Michael Kimmelman on Art: Part 2 of 2

[arthollins]

At 2.57. “There is a certain point at which it may be obligatory for you to make some effort to try to understand something that does not automatically explain itself to you”. A very important point. Most people look for something they know how to recognise because our mind has evolved to STOP us sensing in an older inherent way. The inherent view - as opposed to the learned view - is what artists try to explore but to do so they have to try to create objects that are difficult to recognise.

[hermitcrabbot]

He champions the concept and value of the 'new idea', but he fails to say whether or not the 'new idea' must stand the test of time. Will humanity value the Vermeer or the Warhol more 300 years from now? Too many 'new ideas' are merely that, and the 'liberating' obliteration of standards contributes to some artists not giving future audience comprehension ( instead of the trendy present ) thoughtful consideration. The great artist paints for an audience he will never meet.

[Kurturmis]

i agree with much of what he said but i think he is talking out of his depth on some points.

[Oddonan]

polock is an asshole

[nsaminder]

@retePtnecniV - Kimmelman is not preaching to the choir here. He even starts out by stating that many (the masses) only wish to be 'spoon fed' ideas. He is giving a short primer on why it is that what the many have difficulty seeing as art is still considered art by those who do & will vote with their money. At 1:31 he simply mentions Malewitsch as a simple example the masses viewing the previous film can understand, as they will easily be able to visualize a black circle on a white canvas.

[int1901]

polock sucks,... he was nothing but depressed looser,..

[millisitch]

well articulated . no clutter

[retePtnecniV]

well he certainly shouldnt have taken malewitsch for an example of just pushing the limits of art. malewitsch in art is comarable to hegel in philosophy. both extraordinary in the intellectual area and both only understood by few. art can also be revealing like philosophy, math or music, but with different methods and ways. malewitsch reveals a lot.

[retePtnecniV]

at first i thought i dont like him but the stuff he says from 0:00 to 01:30 is actually quite acurate and true. if you tell someone who doenst know anything about football, that player X did 4 home runs in one game, he wont understand anything and wont see the effort behind it...

i could tell you that ghlarzip did 25 merbs in 1/5th qartz in under 10 seconds, how does that sound to you?

thats exactly what most people know of modern art

and then they judge it

[artworldpirate]

Pretentious ass

[artworldpirate]

Yawn. And he is more than willing to tell people what to like and damn them when they don't like what he does.

[shawry86]

hes smart..i like it

[scottathon]

Thanks for posting this. I found it very insightful.