ART - not just pretty pics

[timsk]

So glad that someone likes that sort of art. . .

Pat,
What do you mean by "that sort of art" - as opposed to what? Can you give examples of art that you like - by which I mean paintings and sculptures found in galleries and museums (as opposed to posters of Monroe and Yoda etc.)
Tim.

 

[Pat494]

Pat,
What do you mean by "that sort of art" - as opposed to what? Can you give examples of art that you like - by which I mean paintings and sculptures found in galleries and museums (as opposed to posters of Monroe and Yoda etc.)
Tim.

I feel art has the opportunity to provide up lifting encouragement. The camera invention forced artists to move to Impressionism and the best of these is in my view Monet.
But of course that has been done now and art moves on, but to where ?
Will the modern art hold it's prices in say 50 years time ? I rather doubt it.
Carcases in liquid, unmade beds etc. don't float my world. They seek new pastures and find it difficult to find any combining "new" with "delightful".
Having one arty parent who had notable success exhibiting at The Royal Academy and The Paris Salon etc. did give me an insight into the art world.

 

[sminicooper]

I feel art has the opportunity to provide up lifting encouragement. The camera invention forced artists to move to Impressionism and the best of these is in my view Monet.
But of course that has been done now and art moves on, but to where ?
Will the modern art hold it's prices in say 50 years time ? I rather doubt it.
Carcases in liquid, unmade beds etc. don't float my world. They seek new pastures and find it difficult to find any combining "new" with "delightful".
Having one arty parent who had notable success exhibiting at The Royal Academy and The Paris Salon etc. did give me an insight into the art world.

The thought that occurs to me is: "It's art Jim, but not as we know it!"

 

[Mr. Charts]

In an earlier post I said that IMO Hockney is arguably Britain's greatest living artist. With the benefit of hindsight, I should have said greatest living male artist. Sadly, sexism exists in art as much as it does in other walks of life and women are woefully underrepresented in the art world. Needless to say, they can make great art just as well as any man. One women who exemplifies this and, IMO, is arguably Britain's greatest living female artist - is Paula Rego. (She's Portuguese by birth, but married a Brit and now lives and works in London.) You don't need to know anything about art to know that she's a supreme talent. With every brushstroke, her drawings and paintings simply ooze skill, quality and passion.

There was a brilliant documentary about her on the BBC last night - made by her son - Nick Willing. It's a fascinating account of her life and work, and even those who don't much care for art or know anything about it will be gripped by her story and the extraordinary power of her paintings: Paula Rego: Secrets & Stories.

Suffice to say, I recommend it highly. Enjoy!
Tim.

I watched that last night. It was a brilliant biography. Thanks for mentioning it.
Richard

 

[neil]

New heights

Decadent rubbish in my humble opinion.

Sometimes, Pat, your musings can only be described as "Bollox." Now your latest post takes your scribbling to new heights -that of "utter bollox."

 

[Pat494]

Sometimes, Pat, your musings can only be described as "Bollox." Now your latest post takes your scribbling to new heights -that of "utter bollox."

Hi sorehead.
And what are your views on the current art scene ? If any.

 

[timsk]

I feel art has the opportunity to provide up lifting encouragement. The camera invention forced artists to move to Impressionism and the best of these is in my view Monet.
But of course that has been done now and art moves on, but to where ?
Will the modern art hold it's prices in say 50 years time ? I rather doubt it.
Carcases in liquid, unmade beds etc. don't float my world. They seek new pastures and find it difficult to find any combining "new" with "delightful".
Having one arty parent who had notable success exhibiting at The Royal Academy and The Paris Salon etc. did give me an insight into the art world.

Hi Pat,
Thanks for the reply.

To use a painterly idiom, it seems to me that you're taring all contemporary artists with the same brush. That is all the more surprising given the success of your arty parent, assuming that you didn't dismiss his or her work as 'decadent rubbish'.

I'm only mildly acquainted with Maggi Hambling's work, but I know enough about it to say with complete confidence that there is a chasm between her work and Hirst's carcasses in formaldehyde and Ms. Emin's unmade bed etc. Perhaps Richard can offer us some insight as he's actually been to Hambling's show. My guess is that it's very possible - likely even - that some admirers of her work would describe it as 'delightful'. Correct if I'm wrong Pat, but I'm getting the impression that your real beef is with work that's not figurative? If that's the case, I can address that - if you'd like me to.

Regarding where art is going and what the value of it will be in fifty years time - that's a bit like asking where the markets are going and what the value of the FTSE 100 will be. No one knows. And, certainly, some artists (and even whole genres of art) go in and out of fashion over time and their values rise and fall accordingly. What I can say with absolute certainty is that there are some contemporary artists whose work will be as valuable in the future as it is today - if not more so. The ones I've highlighted recently (Hockney, Hodgkin and Rego) are dead cert bankers. As it happens, I'm no fan of Hirst and Emin either and I wouldn't be so confident about how they will do in the future. But hey, one never knows: I certainly don't!
Tim.

 

[Pat494]

The great thing about art besides its beauty is that anybody with half a brain can have their own opinion on the picture.
The experts have given way to the individual's own opinion.
So. Nice of you to state your opinions but I really prefer my own.
Whether it is that of the one or the masses makes little difference.

 

[timsk]

The great thing about art besides its beauty is that anybody with half a brain can have their own opinion on the picture.
The experts have given way to the individual's own opinion.
So. Nice of you to state your opinions but I really prefer my own.
Whether it is that of the one or the masses makes little difference.

Pat,
If this is in reply to my last post - I'm afraid I don't understand as it doesn't appear to address the points I made or answer the questions posed?


I get the feeling you don't welcome my posts to your thread. If that's the case, I'll happily bow out, not least because it'll save me the considerable care, thought and time I put into writing them.
Tim.

 

[Atilla]

Pat,
If this is in reply to my last post - I'm afraid I don't understand as it doesn't appear to address the points I made or answer the questions posed?


I get the feeling you don't welcome my posts to your thread. If that's the case, I'll happily bow out, not least because it'll save me the considerable care, thought and time I put into writing them.
Tim.

Best to ignore those 'sort of remarks' Timsk.


Carry on as you were as I think this is one of the quality threads.


I know where Pat is coming from but abstract or contemporary art is not like looking at toilet bowls or animals cut in half. I think Saatchi fecker has done much to rubbish art. Thinking about it I reckon rats in the sewer probably enjoy his art too. Each to their own.

 

[Pat494]

I have no wish to offend.
So please accept what you may agree with or disagree. I think you know where I am coming from and I yours. So I am avoiding personal insults and abuse and as the cousins say " have a nice day boys" ! I will go and kick some rear end out of the weeds in the garden.

:whistling

 

[barjon]

When it comes to art "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" springs to mind and appreciation, or not, is an entirely personal thing. If I think something is crap, then it is to me and me only and I don't need the wise telling me it's because I don't understand it as I don't care whether I do or not, it's still crap to me.

I'm no great fan of the modern stuff but when I'm gazing vacantly at a wall of such paintings in the gallery there's always one or two that shout out for attention. Strangely, they inevitably turn out to be by Picasso.

 

[timsk]

Hi Pat,

I have no wish to offend . . .

Snap!

. . . I think you know where I am coming from and I yours.

Not really - hence my comments and questions. Based on your posts, my understanding is that you don't like any art created after the Impressionists and you're very happy to write off distinguished painters whose work you've never seen (bar some poor quality low res' images on a computer screen) as rubbish. Now, if I've got the wrong end of the stick - then please correct me.

Perhaps I've misunderstood the point of the thread. Based on it's title, I thought it was to have a discussion about art - not just pretty pics. If that's the case, then I'd like to think I can post something of interest and value to the thread. On the other hand, if all you really want to do is to poke fun at the art world - that's fine - but it's of no interest to me so I'll leave you to it.
Tim.

 

[timsk]

When it comes to art "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" springs to mind and appreciation, or not, is an entirely personal thing. If I think something is crap, then it is to me and me only and I don't need the wise telling me it's because I don't understand it as I don't care whether I do or not, it's still crap to me . . .

Hi Jon,
Of the 9,000+ posts you've made to T2W - I think I've read most of them and agreed wholeheartedly with a great many of them. Even those that I don't agree with (e.g. your take on Brexit), I appreciate the points you make and the careful, considered thought process that goes into writing them. Suffice to say, I have huge respect for you and your views. With the above in mind, I suppose I shouldn't be too disappointed in reading one solitary post from you - on a fringe topic to boot - that fails to reach your usual high standard!

Fingers crossed this is a one-off blip and that there will be another 9,000 great posts from you before it occurs again - if a all!

Tim.

 

[Pat494]

Everyone should have an opinion Tim. Even you.
Let's not get "all better taste than thou". I don't really see it as a competition in that respect.
If you were to eulogise over a dog's t*rd on the pavement, that is entirely up to you.
Know what you like and encourage that with praise seems reasonable to me.
Although to have young artists painting only one style could get very boring. Bring on THE NEW................
and I shall no doubt pass personal judgement.
Frankly I think if Turner were to see what his illustrious name has been applied to he would be disgusted.

 

[barjon]

Hi Jon,
Of the 9,000+ posts you've made to T2W - I think I've read most of them and agreed wholeheartedly with a great many of them. Even those that I don't agree with (e.g. your take on Brexit), I appreciate the points you make and the careful, considered thought process that goes into writing them. Suffice to say, I have huge respect for you and your views. With the above in mind, I suppose I shouldn't be too disappointed in reading one solitary post from you - on a fringe topic to boot - that fails to reach your usual high standard!

Fingers crossed this is a one-off blip and that there will be another 9,000 great posts from you before it occurs again - if a all!

Tim.

well, Tim, I thought you might at least concede that I can't be all bad if Picasso keeps drawing me in.

ps: wasn't having a dig at you btw

 

[neil]

Opinion and the rectal orifice

Everyone should have an opinion Tim. Even you.
Let's not get "all better taste than thou". I don't really see it as a competition in that respect.
If you were to eulogise over a dog's t*rd on the pavement, that is entirely up to you.
Know what you like and encourage that with praise seems reasonable to me.
Although to have young artists painting only one style could get very boring. Bring on THE NEW................

Opinions are like the anus. Everyone has one, and very necessary they are too. However, when the opinion of one person or class, is forced upon people, usually with veiled threats, or books and paintings are burnt in public then discussion is dead. Discussion, even on a thread, is to be encouraged, especially that engendered by logic. if you like or dislike something then explain why. Even a dogs rectal deposit might be art to some rather like those people who see shapes in clouds as a result of them exercising their imagination. Art means different things to different people. Hence the reason for differences of opinion, some of which are more informed and more adult than others posted here.

 

[Mr. Charts]

I feel the same about Hirst and Emin (the latter whom I have briefly met and disliked) as I imply Tim does by his comparison with Maggi Hambling. Like most people I do tend to take too much of an instant impression of a work of art; do I like or dislike it or should I spend more time looking to see if there is anything not immediately obvious. In a sense the instant impression is necessary sometimes simply due to the large number of works available in a gallery or elsewhere. With MH, for example, I liked walking around her Scallop on the beach at Aldeburgh and that prompted me to visit her exhibition at the National. I didn't like what I saw, but was intrigued enough to go to the Marlborough to see more. There were things which I had an emotional or sensory link with, (sorry for the picture quality from my smartphone, Tim ), but others which I found almost hideous and repellent.
Part of "art" is how it makes you feel and see differently; your interaction with it, almost a two way thing.
Personally the word "decadent" in relation to art reminds me of the Nazi attitude of burning art they disapproved of, then books, then people. I'm sure the person who used that word here did not imply any such attitude.
Art is a little like religion to me. You don't have to adhere to it. You don't have to respect it or the people who like it. You tolerate it because you are the person you are and it's a tiny part of living in a civilised society.

As Neil very sensibly implies, no-one expects anyone else to polish turds.

 

[timsk]

Hi Pat,

Everyone should have an opinion Tim.

It's clear from yours and Jon's comments that I'm not making myself clear - so I shall try one last time to explain where I'm coming from and the issues I have with your posts.

Of course having an opinion is absolutely fine. Moreover, yours, Jon's and everyone else's is every bit as valid as mine. Just because I have an arts background, had a career in design & print, have many friends who are artists and designers and currently spend the bulk of my time making mosaics - doesn't make my views better than yours or anyone else's. I understand and accept that completely. Seriously, I really do. Not only that, but my views on many artists are quite likely to be similar to yours: I've already said I'm no fan of Hirst and Emin (of cut up cows and unmade beds fame). So, what's the problem?

The problem is that where I have an opinion about what does or doesn't constitute art - let alone whether it is good or bad art - I can support it with reasoned argument. Yes, there will be a fair amount of subjectivity involved - but I would never right off artists as varied as Picasso to Hambling as 'rubbish' -without offering some sort of explanation as to why. This is the key point - and it's one that neil also makes very well in his post, above.

If you are able to say why Monet is good and Picasso isn't - that would be a start and the thread might get somewhere. Just saying 'I think Picasso's rubbish and I'm entitled to my opinion' doesn't get anyone anywhere - least of all you. Look at it this way - how many threads have you seen on T2W started by someone saying what they intend to trade and how - only to get a short reply saying something like 'you're in cloud cuckoo land m8 - that'll never work'. Yes, it's an opinion to which that member is entitled, but it's of zero use to the OP or other subscribers to the thread. Exactly the same principle applies here.

Frankly I think if Turner were to see what his illustrious name has been applied to he would be disgusted.

You made this point earlier in the thread but then - like now - you've not explained why you think Turner would be disgusted. By contrast, I've provided sound reasoning and logic to suggest that in all probability he'd be perfectly happy with it. By all means question my logic and reasoning and put forward a counter argument. That's what good discussion is about and that's what leads to interesting and informative threads from which everyone can benefit and enjoy.
Tim.

 

[Pat494]

Here is one of Turner's best known works.
Is it subtle..........yes
Is it colourful.......yes
Is it interesting.....yes
Is it a wonderful object to behold.....yes

Need I say more ?