@RyanDemaree Yeah you sound like one of those critics bashing Pop artists. I remember Roy Lictenstein talking about "what makes art" Art is different for different people. One person might look at a painting and see a masterpiece others might see trash. You can not like Any Warhol but he has paintings up in museums with picasso and matisse. He is recognized as an artist whether you like it or not.
@RyanDemaree Everything you listed is a fact just like Andy being an artist is a fact. We are entitled to our own opinions about something and you can not like Warhol for your own reasons. just wanted to make sure you weren't discrediting him for not being an artist when its universally known as a fact he is an artist. Just cause you think he isnt one doesn't change the fact that he is one.
@hermenutic i don't get it....and maybe I should......why are all these great innovators in art always in such pain and mentally ill......warhol, Van Gogh, Pollack.........why are they all alcoholics? Or maybe you have to be mentally ill in order to work "outside the box" and come up with something that a normal person could never see
@inkey2 You have to remember it is the status quo that defines mental health. I really don't now the answer. I asked myself the same thing. It could be an aspect of creativity.
One thing for certain they are much more interesting to read about than Ward and June Cleaver.
@hermenutic ...........I always thought ward and june were deliciously one dimentional....even more so than Ozzie & Harriet. Like a playing card that you could only see one side of
@inkey2 They were what was being passed off as ordinary and normal. I'm glad it didn't catch on for long. In fact if you look at how society reacted to the imposition of those ideals in the 50's and 60's you get the idea that a fairly large segment of the population became sick of it relatively soon.
@inkey2 what? Warhol hated drink and drugs!! How the fuck was warhol "mad"? He was a multi millionire I'd say he had his head firmly screwed on. Why do you use two examples Van Gogh and Pollack as examples and make stupid small minded statemenst like "all artists are mad or alcoholic?" sad sad sad
He took pre-made imagery and made his factory workers reprint it in goofy colors repeatedly
So lets look at his failure list shall we?
1. He is known as a great painter. He VERY rarely ever painted.
2.He didnt even create most of his work, his factory workers did. Also most was just commercial images and photography of famous things reprinted repeatedly in goofy colors
He sucked. Bottom line.
Van Gogh and Pollock on the other hand were real modern artists
@RyanDemaree i could just say that you have no understanding of the full implications of pop art and leave it at that. I suppose you have no respect for Roy Lichenstein either? Why the snobbish aversion to any art which is devoid of paint. If that is your line of thought then you must not attribute any value to sculpture or photography.
@RyanDemaree Fraud artist? How? Warhol used assistants yes. So what? He was the artist he had the concept and his team helped him manifest it. Look at the cultural icons who look up to Andy. Bowie, Lou Reed myriad pop stars. Also you know all these reality TV programmes everywhere all over the world now? Well Warhol did that with his movies 40 years ago. He believed in God and you're dissing him for that? Also Warhol WAS a painter initially. Get researching
@emile235 No. I never said painting was the only respectable art. What pisses me off is that a man that very rarely even painted let alone do his own work got recognized as a master painter.
That angers me.
I am a painter who not only works very hard on his own work, I also photograph, edit, and self promote everything that I do. When I see a moron that barely paints, and has a workshop of gnomes do his projects for him and on top of that his projects are shallow and un-creative it
@RyanDemaree I think you are wrong in labelling these artists as frauds. I suggest you leave the name callling for the media and don't let the midea condition you into valuing one art form (painting) over another (factory print production or Koon's sculpture factory productions). it's art. It's creativity. you are thinking in a linear conditioned manner and this is exactly what Koons and Warhol strived against in their work. You miss the point Warhol never CLAIMED to be a painter himslef
@emile235 Im not missing any point or letting the media dictate anything.
Anybody that can purchase a beach toy and fill it with air and call it an homage to a previous artist, take their sex stained bed, or take a famous pop star photograph and add color to it to make money off of them and to top it off the beach toy, bed, and pop star photograph are all factory made either by a company or by little workshop minions is indeed a fraud. Not an artist to be remembered.
@emile235 A real artist, painter, sculptor, film-maker, photographer, musician etc.
Works hard individually in the productionof their work and pours alot of time and thought into what they create.
I am a beginner astrophotographer as well as a painter. Astrophotography is VERY hard to do. It pissed me off when someone takes a famous photo and has their hipster workshop minions duplicate it a few times and splat a few colors around for it to be consideered valid.
@RyanDemaree why do you think he called it the factory? He employed assistants. (mind you DaVinci and caraveggio probbaly did too). When an artist is granted the opportunity to actually manage a factory or a foundry for his art to me this is glorious and at the core of what art is.
@emile235 he doesnt reflect that in his work. His work doesnt really reflect anything to be honest. Its just wacky colored pictures of already made photographs.
Now Banksy on the other hand is a different story. While he may use popular imagery, he is creating his own image and distorting it to convey something.
Warhol not only didnt make his own work, his work was simply repeated wacky colored repeats of pre-made imagery.
@RyanDemaree you are talking from a 2012 perspective. In 1963 Warhol was explosive and astonishing to the art world. The next new level, Why? Answer: because he showed a powerful America how obsessed with consumerism and mass production they had become. Art is a mirror. You're not getting this and i have said enough on the matter
@RyanDemaree Like I said but you are not getting it Warhol used the factory and printed production as a way to reflect how society has become embroiled in mass production and consumerism and narrow mindedness
Warhol doesnt reflect anything beyond the fact that he doesnt care about his creation and that he has nothing important to say.
Even when youre mirroring a problem you still distort and add in your own ideas and aesthetics...warhol merely took already made things and added whacky colors to them and repeated them
A real artist likes being able to work on their own project, rather than having a factory of gnomes do it for you
@emile235 I dont care what art historians say. They are snobbish and pretentious.
There are ppl getting away with passing off their feces and sex stained beds as art...maybe if I go buy a rubber ducky at the toy store and write my name on it and write some 2000 page book on how it reflects the deepness of my childhood or I print out a picture of a pop star and piss on it and say it reflects my feelings towards pop culture ill be the next warhol or Koons!!!
@RyanDemaree then you should do it. Its only people crazy enough to do things like that are the ones that are in museums for it. Lots of people diss on art, and especially what are is not but never grow the balls to try painting and putting it out there.
You obviously havent been on my channel or checked any online gallery links of mine
Im a traditional abstract-surrealist oil painter that makes money off his work and typically spends 20+ hrs on each painting. Its insulting to me as a dedicated young artist that any random bullshit can be passed off like Koons or Warhol
@emile235 call it w/e you wanna call it but dont call it genius or important to the positive growth of art and what its supposed to do for the world.
Warhol wasnt reflecting the problem, he was part of the problem. Part of this sick joke.
A world of non-existent cloud fairy worshipping science neglecting morons. Of auto-tune, poorly written hip-hop/ pop music. Of greasy, salty, sugary fast food. Of dangerous chemicals and drugs
A degenerate world, in which he happily took part of.
@RyanDemaree I believe you have little appreciation for sculpture at this time. Ironically Warhol was REFLECTING those twisted values that imbue society yes the ones you used to describe Andy i.e. sad, shallow, pathetic little world with no substance to it. Cheap ideology, cheap food, cheap entertainment". He was ORIGINAL and OF HIS TIME. The first to show us that we are entrapped within a culture of mass production , homogeneity and emotional stultification.
Many frauds still live today. Jeff Koons bought a lobster beach toy, filled it with air and claimed it an homage to Dali and made money for it....thats pathetic.
Tracey Emin put the bed she slutted herself out with on display....and a tent with construction paper cut-outs of who shes screwd glued all over it...
These are FRAUDS
I dont like pop art really, but at least Roy created something on his own and didnt rely on a
@emile235 workshop of imps to do it for him, or solely use pre-made photos and pop imagery as his sole basis for creation.
H.R. Giger
^^^ THAT is a REAL modern artist. An artist who creates everything he paints right out of his head and does everything himself. He has even inspired movies with his creations.
ill take Picasso / Dali over Warhol / Koons ANYDAY
and yes, he was actually quite religious, did drugs frequently and was a bad artist. he sucked.
@RyanDemaree So are you saying Andy Warhol one if the premiere pop artists was not an artist?
HotPocketsBoy 1 week ago
@HotPocketsBoy he was a decorative artist, if anything
A commercial, decorative, money maker
thats what he was
RyanDemaree 1 day ago
@RyanDemaree is this just Pop art you have this feeling towards? You feel the same way about Roy Lichtenstein?
HotPocketsBoy 1 day ago
@HotPocketsBoy anything that doesnt look genuine to me gives art a bad name
ppl like Warhol gave modern art a huge setback
RyanDemaree 1 day ago
@RyanDemaree Yeah you sound like one of those critics bashing Pop artists. I remember Roy Lictenstein talking about "what makes art" Art is different for different people. One person might look at a painting and see a masterpiece others might see trash. You can not like Any Warhol but he has paintings up in museums with picasso and matisse. He is recognized as an artist whether you like it or not.
HotPocketsBoy 1 day ago
@HotPocketsBoy right.
And Mcdonalds is recognized as one of the most successful place to eat out and Justin Bieber one of the most popular musicians at the time.
Would that make Mcdonalds healthy and wholesome or Justin Bieber a deep, skilled musician?
fuck no
RyanDemaree 1 day ago
@RyanDemaree Everything you listed is a fact just like Andy being an artist is a fact. We are entitled to our own opinions about something and you can not like Warhol for your own reasons. just wanted to make sure you weren't discrediting him for not being an artist when its universally known as a fact he is an artist. Just cause you think he isnt one doesn't change the fact that he is one.
HotPocketsBoy 1 day ago
Comment removed
ganfious 1 week ago
cool
SuperZombieslayer23 1 month ago
This helped on my report for art :)
FireDash13 3 months ago
Servin.Arts
zervinartist1384 4 months ago
Comment removed
TheKevtrevable 5 months ago
Most artists are considered nuts by mainstream society.
Loved this and learned some things about myself as well.
hermenutic 6 months ago 2
@hermenutic i don't get it....and maybe I should......why are all these great innovators in art always in such pain and mentally ill......warhol, Van Gogh, Pollack.........why are they all alcoholics? Or maybe you have to be mentally ill in order to work "outside the box" and come up with something that a normal person could never see
inkey2 5 months ago
@inkey2 You have to remember it is the status quo that defines mental health. I really don't now the answer. I asked myself the same thing. It could be an aspect of creativity.
One thing for certain they are much more interesting to read about than Ward and June Cleaver.
hermenutic 5 months ago
@hermenutic ...........I always thought ward and june were deliciously one dimentional....even more so than Ozzie & Harriet. Like a playing card that you could only see one side of
inkey2 5 months ago
@inkey2 They were what was being passed off as ordinary and normal. I'm glad it didn't catch on for long. In fact if you look at how society reacted to the imposition of those ideals in the 50's and 60's you get the idea that a fairly large segment of the population became sick of it relatively soon.
hermenutic 5 months ago
@inkey2 what? Warhol hated drink and drugs!! How the fuck was warhol "mad"? He was a multi millionire I'd say he had his head firmly screwed on. Why do you use two examples Van Gogh and Pollack as examples and make stupid small minded statemenst like "all artists are mad or alcoholic?" sad sad sad
emile235 2 months ago
@emile235 .....omg.......get some exercise, calm down.....take up yoga or something
inkey2 2 months ago
@emile235 warhol sucked.
He took pre-made imagery and made his factory workers reprint it in goofy colors repeatedly
So lets look at his failure list shall we?
1. He is known as a great painter. He VERY rarely ever painted.
2.He didnt even create most of his work, his factory workers did. Also most was just commercial images and photography of famous things reprinted repeatedly in goofy colors
He sucked. Bottom line.
Van Gogh and Pollock on the other hand were real modern artists
RyanDemaree 1 month ago
@RyanDemaree i could just say that you have no understanding of the full implications of pop art and leave it at that. I suppose you have no respect for Roy Lichenstein either? Why the snobbish aversion to any art which is devoid of paint. If that is your line of thought then you must not attribute any value to sculpture or photography.
emile235 1 month ago
@emile235 btw, warhol was well known to do drugs
He was a religious, drug addicted fraud artist.
Doesnt get anymore pathetic than that.
3 failure character traits all in 1
The fail factory worked hard to produce such a little gremlin of fail
RyanDemaree 1 month ago
@RyanDemaree Fraud artist? How? Warhol used assistants yes. So what? He was the artist he had the concept and his team helped him manifest it. Look at the cultural icons who look up to Andy. Bowie, Lou Reed myriad pop stars. Also you know all these reality TV programmes everywhere all over the world now? Well Warhol did that with his movies 40 years ago. He believed in God and you're dissing him for that? Also Warhol WAS a painter initially. Get researching
emile235 1 month ago
@emile235 No. I never said painting was the only respectable art. What pisses me off is that a man that very rarely even painted let alone do his own work got recognized as a master painter.
That angers me.
I am a painter who not only works very hard on his own work, I also photograph, edit, and self promote everything that I do. When I see a moron that barely paints, and has a workshop of gnomes do his projects for him and on top of that his projects are shallow and un-creative it
RyanDemaree 1 month ago
@RyanDemaree I think you are wrong in labelling these artists as frauds. I suggest you leave the name callling for the media and don't let the midea condition you into valuing one art form (painting) over another (factory print production or Koon's sculpture factory productions). it's art. It's creativity. you are thinking in a linear conditioned manner and this is exactly what Koons and Warhol strived against in their work. You miss the point Warhol never CLAIMED to be a painter himslef
emile235 1 month ago
@emile235 Im not missing any point or letting the media dictate anything.
Anybody that can purchase a beach toy and fill it with air and call it an homage to a previous artist, take their sex stained bed, or take a famous pop star photograph and add color to it to make money off of them and to top it off the beach toy, bed, and pop star photograph are all factory made either by a company or by little workshop minions is indeed a fraud. Not an artist to be remembered.
RyanDemaree 1 month ago
@emile235 A real artist, painter, sculptor, film-maker, photographer, musician etc.
Works hard individually in the productionof their work and pours alot of time and thought into what they create.
I am a beginner astrophotographer as well as a painter. Astrophotography is VERY hard to do. It pissed me off when someone takes a famous photo and has their hipster workshop minions duplicate it a few times and splat a few colors around for it to be consideered valid.
RyanDemaree 1 month ago
@RyanDemaree why do you think he called it the factory? He employed assistants. (mind you DaVinci and caraveggio probbaly did too). When an artist is granted the opportunity to actually manage a factory or a foundry for his art to me this is glorious and at the core of what art is.
emile235 1 month ago
@emile235 he doesnt reflect that in his work. His work doesnt really reflect anything to be honest. Its just wacky colored pictures of already made photographs.
Now Banksy on the other hand is a different story. While he may use popular imagery, he is creating his own image and distorting it to convey something.
Warhol not only didnt make his own work, his work was simply repeated wacky colored repeats of pre-made imagery.
RyanDemaree 1 month ago
@RyanDemaree you are talking from a 2012 perspective. In 1963 Warhol was explosive and astonishing to the art world. The next new level, Why? Answer: because he showed a powerful America how obsessed with consumerism and mass production they had become. Art is a mirror. You're not getting this and i have said enough on the matter
emile235 1 month ago
@emile235 Im talking from a rational perspective.
Pollock, Picasso, and Van Gogh were also doing something explosive and new. They were real artists.
Warhol was a tool. He did w/e it took to pull a big joke on the public and earn him a few bucks.
Banksy does what you think Warhol did. Banksy designs, creates, and tells his own story with his own handywork.
Warhol steals images and employs his mental midget factory workers to print it repeatedly in different colors
RyanDemaree 1 month ago
@RyanDemaree Like I said but you are not getting it Warhol used the factory and printed production as a way to reflect how society has become embroiled in mass production and consumerism and narrow mindedness
emile235 1 month ago
@emile235 ...Banksy does this
Warhol does not.
Warhol doesnt reflect anything beyond the fact that he doesnt care about his creation and that he has nothing important to say.
Even when youre mirroring a problem you still distort and add in your own ideas and aesthetics...warhol merely took already made things and added whacky colors to them and repeated them
A real artist likes being able to work on their own project, rather than having a factory of gnomes do it for you
RyanDemaree 1 month ago
@emile235 I dont care what art historians say. They are snobbish and pretentious.
There are ppl getting away with passing off their feces and sex stained beds as art...maybe if I go buy a rubber ducky at the toy store and write my name on it and write some 2000 page book on how it reflects the deepness of my childhood or I print out a picture of a pop star and piss on it and say it reflects my feelings towards pop culture ill be the next warhol or Koons!!!
lol thats how stupid it is
RyanDemaree 1 month ago
@RyanDemaree then you should do it. Its only people crazy enough to do things like that are the ones that are in museums for it. Lots of people diss on art, and especially what are is not but never grow the balls to try painting and putting it out there.
MarqueeMagic 1 day ago
Comment removed
RyanDemaree 1 day ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MarqueeMagic lol cool story bro
You obviously havent been on my channel or checked any online gallery links of mine
Im a traditional abstract-surrealist oil painter that makes money off his work and typically spends 20+ hrs on each painting. Its insulting to me as a dedicated young artist that any random bullshit can be passed off like Koons or Warhol
Pollock and Picasso were great artists
Warhol and Koons are giant jokes
RyanDemaree 1 day ago
@emile235 call it w/e you wanna call it but dont call it genius or important to the positive growth of art and what its supposed to do for the world.
Warhol wasnt reflecting the problem, he was part of the problem. Part of this sick joke.
A world of non-existent cloud fairy worshipping science neglecting morons. Of auto-tune, poorly written hip-hop/ pop music. Of greasy, salty, sugary fast food. Of dangerous chemicals and drugs
A degenerate world, in which he happily took part of.
RyanDemaree 1 month ago
@RyanDemaree I suggest you ask some art historians about the significance of Warhol
emile235 1 month ago
@emile235 Warhol wasnt reflecting the problem. He was the EPITOME of the problem. He knew it too.
Having a factory of workers is fine as long as
A. They are managing your artwork [storing, selling, displaying, promoting, photographing, keeping track of etc.
B. Creating photo-print reproductions of it for commercial sale
When the factory is literally creating the artwork for you, you become nothing more than a mindless bobblehead pandering to retards for money.
RyanDemaree 1 month ago
@emile235 and even in painting, I photograph ALL of my work for photo-reproduction. I put alot more effort into my crafts than these baboons.
You happily live in the world of Jesus, Mcdonalds, Alcohol, Justin Bieber and Andy Warhol
A sad, shallow, pathetic little world with no substance to it.
Cheap ideology, cheap food, cheap entertainment.
RyanDemaree 1 month ago
@RyanDemaree I believe you have little appreciation for sculpture at this time. Ironically Warhol was REFLECTING those twisted values that imbue society yes the ones you used to describe Andy i.e. sad, shallow, pathetic little world with no substance to it. Cheap ideology, cheap food, cheap entertainment". He was ORIGINAL and OF HIS TIME. The first to show us that we are entrapped within a culture of mass production , homogeneity and emotional stultification.
emile235 1 month ago
@emile235 makes me mad.
This trend doesnt end with Warhol.
Many frauds still live today. Jeff Koons bought a lobster beach toy, filled it with air and claimed it an homage to Dali and made money for it....thats pathetic.
Tracey Emin put the bed she slutted herself out with on display....and a tent with construction paper cut-outs of who shes screwd glued all over it...
These are FRAUDS
I dont like pop art really, but at least Roy created something on his own and didnt rely on a
RyanDemaree 1 month ago
@emile235 workshop of imps to do it for him, or solely use pre-made photos and pop imagery as his sole basis for creation.
H.R. Giger
^^^ THAT is a REAL modern artist. An artist who creates everything he paints right out of his head and does everything himself. He has even inspired movies with his creations.
ill take Picasso / Dali over Warhol / Koons ANYDAY
and yes, he was actually quite religious, did drugs frequently and was a bad artist. he sucked.
RyanDemaree 1 month ago
brilliant documentry.
EdgeworthJohnstone 7 months ago