Debate Rounds (3)
Back in the day, we had some good artists. I like a lot Salvador Dali, but there are others well known, Miguel Angelo, Leonardo Da Vinci. Why now, the paintings are so "simple" in some ways, just lines and colors. I think its funny, because people say that those paintings transmit emotions, but I"ve already tried to "feel" the draw, and its pointless.
It seems that today, videogames are the real art. If someone can make me change my mind, you are welcome.
Because Pro does not provide definitions, I will provide universal definitions.
Art-the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.
Modern art is the same but during the period from the 1860s to present.
The drawings the Pro give us are also modernabstractart.
These are also modern art. Modern Art can include structures and 3-D art as well.
Gillian Wearing and Marjetica Potrc are famous modern artists.
Also, its like a song. Art contains a hidden meaning like some songs do. Another great part about modern art are the ways you can interpret them. Just because you can't feel them doesn't mean they are pointless.
Video games are art, but no type of art can be the real art. Art is expressing yourself in your own creative way.
I know that there are all over the world "real" artists, that can make something outstanding, they deserve attention.
But what you are telling, and correct me if I"m wrong, is that for example, the paintings that I was talking about, they can have a hidden meaning, and this makes them a great painting?
It was given to me a painting, worth something like 200.000, and its all lines, like a "poligraph", with green and yellow, and one day, I said to my self - Today you are going to see past the paint - And after that, it didn"t made me feel emotions.
Like songs, there are good songs, and bad songs.. A good song have few chances to be liked and apreciated by people.
This should happen with paintings. What makes a good paint, if not its aspect? The message? A song is not good by is message only..
Once again, I never said that having a message makes it necessarily good.
This is evidence on how to judge ppaintings.
These "line drawings" are abstract art.
This type of art has its own purpose in the different ways of art.
Buyers of art chose this art because they think it means something very important to them.
I repeat myself, I never said that songs aren't only judged by their message, and I never said that messages aren't the only other thing, but to the art you point at, abstract art, these are special because of there unique differential views.
You constantly drop the arguement that the art is absract. So, you are making flawed conclusions to these drawings. I state once more that art can be seen to everyone differently. So, just becasue you see it bad, it doesn't mean that the art is now pointless.
I have attacked the Pro's weak case with evidence.
What I learn from life, is that we have to accept when we are wrong and say it. Well, you changed a little bit my point of view, so thank you.
Still, imagine a child makes an abstract draw, and some famous artist says it was them who made it. Would that chance your opinion about the draw? Wouldn"t it make it worth more? Humans are very good at trying to deceive themselves.. So I think they are more concerned about the artist, other then the painting. I believe that most people, just because it"s a very famous artist, they deceive themselves to belive that the draw give them emotions.
In the otherside, I believe that there are the "type" of paintings very well paintes, and with an amazing image itself, making no need to have a debate about if its good or bad, because it"s easy to see, no room for doubts.
Again, I don"t have now such a negative point of view about that, but explain this to me.
Not all abstract art is expensive. The price now remains on the quality of the picture.
These are some more expensive pictures, but as you can see, the quality is much better.
Now normal "kids" wouldn't be able to draw these things. Also the price doesn't just increase because of the artist, it depends on the quality of teh painting.
Humans are very good at deceiving themselves, but some drawings from kids are really good, and some drawing for professionals aren't that good either.
As of now, I have been able to counter everyarguement the Pro has presented. vote Con
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by AndrewB686 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||6|
Reasons for voting decision: Both sides were equally civil. Con made constant syntax errors as well as incomprehensible phrases that were unnecessary. The arguments by pro were adequately presented, and as con had no refutation of any of his arguments, pro wins easily.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.