abstract and modern art haters are sooo snobby like klein literally Created an entirely new pigment and then painted a canvas in a way where the brush strokes wouldn’t be visible. the insinuation that people with no skill could reproduce that is so annoying because unless you are skilled at color mixing and painting you definitely couldn’t lmao
i hope it’s okay to add this because i think it hits the nail directly on the head
Honestly, it’s like picking up a book and saying “I know all these words, I can type, I could have written this” like there’s no middle step between the technical ability and the finished work.
Consider- the connection between this specific mindset and the rise of AI generated media.
LMFAO the comments. I’ll forever be a hater of those paintings. You’re literally just trying to generate money out of nothing. You’re just trying to defend the absurdity of capitalism.
I went back and forth a few times on how exactly to respond to you with the best faith intentions. This is my best attempt.
Do you really think that any artistic creation is “nothing”? That someone taking the time to, in this case, literally develop a new pigment and then intentionally crafting a piece that showcases this pigment *for the first time in human history* is “nothing”? Even if you don’t like the piece conceptually (and acknowledging that you haven’t seen it in person), do you think that art is…nothing? (Or just art that you personally don’t like?)
Do you think that IF a piece of art was created with the express intent of generating income for the artist, rather than as some kind of personal passion project, that makes it inherently lesser art? (Because that’s going to cover everything from commissioned art like the Sistine Chapel, to art produced for mass market, like The Great Wave by Hokusai.)
Do you think that art should only generate income for an artist if you personally like it? Or that art should never generate income and thus only be a hobby for the wealthy who can do it in their leisure time?
Do you think art should only exist if you personally like it? And that your taste in art if so objective and universal that you personally are the best arbiter of what art should exist and/or generate income for the artist?
It is ok to not like a painting. It’s ok to not like an entire style or artistic movement. It’s ok if it doesn’t speak to you or you don’t get it. It’s ok to not really care enough about it to try to learn about it or engage with it. It’s ok if you find it trite and overly meta.
But when you start attaching big moral and ethical statements to why an entire collection of artistic movements are bad, you end up playing rhetorical ball with some very dubious arguments about the value of artists and their work.
Discussion ¬