Mr. Charts
Legendary member
- Messages
- 7,370
- Likes
- 1,200
What's that white stuff ?
I like this test: Could I, with no expertise, talent, training or skill, have produced what I am looking at? If the answer is 'yes' then I do not consider it to be art.
I also like this story (urban fiction?) concerning the assessment of art by experts:
An artist's work of a sculptured head was offered to the Royal Academy for their summer exhibition and he was notified that it had been accepted. Needing to be displayed in a particular way it had therefore been dispatched with a display cradle not unlike a stylised dumbbell. At the exhibition our artist was somewhat surprised to find that it was the cradle on display because the judges mistakenly thought that two items had been submitted and they therefore chose the best and rejected the other. Maybe they were right ................
What about an artist who copies and original and the actual result are two identical paintings which only an expert eye or use of science can tell them apart!
How would you rate those two items?
I like this test: Could I, with no expertise, talent, training or skill, have produced what I am looking at? If the answer is 'yes' then I do not consider it to be art.
I also like this story (urban fiction?) concerning the assessment of art by experts:
An artist's work of a sculptured head was offered to the Royal Academy for their summer exhibition and he was notified that it had been accepted. Needing to be displayed in a particular way it had therefore been dispatched with a display cradle not unlike a stylised dumbbell. At the exhibition our artist was somewhat surprised to find that it was the cradle on display because the judges mistakenly thought that two items had been submitted and they therefore chose the best and rejected the other. Maybe they were right ................
Hi smini',I like this test: Could I, with no expertise, talent, training or skill, have produced what I am looking at? If the answer is 'yes' then I do not consider it to be art. . .
Hi smini',
I'm sorry to tell you that your test has a fatal flaw! Without any expertise, talent, training or skill - how are you going to be able to determine whether or not you could produce whatever it is that you're looking at?
One of the hardest things for any artist to do is to produce work that looks as if no expertise, talent, training or skill has gone into making it. To some extent, the French painter Jean Dubuffet devoted his career in pursuit of this goal, wanting to imbue his work with the same innocence and naivety that one would expect from a 5 year old child. The catch 22 for such artists is that they first have to have the formal training and learn all the skills and techniques etc. in order to then 'unlearn' them as mature artists. There is no better example of this than Picasso, whose ability and talent was beyond remarkable. Look at what he was producing as a boy in his early teens - it's quite extraordinary. Even Pat would be impressed! Yet, you'd never know it by just by looking at some of his later work produced as a mature artist.
Tim.
Hi smini',
I'm sorry to tell you that your test has a fatal flaw! Without any expertise, talent, training or skill - how are you going to be able to determine whether or not you could produce whatever it is that you're looking at?
One of the hardest things for any artist to do is to produce work that looks as if no expertise, talent, training or skill has gone into making it. To some extent, the French painter Jean Dubuffet devoted his career in pursuit of this goal, wanting to imbue his work with the same innocence and naivety that one would expect from a 5 year old child. The catch 22 for such artists is that they first have to have the formal training and learn all the skills and techniques etc. in order to then 'unlearn' them as mature artists. There is no better example of this than Picasso, whose ability and talent was beyond remarkable. Look at what he was producing as a boy in his early teens - it's quite extraordinary. Even Pat would be impressed! Yet, you'd never know it by just by looking at some of his later work produced as a mature artist.
Tim.
It is my NOT so humble view that Picasso showed promise in his early works and went downhill later to produce rubbish. Assiduously copied by 2nd rate copycats trying it on. Once he had the adulation and huge prices he knew the suckers would buy anything he produced.
Rubbish is rubbish regardless of whatever the lineage, provenance or time.
Sounds like even smini could sell you some daubs ?
But each to his own quality.
Hi smini',
I'm sorry to tell you that your test has a fatal flaw! Without any expertise, talent, training or skill - how are you going to be able to determine whether or not you could produce whatever it is that you're looking at?
One of the hardest things for any artist to do is to produce work that looks as if no expertise, talent, training or skill has gone into making it. To some extent, the French painter Jean Dubuffet devoted his career in pursuit of this goal, wanting to imbue his work with the same innocence and naivety that one would expect from a 5 year old child. The catch 22 for such artists is that they first have to have the formal training and learn all the skills and techniques etc. in order to then 'unlearn' them as mature artists. There is no better example of this than Picasso, whose ability and talent was beyond remarkable. Look at what he was producing as a boy in his early teens - it's quite extraordinary. Even Pat would be impressed! Yet, you'd never know it by just by looking at some of his later work produced as a mature artist.
Tim.
Hi Pat,. . .Sounds like even smini could sell you some daubs ?. . .
Hi Pat,
Well, without wishing to cast aspersions on smini's artistic abilities, I would be happy to engage in the following test. Actually, it can apply to anyone - not just smini'. . .
1. Pick an artist that you think is rubbish, devoid of any artistic merit or skill. One whose work you think you could equal with ease.
2. You do your version of their inane crap and then insert it among real paintings by that artist.
3. With the exception of some minimalist and conceptual artists (think Carl Andre's 'Equivalent VIII'), I'll pick out your painting from the real Pollock, Picasso, Dubuffet - or whichever artist you choose.
The slight problem with this test is that it may prove difficult to get your fake Pollock (or whoever) in a gallery along side the genuine paintings. So, I'm afraid you'll just have to take my word for it that I'd be able to pick out your impostor piece every time - in no time at all!
Tim.
Street heart
Waddayaguystink?
Ha ha I had a feeling that you would rise to the bait.
Not quite a fair test if I may point out that say 9 pictures by the crap artist will look similiar and the tenth whether better or worse will look different. So you are on fairly safe ground.
I have however an oil painting that is a copy of a Monet. It is as good as the original. I will try to take a photo of it and see what you think.