Alert icon
We're changing our privacy policy. This stuff matters.  Learn more  Dismiss

Michael Kimmelman on Art: Part 2 of 2

Loading...

Sign in or sign up now!
3,822
Loading...
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon

Uploaded by on Sep 17, 2008

This interview is found in the special features of the DVD "My Kid Could Paint That," a documentary film by Amir Bar-Lev. It is an interview with NY Times art critic Michael Kimmelman on modern art. For more information on Bar-Lev's film, please see http://www.sonyclassics.com/mykidcouldpaintthat/. For Kimmelman's articles for the Times, see http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/k/michael_kimmelma...

Category:

Education

Tags:

License:

Standard YouTube License

  • likes, 1 dislikes

Link to this comment:

Share to:

Top Comments

  • Thanks for posting this. I found it very insightful.

  • @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.

see all

All Comments (13)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • 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.

  • 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.

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

  • polock is an asshole

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

  • well articulated . no clutter

  • 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.

  • 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

  • Pretentious ass

Loading...

0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more