because there isn't any difference!

So this has nothing to do with different people seeing beauty in things, or liking things, it has to do, with Arrogant BS. It has to do with people making up imaginary nonsense to feed their vanity and insecurities to make themselves feel superior.

When I see scribble. I see scribble. If it makes you feel special to convince yourself that you get what secret message the genius has sent to you to decipher, knock yourself out, but don't tell me it's because I am not sophisticated enough to understand.

I understand only too well how gullible and vain people are.









Sometimes art (and food) is a relationship between the artist's work and the viewer. Either side of the equation can be lacking. Or both.

Let's talk about food, since Michelin starred restaurants came up. In culinary school the chef told us that there are times that the sophistication of the food can be too far above the sophistication of the diner's palate and vice versa. A good dining experience can't be carried off by one or the other, it requires a match.
There are many reasons why a menu's price is what it is, but one of them is to screen out the diner who would be happier with a Philly cheese steak. This might sound pretentious, but it's really not.
As a clumsy example we recently had an occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave who declared a preference for cheeseburgers and french fries. Nothing wrong with that at all. But compare it to 1960 when Mrs. Kennedy ushered in an environment of etiquette, refinement and gourmet dining, recruiting in the first WH French chef (an amazing chef named Rene Verdon btw). Nothing wrong with that either, but I'm simply contrasting two palates of differing levels of sophistication. Each would probably be unhappy with the other's food choice.

Take literature for example. If I hand a 5th grader any Shakespeare play, they're going to tell me how boring it is. This is mostly because the child is not nearly at the level of being able to understand the emotional themes let alone the technical aspects of the writing. Maybe they'll think it's a lot of nonsense and can't understand what the fuss is all about.
I minored in English Literature, and it wasn't until some of my advanced undergrad classes that I came to appreciate the complexity and human emotion of Shakespeare's plays even though I had read most of them before. Was I merely brainwashed by what a professor told me? Or was it I who needed to grow to fully see and appreciate the genius that was available to me all along?

Wine is yet another example. I've known people who think red wine is red wine, what's the difference? Then there are enthusiasts who will revel at the characteristics of one certain varietal, vintage and terroir. Is the latter person just brainwashed, or do they have a palate that can detect (and appreciate) what the first person can't?

I can give you similar examples in music, film, and architecture.

So it goes with all forms of art. If you think some example of art is garbage, yet it is acclaimed by others, then you're probably in a place where you don't belong.
So just leave, and let other people enjoy what they enjoy, and spend their money as they please. No skin off your nose.
No reason for either crowd to judge the other IMO.

We've all heard the saying "beauty is in the eye of the beholder". Beauty isn't measurable. It's for you to see beauty where you do, but it shouldn't piss you off if someone else sees beauty where you don't.

[Edwin Santos]

Well at least I got you off the Ringo bashing, so life does have its little victories.
Maybe at the pearly gates Ringo should buy Picasso a pint for drawing fire.

[Jim Koepke]

Your whole argument is based on the Arrogant BS that if you don't get Picasso its because you are too dumb to understand it!

You are the only one I have heard saying this.

My statement was some get Picasso, some don't. Some of Picasso's work I don't get.


Can random everyday people with no training recreate a Picasso Sculpture? YES, Pretty much explains the issue!

Your original statement was:


Could your average child do something recognizably equivalent to this?

The work looks to be much taller than "your average child." That could be the angle from which it is photographed. Many amateur sculptures would have problems with something of that size.

From what I could find searching this it seems it may be a smaller work. It also appears there may be multiple renditions and even production runs.

One of the examples looks much better from the other side > https://worleygig.com/2014/03/31/mondern-art-monday-presents-pablo-picassos-head-of-a-warrior/ < just like many who have been warriors through out time.

jtk

[Kev Williams]

I don't remember the exact context or exact subject matter or who exactly was involved, and google isn't any help-- BUT several years ago, I remember someone giving Steven Tyler - Aerosmith- crap about "abandoning his 'art'" for letting/selling Aerosmith music to be used in commercials & whatnot-- and his response was something like "dude, it's just songs" ... ;)

...eye of the beholder :)

--back to my first post, re: that stainless steel inflatable rabbit--
485227
While I in fact can and do appreciate many forms of 'art', for the life
of me I simply can't wrap my head around the fact that someone on
this planet actually paid 91 million dollars for it--- when that same
money could buy THIS-
485228
281' yacht- which I myself consider an EXCEPTIONAL work of art :D -
AND, leave you with 3 million bucks left over for diesel fuel!

--or for a paltry 8 or so million more, you could buy an Airbus A320neo,
& start your own airline...
485229
umm... 485230

Some things I'll never understand :D

[Jim Koepke]

While I in fact can and do appreciate many forms of 'art', for the life
of me I simply can't wrap my head around the fact that someone on
this planet actually paid 91 million dollars for it--- when that same
money could buy THIS-

To paraphrase Robin Williams (may he rest in peace), "it is God's way of telling us some people have too much money."

jtk

[Mark Hennebury]

I think that you are bang on here.



I suspect that much of art in today's world is in fact a con - a way of worming some meme into our consciousness so that we (or some subset of we that has money to burn) value it, despite it having no actual value. You win at this game if you can hook the consciousness of enough people with enough money, and it doesn't matter whether your work has discernable meaning, admirable craftmanship, or exceptional aesthetic beauty. Find the right hook, and you don't need any of those things to be "art." The "art" is in fact in the discernment of the hook that works - the ability to exploit the nooks of others minds with whatever you can put together.

[Mark Hennebury]

This is how I see why we are "stupid" It is how i see the way we process information in our heads, and to me explains the problems we have with seeing what we are looking at without preconceived ideas modifying what we "see".
I see the inside of our heads looking like this.
485256

Modern art, religion, politics, fashion, business etc. is all about the art of influence. It is about understanding that people see a modified version of reality, modified through their own history, experiences, hopes and fears etc.. and you just have to appeal to a part of them, like Steve said, find the hook.

[Mike Soaper]

Calvins take on Neo Cubist

Neo-cubist : calvinandhobbes (reddit.com) (https://www.reddit.com/r/calvinandhobbes/comments/aw7k2x/neocubist/)

[Bill Dufour]

Is this fine art?
Bill D

https://fineartamerica.com/featured/bronze-propeller-maritime-museum-astoria-beverly-guilliams.html

This one used to be in front of 100 Spear street as part of required public art in exchange for building permit. I have no idea what replaced it. My Mom and Dad would go see it when they went to the city he was fascinated by the engraved factory info as to pitch lead etc.

https://www.maritimepropulsion.com/news/landmark-propeller-delivered-cal-435308

[Steve Demuth]

Calvins take on Neo Cubist

Neo-cubist : calvinandhobbes (reddit.com) (https://www.reddit.com/r/calvinandhobbes/comments/aw7k2x/neocubist/)

Tongue-in-cheek, that's not a bad take on this whole thread :D

[Jim Koepke]

Calvins take on Neo Cubist

Neo-cubist : calvinandhobbes (reddit.com) (https://www.reddit.com/r/calvinandhobbes/comments/aw7k2x/neocubist/)

Thanks that was a good smile for this morning.

Maybe the statement some artists are making is, "anybody can create art." It would be like in the movie Ratatouille. The food critic, Anton Ego, despised the deceased owner/chef Gusteau for his book, Any Body Can Cook. A person who can read and follow a recipe is likely able to produce a first class meal. It would have to be someone who is familiar with many aspects of food prep, not some 7th grader on their first foray into a kitchen.

jtk

[Mark Hennebury]

Perfect! ......................


Calvins take on Neo Cubist

Neo-cubist : calvinandhobbes (reddit.com) (https://www.reddit.com/r/calvinandhobbes/comments/aw7k2x/neocubist/)

[Mark Hennebury]

It is to me!..................
Is this fine art?
Bill D

https://fineartamerica.com/featured/bronze-propeller-maritime-museum-astoria-beverly-guilliams.html

This one used to be in front of 100 Spear street as part of required public art in exchange for building permit. I have no idea what replaced it. My Mom and Dad would go see it when they went to the city he was fascinated by the engraved factory info as to pitch lead etc.

https://www.maritimepropulsion.com/news/landmark-propeller-delivered-cal-435308

[Steve Demuth]

So, what if it isn't even made by a human? Is it still art?

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2022/08/ai-wins-state-fair-art-contest-annoys-humans/

[Mark Hennebury]

A new twist and the battle rages on!


So, what if it isn't even made by a human? Is it still art?

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2022/08/ai-wins-state-fair-art-contest-annoys-humans/

[Jim Koepke]

So, what if it isn't even made by a human? Is it still art?

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2022/08/ai-wins-state-fair-art-contest-annoys-humans/

What if it is created with a camera and photo shop?

I man not be able to tell you what is and isn't art, I can only tell you if I like it or not.

jtk

[Frederick Skelly]

I think the kid has his heart in the right place. I'm only pokin' fun at the fact that someone said earlier that a kid could paint a famous Picasso. :) :) :)

Meet the 10-Year-old Artist Who Created a Modern-Day ‘Guernica’ Dedicated to Ukraine (https://mymodernmet.com/andres-valencia-art-prodigy/)

The boy is making a ton of money at the modern "art" game.

[Edward Weber]

Just to add a little more fuel to the fire
https://www.vice.com/en/article/bvmvqm/an-ai-generated-artwork-won-first-place-at-a-state-fair-fine-arts-competition-and-artists-are-pissed

[Jim Koepke]

I think the kid has his heart in the right place. I'm only pokin' fun at the fact that someone said earlier that a kid could paint a famous Picasso. :) :) :)

Meet the 10-Year-old Artist Who Created a Modern-Day ‘Guernica’ Dedicated to Ukraine (https://mymodernmet.com/andres-valencia-art-prodigy/)

The boy is making a ton of money at the modern "art" game.

Hopefully he will be able to obtain an education and continue to create throughout his long, enjoyable life.

jtk

[Mark Hennebury]

BOOM! that looks like slam dunk to me! :D



I think the kid has his heart in the right place. I'm only pokin' fun at the fact that someone said earlier that a kid could paint a famous Picasso. :) :) :)

Meet the 10-Year-old Artist Who Created a Modern-Day ‘Guernica’ Dedicated to Ukraine (https://mymodernmet.com/andres-valencia-art-prodigy/)

The boy is making a ton of money at the modern "art" game.

[Mark Hennebury]

Kind of curious why the kid chose to emulate Picasso and not Michelangelo, Leonardo, Rembrandt, Vermeer, Botticelli, Caravaggio etc....:)

[Jim Koepke]

Kind of curious why the kid chose to emulate Picasso and not Michelangelo, Leonardo, Rembrandt, Vermeer, Botticelli, Caravaggio etc....:)

He likely chose to emulate an artist that appealed to him.

He isn't an average 10 year old. He likely won't grow up to be your average person either.

jtk

[Mark Hennebury]

It's an uphill battle Jim!

So you absolutely convinced, he just didn't like Michelangelo, maybe he tried it and didn't like all the dust and noise from chipping away at the marble, and like was said earlier, it's kind of old hat stuff, that anyone can do these days. My guess is he was looking for something more challenging for his highly developed sophisticated intellect, and what better challenge than the Genius of Genius's the great Pablo. He must really "get" Pablo where so many of us fail. On the other hand ,could just be that his parents put him up to this as they saw a great way to make some money.


He likely chose to emulate an artist that appealed to him.

He isn't an average 10 year old. He likely won't grow up to be your average person either.

jtk

[Mark Hennebury]

I am pretty sure that Picasso appeals to children because it is like what they do in kindergarten anyway.

485298


He likely chose to emulate an artist that appealed to him.

He isn't an average 10 year old. He likely won't grow up to be your average person either.

jtk

[Jim Koepke]

Anything is possible… Or a possibility.

jtk

[Mark Hennebury]

Then I won't give on you Jim, I will try to hold onto the possibility that you will see past the BS and see that scribble is just scribble. There is no secret code for those vain enough to search for it.....it's just scribble. Picasso was not a genius, you got played!

Much as I hold out faint hope for your salvation, I am reminded of the words of wisdom "live in hope, die in despair" or a quote one of the forum members uses " it's easier to fool someone, than to convince them that they've been fooled"


Anything is possible… Or a possibility.

jtk

[Mel Fulks]

Kids who find the Picasso style too difficult sometimes gravitate toward the “Gumby” stuff.

[Jim Koepke]

There is no secret code for those vain enough to search for it.....it's just scribble. Picasso was not a genius, you got played!

I have never heard anyone say there was some secret code to seeing or enjoying modern art. Have heard of secret handshakes, but only among people who wear funny clothes & hats.

I didn't get played, at least no money has been taken from my wallet.

If he got to do what he wanted to do and enjoyed life, that is good enough for most of the people I have known.

Who cares about labels like "genius" or "inspiring" when you can do what ever you want when you want. That may not be genius, but it is pretty good.

Picasso never forced people to purchase his work. Did he go around telling people how much of a genius he happened to be? Most people who do go around telling people such are usually more likely to be experiencing the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

If people wanted to shove money into your pocket for drawing a wiggly line, would you refuse it?

You seem to focus a lot of hostility on those who might enjoy something you don't. How much of Picasso's work would someone have to like to be played or a fool?

BTW, I like the line, "it's easier to fool someone, than to convince them that they've been fooled." It is often incorrectly attributed to Mark Twain. There is no record of him saying or writing such.

He did say or write:


“The glory which is built upon a lie soon becomes a most unpleasant incumbrance. … How easy it is to make people believe a lie, and how hard it is to undo that work again!” – Mark Twain

jtk

[Mark Hennebury]

My hostility is a rage against BS, that's all.


People can like Picasso, and can enjoy and admire his work I have no problem with it.

But if they tell me that he is a genius and the greatest artist of all time, and maybe I just don't get it, I may have something to say.

I like some of the art work kids do in Kindergarten more than Picasso as it is similar in style, technique and skill but far less pretentious.






I have never heard anyone say there was some secret code to seeing or enjoying modern art. Have heard of secret handshakes, but only among people who wear funny clothes & hats.

I didn't get played, at least no money has been taken from my wallet.

If he got to do what he wanted to do and enjoyed life, that is good enough for most of the people I have known.

Who cares about labels like "genius" or "inspiring" when you can do what ever you want when you want. That may not be genius, but it is pretty good.

Picasso never forced people to purchase his work. Did he go around telling people how much of a genius he happened to be? Most people who do go around telling people such are usually more likely to be experiencing the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

If people wanted to shove money into your pocket for drawing a wiggly line, would you refuse it?

You seem to focus a lot of hostility on those who might enjoy something you don't. How much of Picasso's work would someone have to like to be played or a fool?

BTW, I like the line, "it's easier to fool someone, than to convince them that they've been fooled." It is often incorrectly attributed to Mark Twain. There is no record of him saying or writing such.

He did say or write:



jtk

[Jim Koepke]

But if they tell me that he is a genius and the greatest artist of all time, and maybe I just don't get it, I may have something to say.

Many of my college studies were in art. I do not recall any of the instructors calling Picasso "a genius and the greatest artist of all time." I do recall him being referred to as creative, prolific and innovative. He has been credited with being the first major artist to use collage (combining of various materials in a piece of art).

jtk

[Mark Hennebury]

You don't have to look too far, to find references;

485318

Many of my college studies were in art. I do not recall any of the instructors calling Picasso "a genius and the greatest artist of all time." I do recall him being referred to as creative, prolific and innovative. He has been credited with being the first major artist to use collage (combining of various materials in a piece of art).

jtk

[Jim Koepke]

If time is found maybe it will end up on my schedule to watch.

Apparently someone saw a reason to associate him with genius. Likely someone with more authority on the subject than yourself.

jtk

[Edwin Santos]

You don't have to look too far, to find references;

485318

"Genius" is the name of the series. I thought it was very good.
Season 1 chronicled Einstein, Season 2 chronicled Picasso and Season 3 was Aretha Franklin.

But yes, you could say the title of the series infers that all three were geniuses. Obviously you vigorously disagree with one, not sure where you stand on the other two.
Also, I don't know if you've watched the series. If not, I can't help but wonder whether it would reinforce or change your firmly held opinion on Picasso.

On a related note, the acting performances in this series were delivered by absolutely top notch actors. Geoffrey Rush played Einstein, Antonio Banderas portrayed Picasso and Aretha Franklin was played by Cynthia Erivo.

[Jim Koepke]

You don't have to look too far, to find references;


That got me to look around a bit and this is one item found > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAhKliHimVs

It seems maybe he was a genius in some respects. Some of his work looks much like what other contemporary artist were creating.

To have accumulated such a following and amassed such wealth, it seems a bit incredulous for it all to have been a long running scam.

Someone once said something of mine had an ingenious part:


The real ingenious part of Jim's design…

Though I don't think that makes me a genius. Maybe after a few hundred "ingenious designs" there would be grounds for acclaim.

jtk

[Mark Hennebury]

Well I watched the video, apparently the Nazis who were quite the art collectors, banned the showing of any Picasso work deeming it unfit to be considered art, So that's kind of funny.


"To have accumulated such a following and amassed such wealth, it seems a bit incredulous for it all to have been a long running scam." My guess is if Picasso made such a lot of money, so did the galleries and promoters, no chance i guess that anyone would promote anything just for money, I mean hundreds of millions?

Leonardo took four years to paint the Mona Lisa.

Picasso was prolific; roughly translated that means that he could do a painting in an hour.
Picasso was innovative; roughly translated that means he was trying desperately to find a gimmick like an identifiable brand to distinguish himself from the others, that's business not art.


From the beginning of time the masses have been manipulated for the profit of the few.
Long running scams are the best ones.

Are you absolutely sure that no big lie could work on millions of people?

485337



That got me to look around a bit and this is one item found > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAhKliHimVs

It seems maybe he was a genius in some respects. Some of his work looks much like what other contemporary artist were creating.

To have accumulated such a following and amassed such wealth, it seems a bit incredulous for it all to have been a long running scam.

Someone once said something of mine had an ingenious part:



Though I don't think that makes me a genius. Maybe after a few hundred "ingenious designs" there would be grounds for acclaim.

jtk

[Mark Hennebury]

I have not watched the series.

Love Aretha, love Einstein.
Thanks for the review, I may watch some.


"Genius" is the name of the series. I thought it was very good.
Season 1 chronicled Einstein, Season 2 chronicled Picasso and Season 3 was Aretha Franklin.

But yes, you could say the title of the series infers that all three were geniuses. Obviously you vigorously disagree with one, not sure where you stand on the other two.
Also, I don't know if you've watched the series. If not, I can't help but wonder whether it would reinforce or change your firmly held opinion on Picasso.

On a related note, the acting performances in this series were delivered by absolutely top notch actors. Geoffrey Rush played Einstein, Antonio Banderas portrayed Picasso and Aretha Franklin was played by Cynthia Erivo.

[Greg Funk]

I am pretty sure that Picasso appeals to children because it is like what they do in kindergarten anyway.

485298Do you prefer children paint like this: 485340
That was painted by Picasso when he was 12.

[Jim Koepke]

Well I watched the video, apparently the Nazis who were quite the art collectors, banned the showing of any Picasso work deeming it unfit to be considered art, So that's kind of funny.

The Nazis were more art thieves during the war. The Nazis also burned books and art works of people of religious faiths the Nazis didn't approve. That doesn't make them sophisticated art collectors.

Since you brought up Nazis, there is an interesting story about Mel Brooks fighting the Nazis with song > https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/mel-brooks-ww2-sing-off-with-german-soldiers/


"To have accumulated such a following and amassed such wealth, it seems a bit incredulous for it all to have been a long running scam."


My guess is if Picasso made such a lot of money, so did the galleries and promoters, no chance i guess that anyone would promote anything just for money, I mean hundreds of millions?

So as an unknown artist Picasso convinces some promoters and galleries that "this crap will sell like hot cakes, come on, you don't want to be left out." That is kind of a long reach.


Leonardo took four years to paint the Mona Lisa.

During those four years did he do no other work? Many artists will have more than one project going all at once.


Picasso was prolific; roughly translated that means that he could do a painting in an hour.
Picasso was innovative; roughly translated that means he was trying desperately to find a gimmick like an identifiable brand to distinguish himself from the others, that's business not art.

Do you have a source for these words or are you just making them up as you go to further your efforts to paint Picasso in a dark light?


From the beginning of time the masses have been manipulated for the profit of the few.
Long running scams are the best ones.

Are you absolutely sure that no big lie could work on millions of people?

We have experienced that recently in our own politics. Though a many of the formerly scammed won a lawsuit. Many others are also beginning to see the light.

Someone has to be a pretty good scam artist to convince people it is worth buying a piece of art they do not like.

There have always been promoters of "snake oil" usually they do not stay in one place very long.

There have been major breakthroughs in art. Impressionism was one breakthrough. Guernica was another. Before Picasso painted Guernica most depictions of war were images almost romanticizing the field of battle. There may be some horrific elements included here and there:

485338

In Custer's Last stand, without knowing the title or history, one might not know the final outcome.

In Guernica:

485339

The horror of war is very clear and it clearly depicts all involved have lost something.

Picasso left Spain for France when the Fascist were fighting for power. He was in France when he painted Guernica.

I can appreciate Guernica, but it isn't something for my walls. Though I have know folks who do have a print of Guernica on their walls.

You feel they have been taken by a huge, long running scam. They likely feel moved by what they see as a statement against the horror of war.

jtk

[Mel Fulks]

I don’t think it’s a painting . It’s a cut and paste. When “construction paper “ was invented the company was always looking for
famous people who would use it. High School proms were the real pioneers with the paper chains.

[Mark Hennebury]

Why do you think that he switched to this? 485350

Do you prefer children paint like this: 485340
That was painted by Picasso when he was 12.

[Mark Hennebury]

Which picture do you think took him the longest to paint, the Owl or the old fisherman? and which picture was most recognizable as a Picasso and which Picture made him the best ROI.? Feel free to answer my questions if you like, although I seriously doubt that you will. I never said that Picasso wasn't able to paint, I just figure that he realized it was a lot of work and that it didn't get him noticed doing good work, he would be just another artist. Then the brilliant revelation that people are gullible enough to believe anything if properly presented. You and can get noticed doing something different, BOOM ! SHOCKING, CRAZY, you know, a good business decision. Kind of of like Shock rock, I went to a great Alice Copper concert back in the early 70's. It was like Wow Man crazy, that's different, it helped that i was stoned at the time. Picasso and his contemporaries were fighting to find a gimmick just like Alice Cooper. I like Alice By the way. You notice that Picasso dropped the good stuff pretty early on for the quick and easy stuff with the big paycheck. Schools out!
485353

[Greg Funk]

Which picture do you think took him the longest to paint, the Owl or the old fisherman? and which picture was most recognizable as a Picasso and which Picture made him the best ROI.? Feel free to answer my questions if you like, although I seriously doubt that you will. I never said that Picasso wasn't able to paint, I just figure that he realized it was a lot of work and that it didn't get him noticed doing good work, he would be just another artist.Exactly. No one wants to see someone create the same art that already exists. We don't want to hear the same music or look at the same buildings. We pay for creativity not reproductions. You seem upset Picasso was able to monetize his talent. Not all artists need to starve.

[Mark Hennebury]

First of all, I didn't bring up the Nazis, the video that you linked to did, I just watched the video that you linked to and remarked on it.

I don't know what world you live in but we are surrounded and bombarded by scams, and con artists. Everyone is trying to sell us something, convince us of something. Whether it is the woodworking Gurus or the yoga Gurus, the religions or cults, the politician's or herbalists, or pharmaceutical companies, everyone wants to sell you a miracle or be your saviour. The one thing that they want to do is convince you of something, a product, a cause whatever appeals to you, they are searching to sell to you, best of all they will sell you your dreams and solve your problems. The list is endless.

485354485355485356485357

[Mark Hennebury]

So if I told you that I did the owl, and not Picasso, would the change your opinion of it, or the value of it ? and why? It is still exactly the same, nothing has changed.

if you bought an original Picasso, and a few years later someone told you that it was a fake, would you be upset? after having looked at it lovingly for ten years, how would you know feel? it would still be the same painting that gave you such great joy to look at. What has changed, not the painting or drawing, only what is in your head. So what did you buy, what did you pay for? certainly you still have the artwork which you purchased because you loved it and it spoke to you. Is it that you didn't buy it for the artwork at all, but because it made you feel special to "own" a real Picasso, now finding out that it is a fake, you feel like a fool that has been cheated. But of course you could get a second opinion and maybe they could verify it as real, oh the emotional rollercoaster. What to feel?

The fact is you cannot tell if it's real or fake! So what difference does it make?

If you can't tell the difference and have to trust someone telling you whether it is real or fake, what is real, and does it matter, as long as the salesman convinces you, you are happy in your blissful ignorance. The salesman can then go on and sell another dozen copies to those of similar highly sophisticated intellect, and make lots of people happy.

Reality is such a hoot isn't it!



Exactly. No one wants to see someone create the same art that already exists. We don't want to hear the same music or look at the same buildings. We pay for creativity not reproductions. You seem upset Picasso was able to monetize his talent. Not all artists need to starve.

[Jim Koepke]

Many pieces of art come with papers of authentication or letters of provenance.

A lot of Picassos sculptures have been produced in quantity in studios or a factor of sorts. The will have a stamp or other form of authentication.

Another musical example would be the Monkees. They weren't even playing or singing on some of their albums. But some people enjoyed the music.

Even Woodstock was a scam if you want it to be.

Everything in the world can be a scam.

Everyone is an idiot, only on different subjects.

Everyone is a genius, only on different subjects.

Looking to see every angle of scam behind every encounter is a cynical way to live.

I like the idea of enjoying what comes to me freely. If I like a piece of art enough to want to display it in my home, I buy a print. It is less expensive that way. Sometimes art has been given to me by artist friends. I have sometimes given my art to friends.

jtk

[Frederick Skelly]

Why do you think that he switched to this? 485350

Not trying to stir the pot here, but I LIKE the owl. It's simple. It's different. And I can easily tell what it is without making up some mystical BS to "explain" it. I like the owl a whole LOT more than the ugly crap I describe in my original post. (See example below.)
485371

[Bill Dufour]

I heard on TV they are making a bio pic of Milli Vanilli. Thanks to them and Madona California passed a law years ago ago that muscians at a live concert have to preform in real life.
Bill D

[Mark Hennebury]

First the Monkees, now Milli Vanilli, my whole life has been a lie!



I heard on TV they are making a bio pic of Milli Vanilli. Thanks to them and Madona California passed a law years ago ago that muscians at a live concert have to preform in real life.
Bill D

[Mark Hennebury]

Call me Cynical if you must.

Where lies the truth between Gullible, realistic and cynical?

Scams are everywhere, I get about 50 email a day that are some type of scam.
You have big time scammers from government, industry, religion down to the smaller con-artists, it's a full time job not to get scammed by someone somehow.

Maria Duval

485372 485373



It's one of the world's longest-running cons. Hundreds of millions of dollars stolen from some of the world's most vulnerable people -- the sick, the elderly and the poor -- who all thought they had found a savior in a mysterious woman named Maria Duval.
It has claimed more than 60 times the number of victims of Madoff's Ponzi scheme. With millions of people affected from the United States to Japan, federal investigators say it would be hard to find another case of consumer fraud that has hurt more people.
Since the alleged mail fraud started around 20 years ago, a laundry list of government agencies across the globe -- including the U.S. Department of Justice, British authorities, Canadian fraud investigators and Australian consumer protection officials -- have attempted to put an end to the scheme.
But somehow, it has raged on for decades. It all centers around a mysterious French psychic named Maria Duval. In letters, interviews and Internet videos seen around the globe, Duval says she has had visions of the world exploding and humans living in space. She claims to have successfully predicted election results, forecast winning lottery numbers and helped police investigate crimes. She says she even found the missing dog of movie star Brigitte Bardot.
And millions of people have been convinced by her "personalized" letters that she can help them, too.

The list is endless.

485374485375485376485377



Many pieces of art come with papers of authentication or letters of provenance.

A lot of Picassos sculptures have been produced in quantity in studios or a factor of sorts. The will have a stamp or other form of authentication.

Another musical example would be the Monkees. They weren't even playing or singing on some of their albums. But some people enjoyed the music.

Even Woodstock was a scam if you want it to be.

Everything in the world can be a scam.

Everyone is an idiot, only on different subjects.

Everyone is a genius, only on different subjects.

Looking to see every angle of scam behind every encounter is a cynical way to live.

I like the idea of enjoying what comes to me freely. If I like a piece of art enough to want to display it in my home, I buy a print. It is less expensive that way. Sometimes art has been given to me by artist friends. I have sometimes given my art to friends.

jtk

[Bill Dufour]

It is interesting to see in my lifetime a few paintings or sculptures have gone from school of famous artist to being made by the famous artist. Suddenly they are significant works and worth 100-1,000 times more money. How much did Michaangelo actually do on his sculptures verus how much grunt work did someone else with young muscles do to rough it out. Does it matter?
It should only matter to an art historian who wants to understand the progression of a artists style and technique.
Looking at ancient Egyptian or Chinesse art I do not care what dynasty made it. It is either good looking or not. For crude caveman stuff I suppose it does make a difference. Ancient cave paintings are not wonderful until you realize the makers probably had no spoken language,certainly nothingn written down to tell their story. Modern taggers have no such excuse.
Bill D

[Frederick Skelly]

Which picture do you think took him the longest to paint, the Owl or the old fisherman? and which picture was most recognizable as a Picasso and which Picture made him the best ROI..... I never said that Picasso wasn't able to paint, I just figure that he realized it was a lot of work and that it didn't get him noticed doing good work, he would be just another artist.

Ok, there's truth here. You have to stand out if you are going to get noticed and NOT be another starving artist. I don't begrudge someone who creates art/music/literature for trying to stand out and be noticed. David Bowie was one flaky guy back in his Ziggy Stardust days - he became (IMO) one of several "elders" of rock music. You named Alice for having a gimmick. I can add KISS, Madonna and others.


Then the brilliant revelation that people are gullible enough to believe anything if properly presented. You and can get noticed doing something different, BOOM ! SHOCKING, CRAZY, you know, a good business decision. ... You notice that Picasso dropped the good stuff pretty early on for the quick and easy stuff with the big paycheck. Schools out!

Here's where I disagree with you. It wasn't (necessarily) a scam that Picasso went with the art that set him apart and made him some money. The guy probably went "Huh, no kiddin? They like that? Well, let me follow that a while and see where it goes." That's not alot different than Bowie or others did. If people like "Art Collector Frank" made up mystical BS stories, that doesn't mean Picasso was pulling a scam.

Think about furniture. Most people seem to really like Nakashima. To my eyes, his work is beautifully crafted but nothing I'd ever want to emulate. But it's different and got him noticed. Is it a scam that this piece sold for $130,000? I doubt it.
485388

[Jim Koepke]

…

Here's where I disagree with you. It wasn't (necessarily) a scam that Picasso went with the art that set him apart and made him some money. The guy probably went "Huh, no kiddin? They like that? Well, let me follow that a while and see where it goes." That's not alot different than Bowie or others did. If people like "Art Collector Frank" made up mystical BS stories, that doesn't mean Picasso was pulling a scam.

Think about furniture. Most people seem to really like Nakashima. To my eyes, his work is beautifully crafted but nothing I'd ever want to emulate. But it's different and got him noticed. Is it a scam that this piece sold for $130,000? I doubt it.
485388

One way to get rich, give the customer what they want. Most likely not many people are going to get excited about bent and twisted coat hangers. Though wire coat hangers are becoming a thing of the past.

Looking at Nakashima's bench and thinking how much work it would take me, $130,000 is a bargain. :D

jtk

[Frederick Skelly]

Jim, I know you're right Sir.

Changing subjects, here's another fun one..... 7 kinds of art critics (https://theartgorgeous.com/7-types-art-critics-youll-find-art-world/).

[Mark Hennebury]

Picasso found a way to get noticed with the shock value of doing different stuff; good businessman. The marketers found a goldmine and milked it, they worked on creating the "mystical genius" Lets face if they marketed it is infantile crap I don't think that it would have fetched as much money.

Same with Nakashima, Maloof etc. When George died, sales dropped off at the studio, Mira said they weren't sure that they would survive, even though George hadn't been making furniture for the previous twenty years. His employees made the furniture, so the furniture was the same, the public perception was different that's all.

Most average woodworkers can make a Nakashima table as indistinguishable from the original, yet you won't get a fraction of the price for it why? Because people are not buying a table, they are buying a perception of special. The way you give people that feeling is not by selling them a table, it is by selling them a story, or what I refer to as a line of BS. that is what people buy, and are willing to pay a fortune for. This is where the marketing comes in. A table left on it's own is practically worthless, wrap it in BS and it's a $130,000 table. A Picasso on it's own is a childlike scribble Wrap in the "Mystical Genius" BS and it's worth $50,000,000
It's not the artist, or woodworker, it's not the art or the furniture, it's the BS that I have issue with.

Look at the painting or the table without the BS and we can have a real discussion about it. If you cant look at it without seeing it through a filter of "Genius" BS we have nothing to talk about. If all you are ever looking at is filtered through you preconceived ideas, you wont really see anything.

The Nakashima table is a $1000 table wrapped in $129,000 worth of BS.

BS is by far the worlds most valuable commodity, not crude oil.


Ok, there's truth here. You have to stand out if you are going to get noticed and NOT be another starving artist. I don't begrudge someone who creates art/music/literature for trying to stand out and be noticed. David Bowie was one flaky guy back in his Ziggy Stardust days - he became (IMO) one of several "elders" of rock music. You named Alice for having a gimmick. I can add KISS, Madonna and others.



Here's where I disagree with you. It wasn't (necessarily) a scam that Picasso went with the art that set him apart and made him some money. The guy probably went "Huh, no kiddin? They like that? Well, let me follow that a while and see where it goes." That's not alot different than Bowie or others did. If people like "Art Collector Frank" made up mystical BS stories, that doesn't mean Picasso was pulling a scam.

Think about furniture. Most people seem to really like Nakashima. To my eyes, his work is beautifully crafted but nothing I'd ever want to emulate. But it's different and got him noticed. Is it a scam that this piece sold for $130,000? I doubt it.
485388

[Michael Weber]

AI wins art prize. Just ran across this article art related. Pretty amazing. Artists aren’t happy. Phttps://dnyuz.com/2022/09/02/an-a-i-generated-picture-won-an-art-prize-artists-arent-happy/

[Edwin Santos]

Then I won't give on you Jim, I will try to hold onto the possibility that you will see past the BS and see that scribble is just scribble. There is no secret code for those vain enough to search for it.....it's just scribble. Picasso was not a genius, you got played!

Much as I hold out faint hope for your salvation, I am reminded of the words of wisdom "live in hope, die in despair" or a quote one of the forum members uses " it's easier to fool someone, than to convince them that they've been fooled"


Mark,
You're reminding me so much of my late grandmother.
She used to say "don't yuck on someone else's yum".
I once asked her what she meant by that.
She said, it's your right to choose what you like and don't like for yourself.
For example, if you don't like string beans, and a platter of them is being passed around the table, just don't take any and quietly pass the platter on.
But then to loudly declare how terrible string beans are, or to tell everyone else they're stupid (or gullible or whatever) for liking string beans is just plain rude.

[Mark Hennebury]

Maybe if everyone has always told you that string were great and you one day decide to tell them that they are not great to you, and they are not great because others say so. They are just string beans. Don't keep telling me how great they are. Maybe just eat them and keep quite.


Mark,
You're reminding me so much of my late grandmother.
She used to say "don't yuck on someone else's yum".
I once asked her what she meant by that.
She said, it's your right to choose what you like and don't like for yourself.
For example, if you don't like string beans, and a platter of them is being passed around the table, just don't take any and quietly pass the platter on.
But then to loudly declare how terrible string beans are, or to tell everyone else they're stupid (or gullible or whatever) for liking string beans is just plain rude.

[Edwin Santos]

Maybe if everyone has always told you that string were great and you one day decide to tell them that they are not great to you, and they are not great because others say so. They are just string beans. Don't keep telling me how great they are. Maybe just eat them and keep quite.


Seems to me that nobody here is trying to convince you to be a Picasso fan, but you're working awfully hard at convincing everyone else why they shouldn't be one.

[Mark Hennebury]

Edwin, I don't expect to change any ones mind, I am engaging in debate, it's fun to be challenged by those interested in the debate. I believe that a little humor and bantering is a fun part, I am sure that Jim can stick up for himself if he feels I have crossed the line. If you don't enjoy the debate you can of course choose to leave, join in, or attack me. I am okay either way. I don't mind personal attacks on me either but it usually ends in the thread being shutdown. So I would prefer if you stuck to discussing the points.
The interest to me is in how we perceive things, and questioning our perception so we can see where it came from and what created that. So I have tried to make an argument that will get people examine explain what they have accepted as true, I find it a good exercise, to have our beliefs challenged and to have to defend them.

if i like Picasso or not is irrelevant. And I am not trying to convince anyone that they should or shouldn't. It's seems that a few have missed the point.


It is just string beans

485408


Seems to me that nobody here is trying to convince you to be a Picasso fan, but you're working awfully hard at convincing everyone else why they shouldn't be one.

[Jim Koepke]

Edwin, I don't expect to change any ones mind, I am engaging in debate,
…
if i like Picasso or not is irrelevant. And I am not trying to convince anyone that they should or shouldn't. It's seems that a few have missed the point.


485408

Debate is more than saying the same thing repeatedly.


Then I won't give on you Jim, I will try to hold onto the possibility that you will see past the BS and see that scribble is just scribble.

So much for the "not trying to convince anyone" claim.

It seems most everyone understands your point, you feel Picasso wasn't a great artist nor does he deserve the mantle of artistic genius*. Anyone who likes or has purchased any work by Picasso is the victim of some elaborate scheme to scam them. So in order for these folks to hide the reality of them being taken for a ride they have all decided to become part of the scheme and keep it going.

(*Labeling people as heroes or geniuses is, imo, overdone)

My own opinion doesn't really matter. It is different than yours even though in my opinion words like hero, genius and other superfluous superlatives have almost become meaningless in how freely they are thrown about.

Picasso created many things that communicated to others. That some of his work communicated to people like yourself, "hey I could do that," is in itself profound. Many people, myself included, recreated some of his work on our own. It has likely led many other artists to paths they may not have taken before.

That may be the true genius of Picasso's life and work.

Something heard on the radio many years ago seems to have been attributed to many people other than the person who said it during my evening's listening:

Sell to the classes and live with the masses
Sell to the masses and live with the classes

There are original works of Picasso in my price range. Whoopie! I currently have too many art works in storage for lack of room on my walls.

jtk

[Mark Hennebury]

"Debate is more than saying the same thing repeatedly." are you referring to me or you Jim?

The business of art, the art of business.

Companies spend a lot of money developing recognizable brands and logo's.
The reason is that they don't want to leave it up to us to evaluate their product.
They market their product, saturate us with how great it is, imprint their logo into our heads, then all we have to do is see a product and recognize their logo or style, and we accept that it is a quality product without ever having to evaluate it ourselves.
We are not good at evaluating, we feel far more comfortable recognizing things that we have already saved a reference for, for example a BMW perhaps.

Modern art is the same to me.

The sculpture bbelow I know nothing about, don't know who made it or when, but I think that it's a fine piece of work, that's my opinion, based on a simple evaluation of the photo. (I have never seen the piece so this is just for an example)

485431

I will evaluate Picasso's work, piece by piece the same way, not collectively as having been done by a genius, therefore they are all by default masterpieces.
If I see some that I like, or some that I think are fine pieces of work, I will judge them a such, just as if I see some as infantile crap, I will judge those accordingly.
I will not be swayed by the media pressure to convince myself that infantile crap is anything other than that simply because of who did it.
If you choose to see all of his work as masterpieces, some that you "get" and some that you don't that is up to you.

And I don't see why the forum admin removed my earlier post, maybe they could explain.





Debate is more than saying the same thing repeatedly.



So much for the "not trying to convince anyone" claim.

It seems most everyone understands your point, you feel Picasso wasn't a great artist nor does he deserve the mantle of artistic genius*. Anyone who likes or has purchased any work by Picasso is the victim of some elaborate scheme to scam them. So in order for these folks to hide the reality of them being taken for a ride they have all decided to become part of the scheme and keep it going.

(*Labeling people as heroes or geniuses is, imo, overdone)

My own opinion doesn't really matter. It is different than yours even though in my opinion words like hero, genius and other superfluous superlatives have almost become meaningless in how freely they are thrown about.

Picasso created many things that communicated to others. That some of his work communicated to people like yourself, "hey I could do that," is in itself profound. Many people, myself included, recreated some of his work on our own. It has likely led many other artists to paths they may not have taken before.

That may be the true genius of Picasso's life and work.

Something heard on the radio many years ago seems to have been attributed to many people other than the person who said it during my evening's listening:

Sell to the classes and live with the masses
Sell to the masses and live with the classes

There are original works of Picasso in my price range. Whoopie! I currently have too many art works in storage for lack of room on my walls.

jtk

[Mark Hennebury]

The only thing that i would try to convince anyone to do is to see things as they are!

485434

[Mel Fulks]

It’s the Loaacoon ( or something close ) really early stuff. But I still prefer Michael - Angelo’s MOSES . Ya’ just can’t beat
the story of Michael ,after finishing the sculpture, lightly tapping Mose’s knee, with a big mallet !…. and demanding of Moses that he “now speak !” Sadly….history did not
write down whatever Moses said.

[Frederick Skelly]

It’s the Loaacoon ( or something close ) really early stuff. But I still prefer Michael - Angelo’s MOSES . Ya’ just can’t beat
the story of Michael ,after finishing the sculpture, lightly tapping Mose’s knee, with a big mallet !…. and demanding of Moses that he “now speak !” Sadly….history did not write down whatever Moses said.

He probably said "Stop hittin my knee with that dang hammer you crazy italian".

[Mel Fulks]

He probably said "Stop hittin my knee with that dang hammer you crazy italian".

Frederick , That is a well though out…guess !

[Jim Koepke]

… we accept that it is a quality product without ever having to evaluate it ourselves.
We are not good at evaluating, we feel far more comfortable recognizing things that we have already saved a reference for, for example a BMW perhaps.

Maybe some people do, but there are too many who will read independent reviews. It used to be magazines for different careers, hobbies, sports or other paths of participation had regular reviews of new products. Some still do.

Many people are good at evaluating.


I will evaluate Picasso's work, piece by piece the same way, not collectively as having been done by a genius, therefore they are all by default masterpieces.
…

I will not be swayed by the media pressure to convince myself that infantile crap is anything other than that simply because of who did it.
If you choose to see all of his work as masterpieces, some that you "get" and some that you don't that is up to you.


Maybe some enthusiast somewhere is calling everything Picasso has ever done a masterpiece. Who in this discussion is fixated on the labeling of Picasso a genius or saying every piece of his work is a masterpiece?

I must be watching something else on television. I am unaware of all the media pressure. Then again, I don't watch that much TV.
Somehow you have gotten the wrong impression if you feel I "choose to see all of his work as masterpieces," I do not.

Some of his work I see as enlightening, but not on the level of a masterpiece. An example would be of prints he made of various animals:

485456

At first glance these may look like the renditions of a child. Not many children have this level of control over the lines they draw. These break each animal depicted into a simple, recognizable form. When my mind wonders while viewing something simple like this, my mind often adds elements like color, texture and other details. Many of these prints were produced in the thousands and are very inexpensive. At one time my occupation was as a drafter. Visualization of things is part of the job. Same with creating art and many other occupations.

These are somewhat appealing, but not on the level of masterpiece in my opinion. Nice and if I really wanted to make an artistic statement to some art snob who entered my shop I might spend the ten or fifteen bucks to have one on my shop walls. Instead, there are a couple of reproduction metal beer signs, a fake Hwy 66 sign and a bucolic scene painted on a cheap saw among a few other things.

If nothing else, Picasso has shown many artist the versatility of the line.


The only thing that i would try to convince anyone to do is to see things as they are!

To me it seems you are trying to convince everyone to see things the way you see them, which you seem to believe is the only way to see them.

jtk

[Mark Hennebury]

This is art to me H.R Giger cover on an Emerson Lake and Palmer record.

485457
https://youtu.be/p4fVQkL08Uo



Many people are good at evaluating.

To me it seems you are trying to convince everyone to see things the way you see them, which you seem to believe is the only way to see them.

jtk

On that we disagree.
When I taught woodworking 40 years ago, one of my first tasks was to get people to look at a piece of wood and describe in minute detail everything possible about it. I effect, forcing them to look and see. People are generally quite blind, they operated on recognition of markers stored in their memory, not observation and analysis; show them a piece of furniture, and they go through a mental checklist, check for recognizable design elements, check how and where it's being sold, check color, check price. etc.

A guy who had signed up for one of my classes asked me to review some furniture that he had just purchased. Background; he was a well paid executive type and interested in furniture-making as a hobby, he told me he had done lots of researching furniture companies and had purchased an expensive Cherry living set from one of the top companies. He was quite proud of this purchase and bought in photos and brochures. he wanted to know what the difference might be having it hand made. So I pointed out that a studio craftsman might use re-sawn solid wood book-matched panels chosen for a beautiful cathedral arches for door panels, on the other hand, his doors were made up of bland 2" wide strips, that had been stain and shaded to bring a uniform color, and that you could hardly see the actual wood or tell what species it was. After my review of his furniture his opinion of his furniture changed. He told me that he had never noticed any of what I showed him, he had sat in front of his furniture every night for the past year and had never really looked at it, not up close. He looked at it and saw what he wanted, which is it checked all his mental boxes, Cherry colored, expensive, Shiny, well presented in an exclusive store, brand name company etc. He saw a beautiful piece of furniture. The fact that it checked all his boxes satisfied him, so he saw what he wanted, never saw what it actually was, never looked close, never had reason to question, was content. It wasn't till I took him up close and forced him to see what it was. He told me that he could no longer look at the furniture the same way any more, he could not unsee what he now saw. He was angry with himself and hated his furniture, feeling that he had been conned by it. How could he not see, what I so plainly saw? It's my job as a furniture maker to see all of those details, the general public go by "brand" recognition Or snippets of information or details that they have committed to memory from what they have read somewhere or heard somewhere. All the furniture has to do is check a couple of boxes on their list and it is accepted.

That method of how humans operate enable us to function and move on, we cant stop and analyze every detail about everything or would would never take a step, so we operate on a quick scan, check a few boxes, accept and move on.
So this is essential for us to function, but also it is what makes us vulnerable to manipulation and deception. It is the dilemma , the duality of both being smart and stupid at the same time.

[Kevin Jenness]

Debate is more than saying the same thing repeatedly.

jtk

No it isn't. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohDB5gbtaEQ

[Mark Hennebury]

Monty Python, Brilliant! as always. Thanks for that.



No it isn't. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohDB5gbtaEQ

[Jim Koepke]

No it isn't. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohDB5gbtaEQ

LOL! I have enjoyed many hours of Monty Python (and the Flying Circus) and especially like John Cleese for his wit.

jtk

[Jim Koepke]

…

A guy who had signed up for one of my classes asked me to review some furniture that he had just purchased. Background; he was a well paid executive type and interested in furniture-making as a hobby, he told me he had done lots of researching furniture companies and had purchased an expensive Cherry living set from one of the top companies.
…


If you have read many of my posts you know my parents owned a furniture & appliance store for many years. After my mother passed and appliances were more than my dad could handle it was mostly just furniture.

Roll top desks were a popular item at the time but people always commented his were much more expensive than the others they had seen. Finally he decided to have one of the lower cost roll top desks on the floor. He would show people the differences in construction such as the oak desk having end grain on the all of the pieces and the less expensive desk had a veneer covering the end of the plywood or particle board. He would show the dovetails on the drawers compared to the stapled construction of doors in the less expensive desk. After all he would have them lift first the inexpensive desk followed by the oak desk. After all of that, many folks still purchased the less expensive desk, others appreciated something that could stay in the family for a few generations.

I've listened to Emerson, Lake & Palmer, though I do not think any of their recordings are in my music collection. I do like Benny Goodman or Glenn Miller among many other artists from ABBA to Wicket Tinkers.

jtk

[Mark Hennebury]

It reminds me of a passage in a book written by a retired drug smuggler, where he mentions how, upon release from prison, he took a legitimate job as a salesman for a company, and how alien he found the concept of having to convince a customer to buy your product.




If you have read many of my posts you know my parents owned a furniture & appliance store for many years. After my mother passed and appliances were more than my dad could handle it was mostly just furniture.

Roll top desks were a popular item at the time but people always commented his were much more expensive than the others they had seen. Finally he decided to have one of the lower cost roll top desks on the floor. He would show people the differences in construction such as the oak desk having end grain on the all of the pieces and the less expensive desk had a veneer covering the end of the plywood or particle board. He would show the dovetails on the drawers compared to the stapled construction of doors in the less expensive desk. After all he would have them lift first the inexpensive desk followed by the oak desk. After all of that, many folks still purchased the less expensive desk, others appreciated something that could stay in the family for a few generations.

I've listened to Emerson, Lake & Palmer, though I do not think any of their recordings are in my music collection. I do like Benny Goodman or Glenn Miller among many other artists from ABBA to Wicket Tinkers.

jtk

[Kevin Jenness]

There's plenty of bad modern art just as there's bad old or classical art. More of the bad old stuff has disappeared because it was perceived as such and not worth preserving over time and changing perspectives. That's as true of furniture as painting. The 17th century is lauded for magnificent furniture, but you can be sure there was at least an equal proportion of ugly and poorly made stuff as today (though smaller quantities due to mass production). Perhaps Jeff Koons and Andres Serrano will be forgotten in 500 years if there are any human beans around then.

My approach is to look at lots of art and craft (let's not get started on that distinction), ignore the market aspects and appreciate the pieces that surprise and excite and change my mind. I like some works (for instance) by Michael Heizer, Richard Serra, Andy Goldsworthy and Jackson Pollack that aren't examples of individual technical virtuosity but have a presence that says things that can't be or are better off not put into words. If you think I'm stupid or gullible to feel that way, well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

[Mark Hennebury]

"If you think I'm stupid or gullible to feel that way, well, that's just, like, your opinion, man." That is not what I said.