Clearly, in an effort to appeal to a lowest common denominator and show nothing intellectually or conceptually challenging, public artists and public art committees have missed their audience:
cranky septuagenarians sounding off on a program targeted toward the senile
I agree. If you want to understand a big part of why modern art is such a sham,
read "The 12 Million Dollar Stuffed Shark" by Don Thompson. It's all about tax shelters, money laundering and public money for the last century. Most of our fine art schools, museums, dealers, and even many collectors are rotten to the core. If viewing this public junk is hard for you, imagine being a dedicated painter
Artists of today are trying to reach out and pull something new and original... but seriously the it looks terrible, be original and produce something magnificent not childish
rooney's views are uncharitable, ungracious, stubborn, under educated, and his criteria for determining good art from bad is entirely muddled and ignorant.
his last statement, "i understand perfectly well that good art is always ahead of public taste; most of this stuff is certainly ahead of my taste; i don't like it. and if i'm wrong, i'm sure you'll correct me," seems like a better beginning for a critical analysis to soapbox about that the waste you've just been fed.
Perhaps not. Rather than being religious in your defence of what rooney decrys - how about jumping out of your cultural vaccum and get on with correcting him?
This "is it art?" question is so outdated. It is an invalid question that was pondered about 100 years ago. Yes it is. Just because you don't like it, doesn't automatically remove it from the "real art" category. Unless you are pretentious enough to believe you have that power. And they call the art world snobby....
"This is not art, because I think so. However, THIS is art whether or not I think so, because the artist can make an accurate sculpture of a human being". This line of reasoning is pretty strange I think.
I hate philistines. Serra in particular, even today, is one of the brightest and most thought provoking artists to have lived in the 20th Century. If you do not understand 'modern art' and instinctively declare it as culturally decadent, I suggest you study its history. Modern art is far more interesting than popular and mainstream entertainment and 'culture'.
@MartyFunkhouser00 Well, Marty...I have read history, and what we have here is a case of a tower of Babel. Artists, so excited to have been freed from all having to speak the one language (19C Beaux-Arts), feeling the freedom of glossolalia (the isms), the death of meaning/ historicity (PoMo), the rise of the individual and its desires (20C), that they haven't noticed that they cannot communicate with anyone any more, they only speak a language of one.
As a young person, you're not wrong on this Andy Rooney! Modern art is 100% sad. It's as if an attempt to remain as relevant as music, media and literature they just started coming up with random crap. As if the music industry started releasing full-length albums of two notes on a kazoo. You know, for the statement it makes...
@andid And what kind of music do you listen to? If there is anything on your playlist involving anything after Jazz you are a total hypocrite. All of the music made in the last 100 years is a product of the same social evolution as Modern art is. With breakdowns of the Romantic styles into formal elements and then fusion with everyday life and modern noise. You are in the greatest renaissance of culture of all time and you are closing your eyes.
Some of those works I enjoy, others I don't understand. That doesn't make them non-art. It's art for who recognizes it. However, putting them in public places ? It changes perspectives ! I like the idea.. but apparently people don't generally like them. If the majority doesn't like it, then why bother showing them the message ? But then again.. it's a form of expression, covered by the freedom of expression. At least artists should pay for their works to go public. -comercial art ? Damn !-
Agreed! Just cause what he did was different and new, doesn't mean it was an improvement on the other art styles. Too many people forget this, and like modern art just cause it's new and edgy. Most modern and abstract art is pure shit that requires an essay-length 'interpretation' to get anything out of it.
@FuckYouYouFuck For the most part I agree about Picasso (especially his sculptures). But I have to admit that some of his paintings really suck me in.
So everyone who wants to be an artist has to first master the kind of cheap realism that every portrait painter at the mall can do? Sure, those kitschy animal sculptures are a blight on this city, but there is a lot of fine modern art that has nothing to do with traditional draftsmanship or figurative sculpture.
Oh I found it!! I remember watching this in 04 i think and agreed with him completely. Just google some of the most expensive paintings sold, I wouldn't spare a dollar for it
This sorta reminds me of my grandpa complaining when I was listening to my rap music. "That isn't music! That isn't art! Thats garbage! How can you listen to such garbage? You should be listening to what I listened to when I was a young lad!" Seriously old dude. Just because sojmething isnt your paticular taste, that doesnt mean it isnt art. If your more in to the old fashion kind then by all means look at every painting from the 16th century(it all looks the same to me) and I will stick to Moma
You'll read in so many books that Picasso was a brilliant traditional draftsman, sometimes even compared to Raphael!
Well's that's all nonsense. Picasso certainly could copy Bargues plates more or less accurately, like thousands of academic students before and after him.
A better idea of his supposed skills can be made if you analyze his blue period work.
If you consider this to be good drawing, then your standards must be terribly low!
well i got nothing wrong with people calling something art, so long as they keep it to themselves, fair enough if it was on private property but imposing stuff like that on the public and expecting them to pay to maintain it is bs
The very advanced visual culture that was achieved in middle age Europe (and Asia) had to be destroyed. The group who took over pictorial art as well as music in the early to mid-20th century, redefined those two arts for very clear political purposes. As a result, Art in the 21st century has no meaning whatsoever. It’s WHO promotes it, WHO sells it, WHO markets it, WHO appoints the "experts" that tells us what Beauty is. I expose that in my "Art" video.
The infantile art is a reflection of what the people who put up the money to produce said art think if the population in general. They wouldn't have that kind of art in their mansions, but they'll put it in parks and public places. .....Because they think that everyday people are intellectual children. Plain and simple.
I agree that art doesn't have to be representational to be art. Abstract art has existed since ancient times. But most so-called modern art promotes ugliness and other repugnant characteristics which make it hateful and disgusting.
The problem with modern art that most people have is that it doesn't seem to be about them or relate to them in anyway. But it does,ordinary people don't own the streets the land the water the air the clothes on their backs or the art in our streets. These pieces are funded by business interests, they should remind people its time to stand up and say no and in that sense the pieces of work are now art in my mind.
Mozart was recognised by his own father as being a genius as a child enough so that he gave up his own composing to help his son. Sometimes artists are just artists and nobody can explain why.
@ste6666666 its because DEMONS they make you to do stuff like this, demons are such a non christian unholy beings that like art but they also like science to,but they dont like eugenics but they do like atomic bombs, the demons like anime because Japanese persons are empty shells. those Demons also like XTREEEME sports instead of Christian shit like football
Not everybody agrees with what art actually is. This is good and healthy, the fact that people have taken the time to discuss this modern art, proves it to be art as the only real definition of art we all can agree on is that enough people notice it. Remember, the noticing does not even have to happen in the persons lifetime.
The work of art needs to be exposed, criticized directly, and create a feedback for an artist to mature. Picasso didn't become Picasso overnight. Art in open space is more open to criticism and scrutiny and perhaps a better process to choose them is required. However, the control over art and its commercialization is the other side of the coin. To sell became more tempting than creating art.
Tilted Arc was awesome. What else could you have installed at FBI headquarters? Large... dark... imposing. It was just the right thing for the location.
People who are so quick to judge art without knowing anything about it first are no different than anyone else sounding off on subjects they don't understand. Picasso died in the 70's, and a great deal has happened in the last 30 years. I agree with him about the cows, pigs ect, but the reason that "public art" exists can be traced to the Tilted Arc controversy. Regardless of what you think of Serra, Mark di Suvero, or Franz West they don't deserve to be grouped with crapy "parade" art.
People who are so quick to judge art without knowing anything about it first are no different than anyone else sounding off on subjects they don't understand. Picasso died in the 70's, and a great deal has happened in the 30 years that followed. I agree with him about the cows, pigs ect, but the reason that "public art" exists can be traced to the Tilted Arc controversy. Regardless of what you think of Serra, Mark di Suvero, or Franz West they don't deserve to be grouped with crapy "parade" art.
i agree with him on the "an artist has to earn his right to make moden art" . An artist should achieve classical perfection before he can go off on his own and make symbolic stuff. otherwise its only going to sound and BE pretentious.
@john2890 this is the problem whit most art schools, they make you read, read,read and read about post-modernism the firsts months and they never teach you the basics of anything. they never teach you to practice, but they teach you fucking rhetoric to convince every one that you are dong something useful, when it is not.
His argument about Picasso doesnt make sense - he's making excuses b/c he wouldnt mind having a picasso statue in his city. And most people accept his picasso argument b/c most people would love to see ANY picasso piece...simply b/c picasso is infamous (i mean most of us learn about his "amazing art" from a young age)
@Ozzrya91 If you reread my comment you will see that I was not stating the opinion that you have to focus on realism to do abstract or surreal art. I was protesting the misconception that Picasso was any better at Realism than the kid sitting next to him in class when he copied that Bargue lithograph under teacher supervision. But in my opinion, now that you bring it up, I have to agree with Picasso himself when he said he thought he was a charlatan.
I love Andy Rooney for his straightforward honest opinions. However, the thing Andy has to understand about modern art is that it's meant to be simple. Don't over think it. Two indeterminate lines is about two lines. And what can two lines do? Here you have two lines forming a tunnel. Rather simple.
Andy is a man who can enjoy the simple things in life. I think perhaps he has a very high expectation for art. And so be it. I'd rather have someone who has a high expectation for art than none.
Art is an individuals reflection on the surroundings through their personal medium; they should all be given a chance, some make it, some don`t. Try getting local authorities to let you erect a huge slab of rusting steel in the middle of the street - takes some doing!
I agree that the "Tilted Art" shit (the rusty slab of metal) should have been taken down. I mean for one thing there isn't much thought in to it. But never mind whether it's art or not. It sucks mainly because it obstructs views and paths. You gotta go around that long annoying piece of shit.
@DiverseLA And how is it that you have come to the thought that there "wasn't much thought to it?" Richard Serra works with very psychological concepts. You should read a book once and a while before slandering the hell out of someone.
@chandru1103 I'm sorry for having an opinion. Also, you're right - me not liking a slab of metal obviously means that I don't read books. You're way ahead of everyone here, champ.
Also, the correct wording is "libel", not "slander" - given that my opposition is in the written form.
@DiverseLA You can have an opinion. However, it is much better to have an informed one, based on intellectuality. I CAN have the opinion that all people from Denmark are murderous snobs, but because I know Danish people I know that that is NOT fact. And actually the implication that I AM the snob is odd considering you are technically the one who have belittled the life work of another human being based on absolutely no solid intellectual basis. Pretentiousness?
@chandru1103 Seemed like the city and the people agreed with my standpoint, since that slab of metal was removed.
I like art. I think it has a place and does look good placed in parks, courtyards, etc.
But trying to block off a walking area with a long giant piece of rusty metal is not only unimaginative & ugly, but a nuisance as well. There was little "skill" in to creating it, as not much was done to it.
Please explain the slab of metal since you know so much about it.
@DiverseLA Serra's work is about scale, color, and division of space. He is a minimalist so therefore he uses basic elements to communicate with the viewer. His works are highly physical and unyielding and can impose an oppressive feeling on the viewer. In a way he works with the social contexts of the space by dividing it with metal that not only is FREESTANDING (hint there is A LOT of skill involved in keeping it standing) but if it shifted could crush you flat instantly. Psychology...........
@chandru1103 I think the biggest disagreement though with that slab of metal was the location. I looked up where it was at - Federal Plaza in Downtown NYC.
It would serve better in a very large park on an open field, or somewhere more suburban. Federal Plaza isn't that big and it's in the middle of an intersection of streets and walking paths. The plaza looks nice with the trees, fountain, and "openness" of it all. That metal completely obstructs views and makes the plaza look ugly.
@chandru1103 How is his work "about" scale, colour, spatial divison, any more than a wall, or a tree, or a cloud is "about" scale, colour, etc? A lot of art wank tries to dodge the question with a vauge "it's about" - it's like saying "it can be associated with" - but anything can be connected to anything - sardine ice cream will still make you retch.
What do you think Sera is "communicating" with the viewer? Sounds like it is "I am big, and pretentious and can get in your way."
@ImpliedBodyMan The difference is that these works are ART OBJECTS that challenged the norms of what a sculpture looks like. And Yes everything is linked which is why art is very easy to make. Thank god! Now innovation...that is not an easy task. Serra wants to force a psychological response onto you . When you see a large unforgiving surface looming over you and engineering is the only thing keeping it from flattening you, you react. This is minimalism...its is what it is.
@chandru1103 Yea, but it's a pretty weak contention, with more than a nod to Duchcamp, whose urinal started the current, endless "de-skilling" in Art. You should take a fresh look at your own opinions, and see from where they arise. Probably you have some egoic attachment to being "the one who understands", but it closes your mind to the simple truths of beauty, creativity and the transcendent principle. Why does Serra "want to force..." anything? So do psyops, huffy people - are they ART?
@ImpliedBodyMan What is skill? What is transcendence? What is creativity? What is anything? There is no intrinsic meaning to anything we just apply a meaning to things later. You grab onto these ideas for a sense of stability and comfort, when there is no stability. And the comfort, just a delusion. And don't get me started on the "truth" thing.
@ImpliedBodyMan The whole "Is it art?" debate has been dead since 1917. Just because you don't like something doesn't mean it isn't art. ART IS NOT IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER. There is probably music that you don't like but does that make it any less like music?
In complete agreement, except for the line about Picasso. Simply because one copies a Charles Bargue lithograph (torso from back) in no way entitles them to take any liberty they desire. He did NOT master realism; he had a decent level of academic student training which was extremely common at the time and even today.
@khelens I was going to say something......about something but your comment is SO well said (typed) not to mention insightful and just cool to read, that I'm not going to say anything about nothing! Well said!
@khelens but Picasso was a master of realism at young age, and one moment in his life he decided realism was merely fucking shitting nipples, because football promoted male rape on short men, because of Eugenics,and he said: fuck this shit I am going to make a new form to construct a painting, that does not involve EUGENICS and GAY RAPE ( or it synonym, the organized team sports )
That shit isn't real art. The artists spent no time learning any of the foundations of art and they SHOULD have to get a license to add these multi-colored blights to our public areas.
The ONLY thing I disagree with is that Picasso earned the right and how the man just accepts it as art. That's a little misguided as I'm sure Picasso wanted his art to SPEAK to everyone. Just because it's Picasso's doesn't make it the best abstract and art. Not dissing on Picasso tho.
Thank you...........................you are my hero and all you so called "Modern Artists" just start doing real art!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. Anybody can be a modern artists by taking 2 toothpick breaking them and pieces put some glue and splatter paint then sell it for a million dollars. To me modern artists are just bunch of douchebag just to way to make some quick cash and doesn't put alot of effort into it. GOOD DAY TO ALL YOU MUTHA F MODERN SO CALLED ARTIST.
it is so easy to call something art, and be totally wrong .... too few succeed at the best of standards (should anything less deserve to be called ART??)
As an artist I look for what is created. Sure we all have our opinions but it is a fact that sometimes criticism outweighs interpretation. I do agree though that throwing paint on a canvas and getting 1 million dollars for it is something of a hoax but then again maybe the artist bought the paint at retail and not wholesale and the canvas sat at Versaille for a few hundred years.
I see so many people who are saying what art is or isnt. All I want to know is who wrote the rules? I LOVE being an artist for the simple fact that no one can say whether it is right or wrong. I chose what to paint on the blank canvas. No one is saying that you have to like it.
@PierceMarratoo yes, i understand that all revolution is met with oppostion, and by your passion on the subject i can see that you are an artist, and i by no means meant to offend you or any other serious artist. i only meant to say that rooney had a point, not that he was completley correct. i'm just saying if anything created, even if it was made with no passion, no thought becomes heraled, art loses its value. its like calling a two word sentence a piece of literature.
@Despenny4ever Indeed I am an artist and I promise I wasn't offended. Just having a friendly debate. I do understand what you are saying but my point is that we don't know what the artists intentions are, or the level of passion with which a piece was created. My view has always been simple, if someone puts creative evergy into something, it is art. If it is "good art" is another issue all together.
It is funny that he used Picasso as an example. His first non traditional work "Les Demoiselles d'Avignon" was shunned by the critics using the same arguments that mr rooney just used against the modern art in the video.
@whomejohn The fact that Rooney chose to show pictures of the tackiest, most colorful works while reporting on this topic is a little shady. He's talking about public art, and there is a LOT of beautiful public art. Not a fair report IMO.
People feel sophisticated when saying they appreciate modern art, its like a writer writing a book of words that has no plot, and doesn't actually make sentences, telling people it;s modern writing, and they are just culturally deprived.
@laallaal75 I like a lot of modern art (just to be clear I said a lot-not all) and it has nothing to do with feeling sophisticated. I enjoy art, music, and writing that lean towards the abstract and strange. It is my personal taste.
I think a lot of people who 'appreciate' modern art only appreciate it because they don't want to appear uncultured or stupid. Well guess what, there is nothing cultured about the majority or modern art. Pull your heads out of your collective arse already.
@R0undAboutMidnight why does it make you so angry? Some people like it, some don't. Besides, who are you to say what is cultured and what isn't? I bet there are things that you like I don't. Just out of curiosity, what type of art do you like?
@PierceMarratoo What makes me angry is that people are told that we should like this stuff, that we should have it on public property. Does a big steel structure like the one in the video really convey anything to anyone? I mean, really?
@R0undAboutMidnight By no means am I saying that you have to like it. Im not sure which steel structure you are referring to but I can say that it MAY mean something to someone. Maybe its not even meant to mean anything...who knows. Thats my point exactly, it doesnt have to mean anything to you, and you don't have to like it. There is a lot of art out there that I don't like but I refuse to discredit it by saying that it isn't art.
@PierceMarratoo the reason it makes a lot of people angry is because when you think about an artist you expect them to have spent time on their work, when you look at most modern art and espeically abstract art they hardly look like a lot of effort has gone into it therefore when someone who's just finished their landscape painting of san francisco see's that their painting isn't selling but the guy that threw paint at the canvas just sold his for 1 mill, it seems wrong.
The point is that Art is supposed to be about expressing yourself , however i agree with the guy in the video most of it is "pretentious nonsense". Also, who is to judge whether a piece of art is "good" or "bad" if it is expression of ones unique mind?
this old man is very right!!! picasso knew how to paint and draw perfectly!!! from this point on he developed modern art!, i went to modern art school 4 years in europe!
the students and the teachers do know nothing about color mixing or drawing!!!
shame! is a scam!!! modern art its great when you know how to do it!!!.
I watched this expecting to disagree with ol' Rooney, but most of those examples me gave really are some ugly and/or pretentious crap!
Relating to their fellow humans is an artist's duty, and this is so much more important in a public space. You're trying to enrich the lives of others, not make them feel angry and insecure.
hmmm i see his point about picasso but i just dont know.. by the same criteria i think picasso's abstract stuff is not good art. Its not as if picasso has earned the right, its that picasso has strayed and declined.
he has a point. picasso earned the right to try new non-traditional art because he had first mastered fine art, and dali started off with realism before branching off into the surreal. Most of today's "artists" skip right ahead to attempting a non-traditional work, and they fail miserably. Once everyone can create "great" art that is recognized, then art loses its value.
@Despenny4ever Do you realize that when Picasso began his cubist work all the art critics said the exact same things about it that Mr. Rooney just said about all modern art. Years later it is looked at as the turning point in art history. Rooney is a grumpy old man with no idea what he is talking about. Yeah there is a lot of bad art out there but rooney has no place saying what is good and what isnt.
what's this he says about picasso? just because picasso is an exceptional artist and can make beautifully realistic statues of human form means that his cubism is automatically free from your jurisdiction, andy? if picasso took a shit and called it art, you would not question that either? hippocrite, art cannot be defined.
I'm so with you Andy, and I can't say that too often. The crap that's littered (and I mean littered) all over is just terrible. And the cost of such trash is crazy as well. Sculptures and actually skilled pieces are just not around anymore. Those examples are just terribly and ugly.
@lonewulf44 That is exactly what I am trying to say. I didn't like most of what I saw in the video. However, I will not discredit it or say that it isn't art. It just isn't something I like.
@PierceMarratoo I know and I agree ... and it's never meant as anything but my opinion ... but some of the trash out there just does not compute as art in any shape or form. I suppose people call it a matter of taste ... I just call it a matter of talent ... or lack there of. ;)
if the audience can't tell what the art is trying to say at the basic level, i guess the artist has failed. if i read a book that is so badly written that i can't tell what I am reading, then It is not good book
@neonaction not true-there are examples of art, music, and literature that are meant to be abstract and not easily interperated. Some people enjoy this type of work some dont. Why does this make people so angry?
@neonaction I agree completely. I'm not saying all abstract art is good. Obviously there is a lot of crap out there. However, with abstract art it is hard to say what is or is not badly drawn. You have to critique it differently by paying less attention to technical ability and more attention to composition, balance, color use, form, etc.
@PierceMarratoo the bottom line is, art has to be beautiful. I don't care if it's representational or abstract, if the art does not communicate beauty to the view then the art has failed it job. this is my opinion.
@PierceMarratoo Artists do study the theory of beauty. Musicians and painters study composition. It's true that beauty is in the eye of beholder, but there is some basis on what people consider beautiful. For example, in visual art, simplicity, balance and symmetry seems to be beautiful for most people.
@neonaction I think you are confusing beauty with aesthetics. If it were true that art had to be beautiful then Goya would not be one of the most brilliant painters in history. However, he was very aware of the elements that are USUALLY considered aesthitcially pleasing (composition, balance, form, etc). What I am saying is that what is aethetically pleasing depends on what medium the piece is in, who you speak with, where you are, what time period, and that is just to name a few variables.
@PierceMarratoo I think that "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" has been violently abused as excuse for bad art. Literally I can not even criticize some thing as ugly anymore because of that very phrase. I dont' mind if people call my art ugly as long as i can call theirs the same. I think good art must be opular. Shakespeares was popular culture, now it has become high arts. If the art is not popular it can't even stand a chance in history books.
Art is only made public by the people who put it there, it is an expression of an individual. Art is not made to please anybody, or to annoy anybody, it is expression, and if you say picasso's work is art weither you think so or not? so is any person in the world who manages to express themselves. everything is art.
@dustXiron Bullshit. Calling it an expression does not justify it. If so, I could shit on your sidewalk and say, "Its not about pleasing everybody. its about expression."
Clearly, in an effort to appeal to a lowest common denominator and show nothing intellectually or conceptually challenging, public artists and public art committees have missed their audience:
cranky septuagenarians sounding off on a program targeted toward the senile
patrickbobilin 1 year ago 39
this man sounds cranky and senile but i completely agree with him!
eekrun 1 year ago 21
I agree. If you want to understand a big part of why modern art is such a sham,
read "The 12 Million Dollar Stuffed Shark" by Don Thompson. It's all about tax shelters, money laundering and public money for the last century. Most of our fine art schools, museums, dealers, and even many collectors are rotten to the core. If viewing this public junk is hard for you, imagine being a dedicated painter
having to endure such "art".
jfreeman343 1 year ago 20
@jfreeman343 Amen.
ImpliedBodyMan 1 year ago
haha This is amazing!!! I completely agree!!
girlscandrum 1 year ago 15
Artists of today are trying to reach out and pull something new and original... but seriously the it looks terrible, be original and produce something magnificent not childish
muzikscud23 1 year ago 16
rooney's views are uncharitable, ungracious, stubborn, under educated, and his criteria for determining good art from bad is entirely muddled and ignorant.
his last statement, "i understand perfectly well that good art is always ahead of public taste; most of this stuff is certainly ahead of my taste; i don't like it. and if i'm wrong, i'm sure you'll correct me," seems like a better beginning for a critical analysis to soapbox about that the waste you've just been fed.
superdupersimon 1 year ago
@superdupersimon
Perhaps not. Rather than being religious in your defence of what rooney decrys - how about jumping out of your cultural vaccum and get on with correcting him?
ImpliedBodyMan 1 year ago
This "is it art?" question is so outdated. It is an invalid question that was pondered about 100 years ago. Yes it is. Just because you don't like it, doesn't automatically remove it from the "real art" category. Unless you are pretentious enough to believe you have that power. And they call the art world snobby....
chandru1103 1 year ago
Could this moron get anymore arrogant?
ThePickyNancy 1 year ago
DADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADADA
eMarRsixSixSIX 1 year ago 7
"This is not art, because I think so. However, THIS is art whether or not I think so, because the artist can make an accurate sculpture of a human being". This line of reasoning is pretty strange I think.
noyearold 1 year ago 2
I hate philistines. Serra in particular, even today, is one of the brightest and most thought provoking artists to have lived in the 20th Century. If you do not understand 'modern art' and instinctively declare it as culturally decadent, I suggest you study its history. Modern art is far more interesting than popular and mainstream entertainment and 'culture'.
MartyFunkhouser00 1 year ago
@MartyFunkhouser00 Well, Marty...I have read history, and what we have here is a case of a tower of Babel. Artists, so excited to have been freed from all having to speak the one language (19C Beaux-Arts), feeling the freedom of glossolalia (the isms), the death of meaning/ historicity (PoMo), the rise of the individual and its desires (20C), that they haven't noticed that they cannot communicate with anyone any more, they only speak a language of one.
Surely you can't call that culture?
ImpliedBodyMan 1 year ago 48
As a young person, you're not wrong on this Andy Rooney! Modern art is 100% sad. It's as if an attempt to remain as relevant as music, media and literature they just started coming up with random crap. As if the music industry started releasing full-length albums of two notes on a kazoo. You know, for the statement it makes...
andid 1 year ago 9
@andid And what kind of music do you listen to? If there is anything on your playlist involving anything after Jazz you are a total hypocrite. All of the music made in the last 100 years is a product of the same social evolution as Modern art is. With breakdowns of the Romantic styles into formal elements and then fusion with everyday life and modern noise. You are in the greatest renaissance of culture of all time and you are closing your eyes.
chandru1103 1 year ago
Some of those works I enjoy, others I don't understand. That doesn't make them non-art. It's art for who recognizes it. However, putting them in public places ? It changes perspectives ! I like the idea.. but apparently people don't generally like them. If the majority doesn't like it, then why bother showing them the message ? But then again.. it's a form of expression, covered by the freedom of expression. At least artists should pay for their works to go public. -comercial art ? Damn !-
Yamakoto120 1 year ago
Agree with everything said except for Picasso. Picasso is an irrelevant charlatan too.
FuckYouYouFuck 1 year ago
@FuckYouYouFuck
Agreed! Just cause what he did was different and new, doesn't mean it was an improvement on the other art styles. Too many people forget this, and like modern art just cause it's new and edgy. Most modern and abstract art is pure shit that requires an essay-length 'interpretation' to get anything out of it.
drewnod 1 year ago
@FuckYouYouFuck For the most part I agree about Picasso (especially his sculptures). But I have to admit that some of his paintings really suck me in.
But I like Dali WAY better.
Guitcad1 1 year ago
You think Picasso is irrelevant?
Holmliahora 1 year ago
So everyone who wants to be an artist has to first master the kind of cheap realism that every portrait painter at the mall can do? Sure, those kitschy animal sculptures are a blight on this city, but there is a lot of fine modern art that has nothing to do with traditional draftsmanship or figurative sculpture.
CaptPoco 1 year ago
I actually enjoy the modern art he showed in that slide show...Andy's just a grumpy old man that doesn't know shit about art.
skamaster48 1 year ago
@skamaster48 Why did you enjoy it? What is there that he ought to know about art?
BandofSorensons 1 year ago
Abstract art that makes one wonder and question ends with Picasso. Most artists today are just wannabes with absolutely no creativity.
LameCrippled 1 year ago
Oh I found it!! I remember watching this in 04 i think and agreed with him completely. Just google some of the most expensive paintings sold, I wouldn't spare a dollar for it
tjohn1986 1 year ago
Andy Rooney refers to the World War Two generation as "a bunch of whippersnappers".
deliciousmorton 1 year ago
This sorta reminds me of my grandpa complaining when I was listening to my rap music. "That isn't music! That isn't art! Thats garbage! How can you listen to such garbage? You should be listening to what I listened to when I was a young lad!" Seriously old dude. Just because sojmething isnt your paticular taste, that doesnt mean it isnt art. If your more in to the old fashion kind then by all means look at every painting from the 16th century(it all looks the same to me) and I will stick to Moma
kronolisk 1 year ago
@kronolisk What is art anyway?
BandofSorensons 1 year ago
@kronolisk You're a fucking idiot.
lt53666 1 year ago
Wonderfully curmudgeonly.
Nykytyne2 1 year ago
You'll read in so many books that Picasso was a brilliant traditional draftsman, sometimes even compared to Raphael!
Well's that's all nonsense. Picasso certainly could copy Bargues plates more or less accurately, like thousands of academic students before and after him.
A better idea of his supposed skills can be made if you analyze his blue period work.
If you consider this to be good drawing, then your standards must be terribly low!
muffinsforthesoul 1 year ago
You're not wrong pops.
rahotep101 1 year ago
well i got nothing wrong with people calling something art, so long as they keep it to themselves, fair enough if it was on private property but imposing stuff like that on the public and expecting them to pay to maintain it is bs
ImEuanAndIGotsSkeelz 1 year ago
The very advanced visual culture that was achieved in middle age Europe (and Asia) had to be destroyed. The group who took over pictorial art as well as music in the early to mid-20th century, redefined those two arts for very clear political purposes. As a result, Art in the 21st century has no meaning whatsoever. It’s WHO promotes it, WHO sells it, WHO markets it, WHO appoints the "experts" that tells us what Beauty is. I expose that in my "Art" video.
thegreatfearblog 1 year ago
50 people like long pointless pieces of rusty sheet metal blocking their path.
fads90 1 year ago
Saskatoon Saskatchewan is FILLED with hideous twisted medal atrocities. I just want a nice statue that looks real.
wheelzwheela 1 year ago
lol the guy who introduces him looks like he has that knowing smirk that everyone in the office is just like "fuckin rooney."
FuzzballFury 1 year ago
what a whiny old shit!
blueingreentrain 1 year ago
what a bag of wind
blueingreentrain 1 year ago
omg i laughed so hard i started crying
obi1geoffrey 1 year ago
The infantile art is a reflection of what the people who put up the money to produce said art think if the population in general. They wouldn't have that kind of art in their mansions, but they'll put it in parks and public places. .....Because they think that everyday people are intellectual children. Plain and simple.
p717 1 year ago 4
I agree that art doesn't have to be representational to be art. Abstract art has existed since ancient times. But most so-called modern art promotes ugliness and other repugnant characteristics which make it hateful and disgusting.
XanaduZune 1 year ago
Modern art is garbage that is promoted by pretentious assholes who hate popular culture.
XanaduZune 1 year ago 5
awfyl, awful man
jamlegs2 1 year ago
Amen, Brother.
Fuwuttevas 1 year ago 3
omfg...what an idiot
pedromiguel0007 1 year ago
If you don't understand that, then you are really not a good art critic.
yeagerspace 1 year ago
Just because you don't understand something doesn't mean you should talk trash about it.
yeagerspace 1 year ago
The problem with modern art that most people have is that it doesn't seem to be about them or relate to them in anyway. But it does,ordinary people don't own the streets the land the water the air the clothes on their backs or the art in our streets. These pieces are funded by business interests, they should remind people its time to stand up and say no and in that sense the pieces of work are now art in my mind.
ste6666666 1 year ago
Mozart was recognised by his own father as being a genius as a child enough so that he gave up his own composing to help his son. Sometimes artists are just artists and nobody can explain why.
ste6666666 1 year ago
@ste6666666 its because DEMONS they make you to do stuff like this, demons are such a non christian unholy beings that like art but they also like science to,but they dont like eugenics but they do like atomic bombs, the demons like anime because Japanese persons are empty shells. those Demons also like XTREEEME sports instead of Christian shit like football
porkyminch01 1 year ago
Not everybody agrees with what art actually is. This is good and healthy, the fact that people have taken the time to discuss this modern art, proves it to be art as the only real definition of art we all can agree on is that enough people notice it. Remember, the noticing does not even have to happen in the persons lifetime.
ste6666666 1 year ago
The work of art needs to be exposed, criticized directly, and create a feedback for an artist to mature. Picasso didn't become Picasso overnight. Art in open space is more open to criticism and scrutiny and perhaps a better process to choose them is required. However, the control over art and its commercialization is the other side of the coin. To sell became more tempting than creating art.
mflecha1 1 year ago
Tilted Arc was awesome. What else could you have installed at FBI headquarters? Large... dark... imposing. It was just the right thing for the location.
BTW — Andy’s ignorance is no virtue.
ecallender 1 year ago
@ecallender FAG
faroges 1 year ago
Andy, you don't know shit about art.
0362868 1 year ago
BELIEVE ME, YOU ARE NOT WRONG!
int1901 1 year ago
I love this video! I hate how the word 'art' is thrown around so much. andy rooney is amazing
ampedcam19 1 year ago
People who are so quick to judge art without knowing anything about it first are no different than anyone else sounding off on subjects they don't understand. Picasso died in the 70's, and a great deal has happened in the last 30 years. I agree with him about the cows, pigs ect, but the reason that "public art" exists can be traced to the Tilted Arc controversy. Regardless of what you think of Serra, Mark di Suvero, or Franz West they don't deserve to be grouped with crapy "parade" art.
odetoajar 1 year ago
@odetoajar Picasso sucked.
xxdiogenescynicxx 1 year ago
People who are so quick to judge art without knowing anything about it first are no different than anyone else sounding off on subjects they don't understand. Picasso died in the 70's, and a great deal has happened in the 30 years that followed. I agree with him about the cows, pigs ect, but the reason that "public art" exists can be traced to the Tilted Arc controversy. Regardless of what you think of Serra, Mark di Suvero, or Franz West they don't deserve to be grouped with crapy "parade" art.
odetoajar 1 year ago
"Pretentious Nonsense" sums it up!
t5e2 1 year ago
Since people are going to be living longer and getting older, they'll just have to learn how to be babies longer.
I think having land and not ruining it is the most beautiful art that anybody could ever want to own.
ILIKEBORINGTHING 1 year ago 3
i agree with him on the "an artist has to earn his right to make moden art" . An artist should achieve classical perfection before he can go off on his own and make symbolic stuff. otherwise its only going to sound and BE pretentious.
john2890 1 year ago
@john2890 this is the problem whit most art schools, they make you read, read,read and read about post-modernism the firsts months and they never teach you the basics of anything. they never teach you to practice, but they teach you fucking rhetoric to convince every one that you are dong something useful, when it is not.
porkyminch01 1 year ago
His argument about Picasso doesnt make sense - he's making excuses b/c he wouldnt mind having a picasso statue in his city. And most people accept his picasso argument b/c most people would love to see ANY picasso piece...simply b/c picasso is infamous (i mean most of us learn about his "amazing art" from a young age)
mish9288 1 year ago
The only work of art Andy approves of is a drawing of a guy's ass!
cobrastriesand 1 year ago
i don't mind if they do that as long as they put it a way in the next three days,..
int1901 1 year ago
eres un idiota
dku50 1 year ago
Art, fart! Just gimme da money.
letsif 1 year ago
You must learn the rules of art first befor you can break them.
Antichrist2000 1 year ago
Art isn't about whether you like it or not. Nevermind, I'm not going to get into it on fucking youtube.
Khanstant 1 year ago
@Ozzrya91 If you reread my comment you will see that I was not stating the opinion that you have to focus on realism to do abstract or surreal art. I was protesting the misconception that Picasso was any better at Realism than the kid sitting next to him in class when he copied that Bargue lithograph under teacher supervision. But in my opinion, now that you bring it up, I have to agree with Picasso himself when he said he thought he was a charlatan.
khelens 1 year ago
I love Andy Rooney for his straightforward honest opinions. However, the thing Andy has to understand about modern art is that it's meant to be simple. Don't over think it. Two indeterminate lines is about two lines. And what can two lines do? Here you have two lines forming a tunnel. Rather simple.
Andy is a man who can enjoy the simple things in life. I think perhaps he has a very high expectation for art. And so be it. I'd rather have someone who has a high expectation for art than none.
spudart 1 year ago
@spudart I think you're exactly the type of person Andy hates. There is no reason for that particular type of "art" to be displayed.
TheKafkaLover 1 year ago
Thank you, Mr. Rooney! I'm with you on this.
kenyettan1 1 year ago
Art is an individuals reflection on the surroundings through their personal medium; they should all be given a chance, some make it, some don`t. Try getting local authorities to let you erect a huge slab of rusting steel in the middle of the street - takes some doing!
AClarke2007 1 year ago
What are you to say what is, and what is not art? Art is everything, even Modern Art.
AnAbstractFragment 1 year ago
@AnAbstractFragment
To say Art is everything immediately makes it completely meaningless.
vanderbilt887 1 year ago 12
@vanderbilt887 You get it....we only apply meanings to things.
chandru1103 1 year ago
Pick your own asshole, asshole.
SourPix 1 year ago
I have an MFA in painting and I agree with Andy Rooney. And I don't agree with him about much else.
rosmia2 1 year ago 4
better to see art on the molski.org
radeczko 1 year ago
ANDY.........you ARE wrong
BLACK1HAIRCHIC 1 year ago
@BLACK1HAIRCHIC Sorry, but ANDY is RIGHT.
TheKafkaLover 1 year ago 145
Art is not democratic
Jsonkehrer 1 year ago
I agree that the "Tilted Art" shit (the rusty slab of metal) should have been taken down. I mean for one thing there isn't much thought in to it. But never mind whether it's art or not. It sucks mainly because it obstructs views and paths. You gotta go around that long annoying piece of shit.
DiverseLA 1 year ago 25
@DiverseLA And how is it that you have come to the thought that there "wasn't much thought to it?" Richard Serra works with very psychological concepts. You should read a book once and a while before slandering the hell out of someone.
chandru1103 1 year ago
Comment removed
DiverseLA 1 year ago
@chandru1103 I'm sorry for having an opinion. Also, you're right - me not liking a slab of metal obviously means that I don't read books. You're way ahead of everyone here, champ.
Also, the correct wording is "libel", not "slander" - given that my opposition is in the written form.
DiverseLA 1 year ago
@DiverseLA You can have an opinion. However, it is much better to have an informed one, based on intellectuality. I CAN have the opinion that all people from Denmark are murderous snobs, but because I know Danish people I know that that is NOT fact. And actually the implication that I AM the snob is odd considering you are technically the one who have belittled the life work of another human being based on absolutely no solid intellectual basis. Pretentiousness?
chandru1103 1 year ago
@chandru1103 Seemed like the city and the people agreed with my standpoint, since that slab of metal was removed.
I like art. I think it has a place and does look good placed in parks, courtyards, etc.
But trying to block off a walking area with a long giant piece of rusty metal is not only unimaginative & ugly, but a nuisance as well. There was little "skill" in to creating it, as not much was done to it.
Please explain the slab of metal since you know so much about it.
DiverseLA 1 year ago
@DiverseLA Serra's work is about scale, color, and division of space. He is a minimalist so therefore he uses basic elements to communicate with the viewer. His works are highly physical and unyielding and can impose an oppressive feeling on the viewer. In a way he works with the social contexts of the space by dividing it with metal that not only is FREESTANDING (hint there is A LOT of skill involved in keeping it standing) but if it shifted could crush you flat instantly. Psychology...........
chandru1103 1 year ago
@chandru1103 I think the biggest disagreement though with that slab of metal was the location. I looked up where it was at - Federal Plaza in Downtown NYC.
It would serve better in a very large park on an open field, or somewhere more suburban. Federal Plaza isn't that big and it's in the middle of an intersection of streets and walking paths. The plaza looks nice with the trees, fountain, and "openness" of it all. That metal completely obstructs views and makes the plaza look ugly.
DiverseLA 1 year ago 3
@chandru1103 How is his work "about" scale, colour, spatial divison, any more than a wall, or a tree, or a cloud is "about" scale, colour, etc? A lot of art wank tries to dodge the question with a vauge "it's about" - it's like saying "it can be associated with" - but anything can be connected to anything - sardine ice cream will still make you retch.
What do you think Sera is "communicating" with the viewer? Sounds like it is "I am big, and pretentious and can get in your way."
Truth...
ImpliedBodyMan 1 year ago 3
@ImpliedBodyMan The difference is that these works are ART OBJECTS that challenged the norms of what a sculpture looks like. And Yes everything is linked which is why art is very easy to make. Thank god! Now innovation...that is not an easy task. Serra wants to force a psychological response onto you . When you see a large unforgiving surface looming over you and engineering is the only thing keeping it from flattening you, you react. This is minimalism...its is what it is.
chandru1103 1 year ago
@chandru1103 Yea, but it's a pretty weak contention, with more than a nod to Duchcamp, whose urinal started the current, endless "de-skilling" in Art. You should take a fresh look at your own opinions, and see from where they arise. Probably you have some egoic attachment to being "the one who understands", but it closes your mind to the simple truths of beauty, creativity and the transcendent principle. Why does Serra "want to force..." anything? So do psyops, huffy people - are they ART?
ImpliedBodyMan 1 year ago 14
@ImpliedBodyMan What is skill? What is transcendence? What is creativity? What is anything? There is no intrinsic meaning to anything we just apply a meaning to things later. You grab onto these ideas for a sense of stability and comfort, when there is no stability. And the comfort, just a delusion. And don't get me started on the "truth" thing.
chandru1103 1 year ago 4
@chandru1103 *I'm Pretentious is what i'm saying
rgmztxy 1 year ago 5
@rgmztxy Pretentiousness implies I live my life believing that I am significant....someone who says everything is meaningless would not believe this.
chandru1103 1 year ago 10
@ImpliedBodyMan The whole "Is it art?" debate has been dead since 1917. Just because you don't like something doesn't mean it isn't art. ART IS NOT IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER. There is probably music that you don't like but does that make it any less like music?
chandru1103 1 year ago 49
In complete agreement, except for the line about Picasso. Simply because one copies a Charles Bargue lithograph (torso from back) in no way entitles them to take any liberty they desire. He did NOT master realism; he had a decent level of academic student training which was extremely common at the time and even today.
khelens 1 year ago 10
@khelens I was going to say something......about something but your comment is SO well said (typed) not to mention insightful and just cool to read, that I'm not going to say anything about nothing! Well said!
Youngblood1223 1 year ago
@khelens You don't have to master realism, ever, for anything, unless you're interested in creating realist works of art.
Khanstant 1 year ago
@khelens but Picasso was a master of realism at young age, and one moment in his life he decided realism was merely fucking shitting nipples, because football promoted male rape on short men, because of Eugenics,and he said: fuck this shit I am going to make a new form to construct a painting, that does not involve EUGENICS and GAY RAPE ( or it synonym, the organized team sports )
porkyminch01 1 year ago
@khelens Academia must die for any real art to be made....or at least anything that communicates something truly human.
chandru1103 1 year ago
Tell it like it is, brother!!
That shit isn't real art. The artists spent no time learning any of the foundations of art and they SHOULD have to get a license to add these multi-colored blights to our public areas.
The ONLY thing I disagree with is that Picasso earned the right and how the man just accepts it as art. That's a little misguided as I'm sure Picasso wanted his art to SPEAK to everyone. Just because it's Picasso's doesn't make it the best abstract and art. Not dissing on Picasso tho.
NoellVague 1 year ago
Thank you...........................you are my hero and all you so called "Modern Artists" just start doing real art!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. Anybody can be a modern artists by taking 2 toothpick breaking them and pieces put some glue and splatter paint then sell it for a million dollars. To me modern artists are just bunch of douchebag just to way to make some quick cash and doesn't put alot of effort into it. GOOD DAY TO ALL YOU MUTHA F MODERN SO CALLED ARTIST.
ehilado06 1 year ago
hahah..''.the people looking, are better looking than what they are looking at!'' classic! :D
MoRo1333 1 year ago
SHUT UP ANDY!!!!! DIE!!!!
gunnare123 1 year ago
it is so easy to call something art, and be totally wrong .... too few succeed at the best of standards (should anything less deserve to be called ART??)
JWREmmett 1 year ago
As an artist I look for what is created. Sure we all have our opinions but it is a fact that sometimes criticism outweighs interpretation. I do agree though that throwing paint on a canvas and getting 1 million dollars for it is something of a hoax but then again maybe the artist bought the paint at retail and not wholesale and the canvas sat at Versaille for a few hundred years.
vroyen 1 year ago
I see so many people who are saying what art is or isnt. All I want to know is who wrote the rules? I LOVE being an artist for the simple fact that no one can say whether it is right or wrong. I chose what to paint on the blank canvas. No one is saying that you have to like it.
PierceMarratoo 1 year ago
@PierceMarratoo yes, i understand that all revolution is met with oppostion, and by your passion on the subject i can see that you are an artist, and i by no means meant to offend you or any other serious artist. i only meant to say that rooney had a point, not that he was completley correct. i'm just saying if anything created, even if it was made with no passion, no thought becomes heraled, art loses its value. its like calling a two word sentence a piece of literature.
Despenny4ever 1 year ago
@Despenny4ever Indeed I am an artist and I promise I wasn't offended. Just having a friendly debate. I do understand what you are saying but my point is that we don't know what the artists intentions are, or the level of passion with which a piece was created. My view has always been simple, if someone puts creative evergy into something, it is art. If it is "good art" is another issue all together.
PierceMarratoo 1 year ago
@PierceMarratoo well, if you don't try to make something that atleast looks good you aren't going to better youreself.
whosthisguythinkheis 1 year ago
It is funny that he used Picasso as an example. His first non traditional work "Les Demoiselles d'Avignon" was shunned by the critics using the same arguments that mr rooney just used against the modern art in the video.
PierceMarratoo 1 year ago
He clearly states "I may not understand art" and yet he critiques it..
What an ignorant fossil. So out of touch it hurts. Art is supposed to make you think, and make you feel!
I'm so tired of people saying something isn't art. Anything can be art. Is it good art, though? That's the question to ask.
actuallyadam 1 year ago
@actuallyadam All I saw was bad art....
whomejohn 1 year ago
@whomejohn The fact that Rooney chose to show pictures of the tackiest, most colorful works while reporting on this topic is a little shady. He's talking about public art, and there is a LOT of beautiful public art. Not a fair report IMO.
actuallyadam 1 year ago
People feel sophisticated when saying they appreciate modern art, its like a writer writing a book of words that has no plot, and doesn't actually make sentences, telling people it;s modern writing, and they are just culturally deprived.
laallaal75 1 year ago
@laallaal75 I like a lot of modern art (just to be clear I said a lot-not all) and it has nothing to do with feeling sophisticated. I enjoy art, music, and writing that lean towards the abstract and strange. It is my personal taste.
PierceMarratoo 1 year ago
I think a lot of people who 'appreciate' modern art only appreciate it because they don't want to appear uncultured or stupid. Well guess what, there is nothing cultured about the majority or modern art. Pull your heads out of your collective arse already.
R0undAboutMidnight 1 year ago
@R0undAboutMidnight why does it make you so angry? Some people like it, some don't. Besides, who are you to say what is cultured and what isn't? I bet there are things that you like I don't. Just out of curiosity, what type of art do you like?
PierceMarratoo 1 year ago
@PierceMarratoo What makes me angry is that people are told that we should like this stuff, that we should have it on public property. Does a big steel structure like the one in the video really convey anything to anyone? I mean, really?
R0undAboutMidnight 1 year ago
@R0undAboutMidnight By no means am I saying that you have to like it. Im not sure which steel structure you are referring to but I can say that it MAY mean something to someone. Maybe its not even meant to mean anything...who knows. Thats my point exactly, it doesnt have to mean anything to you, and you don't have to like it. There is a lot of art out there that I don't like but I refuse to discredit it by saying that it isn't art.
PierceMarratoo 1 year ago
@PierceMarratoo the reason it makes a lot of people angry is because when you think about an artist you expect them to have spent time on their work, when you look at most modern art and espeically abstract art they hardly look like a lot of effort has gone into it therefore when someone who's just finished their landscape painting of san francisco see's that their painting isn't selling but the guy that threw paint at the canvas just sold his for 1 mill, it seems wrong.
whosthisguythinkheis 1 year ago
This guy is such a doofus.
angelgabby 1 year ago
@angelgabby No, modern artists are doofuses.
R0undAboutMidnight 1 year ago
The point is that Art is supposed to be about expressing yourself , however i agree with the guy in the video most of it is "pretentious nonsense". Also, who is to judge whether a piece of art is "good" or "bad" if it is expression of ones unique mind?
Giving both of my opinions.
SebRealMadrid 1 year ago
Comment removed
JWREmmett 1 year ago
@JWREmmett too many.
whosthisguythinkheis 1 year ago
Comment removed
JWREmmett 1 year ago
Comment removed
JWREmmett 1 year ago
this old man is very right!!! picasso knew how to paint and draw perfectly!!! from this point on he developed modern art!, i went to modern art school 4 years in europe!
the students and the teachers do know nothing about color mixing or drawing!!!
shame! is a scam!!! modern art its great when you know how to do it!!!.
puppeteye 1 year ago
I watched this expecting to disagree with ol' Rooney, but most of those examples me gave really are some ugly and/or pretentious crap!
Relating to their fellow humans is an artist's duty, and this is so much more important in a public space. You're trying to enrich the lives of others, not make them feel angry and insecure.
meatmotor 1 year ago
1:24 just shows what the world will look like once the landfills overflow. (:
JessieeSmiless 1 year ago
hmmm i see his point about picasso but i just dont know.. by the same criteria i think picasso's abstract stuff is not good art. Its not as if picasso has earned the right, its that picasso has strayed and declined.
gracer99 1 year ago
he has a point. picasso earned the right to try new non-traditional art because he had first mastered fine art, and dali started off with realism before branching off into the surreal. Most of today's "artists" skip right ahead to attempting a non-traditional work, and they fail miserably. Once everyone can create "great" art that is recognized, then art loses its value.
Despenny4ever 1 year ago
@Despenny4ever Do you realize that when Picasso began his cubist work all the art critics said the exact same things about it that Mr. Rooney just said about all modern art. Years later it is looked at as the turning point in art history. Rooney is a grumpy old man with no idea what he is talking about. Yeah there is a lot of bad art out there but rooney has no place saying what is good and what isnt.
PierceMarratoo 1 year ago
what's this he says about picasso? just because picasso is an exceptional artist and can make beautifully realistic statues of human form means that his cubism is automatically free from your jurisdiction, andy? if picasso took a shit and called it art, you would not question that either? hippocrite, art cannot be defined.
dustXiron 1 year ago
if only he wasn't an atheist.
aznmessenjah 1 year ago
Im with ya Andy !
bankotsu82 1 year ago
i believe that this art all communicates something
ydrjtt 1 year ago
Comment removed
joedamofu 1 year ago
Comment removed
joedamofu 1 year ago
I love it
TheBlueLorax 1 year ago
I want Andy Rooney's job when I get to be his age. Hell, I wouldn't mind having his job now.
vaccarovj 1 year ago
All hail Rooney!
Aeythvaenn 1 year ago
I'm so with you Andy, and I can't say that too often. The crap that's littered (and I mean littered) all over is just terrible. And the cost of such trash is crazy as well. Sculptures and actually skilled pieces are just not around anymore. Those examples are just terribly and ugly.
lonewulf44 1 year ago
@lonewulf44 remember that this is your opinion. Some people enjoy it.
PierceMarratoo 1 year ago
@PierceMarratoo 'shakes head' to each their own ... that's my motto.
lonewulf44 1 year ago
@lonewulf44 That is exactly what I am trying to say. I didn't like most of what I saw in the video. However, I will not discredit it or say that it isn't art. It just isn't something I like.
PierceMarratoo 1 year ago
@PierceMarratoo I know and I agree ... and it's never meant as anything but my opinion ... but some of the trash out there just does not compute as art in any shape or form. I suppose people call it a matter of taste ... I just call it a matter of talent ... or lack there of. ;)
lonewulf44 1 year ago
if the audience can't tell what the art is trying to say at the basic level, i guess the artist has failed. if i read a book that is so badly written that i can't tell what I am reading, then It is not good book
neonaction 1 year ago
@neonaction not true-there are examples of art, music, and literature that are meant to be abstract and not easily interperated. Some people enjoy this type of work some dont. Why does this make people so angry?
PierceMarratoo 1 year ago
@PierceMarratoo abstract is not the same as badly drawn though...a book can be hard to interpreted but it does not mean it's badly written.
neonaction 1 year ago
@neonaction I agree completely. I'm not saying all abstract art is good. Obviously there is a lot of crap out there. However, with abstract art it is hard to say what is or is not badly drawn. You have to critique it differently by paying less attention to technical ability and more attention to composition, balance, color use, form, etc.
PierceMarratoo 1 year ago
@PierceMarratoo the bottom line is, art has to be beautiful. I don't care if it's representational or abstract, if the art does not communicate beauty to the view then the art has failed it job. this is my opinion.
neonaction 1 year ago
@neonaction I can definetly respect your opinion. However, it is important to remember that beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
PierceMarratoo 1 year ago
@PierceMarratoo Artists do study the theory of beauty. Musicians and painters study composition. It's true that beauty is in the eye of beholder, but there is some basis on what people consider beautiful. For example, in visual art, simplicity, balance and symmetry seems to be beautiful for most people.
neonaction 1 year ago
@neonaction I think you are confusing beauty with aesthetics. If it were true that art had to be beautiful then Goya would not be one of the most brilliant painters in history. However, he was very aware of the elements that are USUALLY considered aesthitcially pleasing (composition, balance, form, etc). What I am saying is that what is aethetically pleasing depends on what medium the piece is in, who you speak with, where you are, what time period, and that is just to name a few variables.
PierceMarratoo 1 year ago
@PierceMarratoo I think that "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" has been violently abused as excuse for bad art. Literally I can not even criticize some thing as ugly anymore because of that very phrase. I dont' mind if people call my art ugly as long as i can call theirs the same. I think good art must be opular. Shakespeares was popular culture, now it has become high arts. If the art is not popular it can't even stand a chance in history books.
neonaction 1 year ago 6
Add me to the list of those perplexed by the use of the term 'Modern Art' to describe (most of) what was featured in this piece.
As for Mr. Rooney's points-of-view ... they strike me as sad views to hold.
willpaint4paint 1 year ago
He sounds like he belongs in the french boutique about 100 years ago.Move over Andy well take it from here :)
spiralisedcat 1 year ago
Art is only made public by the people who put it there, it is an expression of an individual. Art is not made to please anybody, or to annoy anybody, it is expression, and if you say picasso's work is art weither you think so or not? so is any person in the world who manages to express themselves. everything is art.
aarneybobo 1 year ago
@aarneybobo "Art is not made to please anybody, or to annoy anybody"
Same argument can be made about litter.
Hotmonkeylovin 1 year ago
@Hotmonkeylovin whats wrong with litter? I use litter to make art in order to express myself. Its not about pleasing everybody. its about expression
dustXiron 1 year ago
@dustXiron Bullshit. Calling it an expression does not justify it. If so, I could shit on your sidewalk and say, "Its not about pleasing everybody. its about expression."
Hotmonkeylovin 1 year ago
Comment removed
dustXiron 1 year ago
@Hotmonkeylovin if you want to express yourself with shit, go right ahead. I will still love you
dustXiron 1 year ago
@dustXiron Punching you in the face is also an expression. Would you still love me then?
Hotmonkeylovin 1 year ago
@Hotmonkeylovin Hahahahaha, absolutely! The more it hurts, the better I feel my passionate primate friend.
dustXiron 1 year ago