I see what you're saying, but then I think of aesthetics as well. Some people just aren't conceptual in their thinking and cannot express things in an art form, so they create for the sake of creating.
@GrassMoss That certainly isn't wrong, a lot of things can be devoid of meaning. But if it lacks effort, and people try to add meaning to meaningless things, that's what irritates me. If it's creation for creations sake, let that be known - don't sugar coat it in fake artsy BS.
i agree with you completely. i would like to see some of your artwork! one artist i dislike is damien hurst, i really dont like what he does to animals and he calls that art.
@LioeIe I looked him up. He's interesting. Can't say I see the value in it, but it certainly is interesting. People have done taxidermy before though, so I don't see how his "art" moves out of that realm significantly enough to be art, without just opening the floodgates for calling taxidermy in general "art."
The way I look at it. So long as there is passion in the act of creating the piece, it's art. Keep in mind, art (aside from maybe music) is the most subjective thing there is. Perhaps the artist had a traumatic experience that he feels can only be expressed through a single color, or a few shapes. To anyone else it appears lazy, but within that color the artist sees his trauma.
@TheDesertonfire Music is pretty subjective too. And while I agree that some artists express their "trauma" in various ways, if it seem lazy to others, and can be reproduced easily by anyone, can it be elevated to the status of art simply on the basis of intent?
Minimalist is one thing, but when you put a red triangle, a blue square, and a yellow circle on a canvas AND PEOPLE BUY IT AS ART, it has gone too far.
Eeeh I am both for and against color field paintings. Sometimes it is just an obsession with obtaining that exact color. I am really confused how you say it is becoming a big part of mainstream art. It has existed for quite a long time. Art on the internet can be drastically different than what is offered in current art streams. Go to the nearest big city and see if they have an Artwalk or a First Friday, you won't see colorfield everywhere.
Yes some of it is simple but can you deny its art?
@Xenicus31 I'm ok with color field aesthetically - I'd have some hanging in my house or apartment or room if I could. But yes, I think I can deny that JUST the obsession with obtaining an exact color is art. It's ok to have that obsession, even to share it with others. But can we elevate that to "art" status?
I know it has existed for a while. It's the lack of progression from that that is bothering me. Lots of mainstream art nowadays is still confined to color field, and that's fairly old cont.
@EmpGrevious How exactly does one progress color field... if anything else is done it to it is no longer color field but instead ____ with a large area of color.
It is hard to deny something is art/music when it is overtly simple or over complicated. It follows definition.
Try looking up some current art magazines, Hi-Fructose or Juxtapose are quite commonly available, they also have no color field at all. Present day art is very far away from color field.
To continue on the topic of lazy art, someone threw an air conditioner on the ground and sold it for $1,000,000+
CytrixFeare 1 month ago
I understands... I'm the same way...
PandemicPain 1 month ago
Lol. I got an ad for GoPro Camera and it had Skrillex music :3
PandemicPain 1 month ago
LeaderGrev, i agree.and i approve
SuperBoyboys 1 month ago
When everything can mean anything, everything loses its meaning
Agree completely.
staomruel 1 month ago
@staomruel I've said this, in these exact terms, in an older video of mine. Totally agree.
EmpGrevious 1 month ago
I see what you're saying, but then I think of aesthetics as well. Some people just aren't conceptual in their thinking and cannot express things in an art form, so they create for the sake of creating.
And I don't think that's wrong whatsoever.
GrassMoss 1 month ago
@GrassMoss That certainly isn't wrong, a lot of things can be devoid of meaning. But if it lacks effort, and people try to add meaning to meaningless things, that's what irritates me. If it's creation for creations sake, let that be known - don't sugar coat it in fake artsy BS.
EmpGrevious 1 month ago
My eyes hurt I fell like im high when i whached this
an12356 1 month ago
13th!
stghforthewin 1 month ago
i agree with you completely. i would like to see some of your artwork! one artist i dislike is damien hurst, i really dont like what he does to animals and he calls that art.
LioeIe 1 month ago
@LioeIe I looked him up. He's interesting. Can't say I see the value in it, but it certainly is interesting. People have done taxidermy before though, so I don't see how his "art" moves out of that realm significantly enough to be art, without just opening the floodgates for calling taxidermy in general "art."
EmpGrevious 1 month ago
last
kinggabe314 1 month ago
The way I look at it. So long as there is passion in the act of creating the piece, it's art. Keep in mind, art (aside from maybe music) is the most subjective thing there is. Perhaps the artist had a traumatic experience that he feels can only be expressed through a single color, or a few shapes. To anyone else it appears lazy, but within that color the artist sees his trauma.
TheDesertonfire 1 month ago
@TheDesertonfire Music is pretty subjective too. And while I agree that some artists express their "trauma" in various ways, if it seem lazy to others, and can be reproduced easily by anyone, can it be elevated to the status of art simply on the basis of intent?
EmpGrevious 1 month ago
@EmpGrevious You make good point.
TheDesertonfire 1 month ago
I never understood abstract art...
Minimalist is one thing, but when you put a red triangle, a blue square, and a yellow circle on a canvas AND PEOPLE BUY IT AS ART, it has gone too far.
TwilightWarrior92 1 month ago
Eeeh I am both for and against color field paintings. Sometimes it is just an obsession with obtaining that exact color. I am really confused how you say it is becoming a big part of mainstream art. It has existed for quite a long time. Art on the internet can be drastically different than what is offered in current art streams. Go to the nearest big city and see if they have an Artwalk or a First Friday, you won't see colorfield everywhere.
Yes some of it is simple but can you deny its art?
Xenicus31 1 month ago
@Xenicus31 I'm ok with color field aesthetically - I'd have some hanging in my house or apartment or room if I could. But yes, I think I can deny that JUST the obsession with obtaining an exact color is art. It's ok to have that obsession, even to share it with others. But can we elevate that to "art" status?
I know it has existed for a while. It's the lack of progression from that that is bothering me. Lots of mainstream art nowadays is still confined to color field, and that's fairly old cont.
EmpGrevious 1 month ago
@EmpGrevious , and I'd like to see some progression.
EmpGrevious 1 month ago
@EmpGrevious How exactly does one progress color field... if anything else is done it to it is no longer color field but instead ____ with a large area of color.
It is hard to deny something is art/music when it is overtly simple or over complicated. It follows definition.
Try looking up some current art magazines, Hi-Fructose or Juxtapose are quite commonly available, they also have no color field at all. Present day art is very far away from color field.
Again try First Friday-
Xenicus31 1 month ago
UCH I HAVE APPLICATIONS TO WRITE. GREVVVVVV (see what i did there?)
dafly45 1 month ago
25 BIOTCH!
Dedonarivl96 1 month ago
PLAY SHANK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! or super meat boy
dafly45 1 month ago
woahhhhhhh video!!!!!
TragicMatthew 1 month ago
I like listening to the music bro
TragicMatthew 1 month ago
BEST! GAME! EVAH! man, I love this game. Played the demo on pc, I am planning on getting it on the 3DS! :D
mocanico17 1 month ago
Fourth.
DAMNIT!
EmpGrevious 1 month ago 2
second
rhetta16 1 month ago
First
jacky4001 1 month ago