Total Posts:25|Showing Posts:1-25
Jump to topic:

The psychology of post-modernism

dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2015 2:51:23 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I find it highly implausible that anyone genuinely finds post-modernist art appealing. This gives rise to an obvious question: why, then, do so many people claim to enjoy it, and why do so many artists spend time making it? On the part of the artist, I think it amounts to a jealous rebellion against achievement and a desire for instant gratification. Notice that most post-modernist works of art are exceedingly simple - in many cases, a child could have done it without much effort. Rarely do you see post-moderist works of art that obviously took a lot of time and effort to make. On the part of the spectator, it amounts to a lethargic search for meaning. Post-moderist works of art are so obviously ugly and pointless, that people assume that beneath the surface there lies a grand meaning which takes sophistication to appreciate - so they simply project that assumption onto the work of art. Does it not cross their mind that perhaps the work of art appears pointless because it is? They want to feel sophisticated, so they convince themselves it is good. Without people around to flaunt their ostensibly enlightened tastes, most people would not claim to enjoy it.
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2015 3:04:08 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/25/2015 2:51:23 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
I find it highly implausible that anyone genuinely finds post-modernist art appealing. This gives rise to an obvious question: why, then, do so many people claim to enjoy it, and why do so many artists spend time making it? On the part of the artist, I think it amounts to a jealous rebellion against achievement and a desire for instant gratification. Notice that most post-modernist works of art are exceedingly simple - in many cases, a child could have done it without much effort. Rarely do you see post-moderist works of art that obviously took a lot of time and effort to make. On the part of the spectator, it amounts to a lethargic search for meaning. Post-moderist works of art are so obviously ugly and pointless, that people assume that beneath the surface there lies a grand meaning which takes sophistication to appreciate - so they simply project that assumption onto the work of art. Does it not cross their mind that perhaps the work of art appears pointless because it is? They want to feel sophisticated, so they convince themselves it is good. Without people around to flaunt their ostensibly enlightened tastes, most people would not claim to enjoy it.

The point is that there is no point - postmodernists only want the destruction of purpose.
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2015 6:49:49 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I forgot to mention another motivation for the separator: consciously or not, they want to feel superior to those who are unable to appreciate it. It's similar to the subtle pretentiousness of logical positivists.
YYW
Posts: 36,303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2015 10:22:01 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/25/2015 2:51:23 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
I find it highly implausible that anyone genuinely finds post-modernist art appealing.

Could you provide a few examples of what you would regard as postmodern art?
Tsar of DDO
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2015 10:22:13 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/25/2015 6:49:49 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
I forgot to mention another motivation for the separator: consciously or not, they want to feel superior to those who are unable to appreciate it. It's similar to the subtle pretentiousness of logical positivists.

They want to be happy without putting in the work necessary, so they try to redefine reality to suit themselves. When they find that this is impossible, they lash out at everyone who is able to find happiness so that they can at least have some semblance of self-worth left in their miserable lives.
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
WillYouMarryMe
Posts: 247
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2015 10:28:03 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/25/2015 10:22:01 PM, YYW wrote:
At 3/25/2015 2:51:23 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
I find it highly implausible that anyone genuinely finds post-modernist art appealing.

Could you provide a few examples of what you would regard as postmodern art?

http://www.sfmoma.org...
WillYouMarryMe
Posts: 247
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2015 10:30:25 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/25/2015 2:51:23 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
I find it highly implausible that anyone genuinely finds post-modernist art appealing. This gives rise to an obvious question: why, then, do so many people claim to enjoy it, and why do so many artists spend time making it? On the part of the artist, I think it amounts to a jealous rebellion against achievement and a desire for instant gratification. Notice that most post-modernist works of art are exceedingly simple - in many cases, a child could have done it without much effort. Rarely do you see post-moderist works of art that obviously took a lot of time and effort to make. On the part of the spectator, it amounts to a lethargic search for meaning. Post-moderist works of art are so obviously ugly and pointless, that people assume that beneath the surface there lies a grand meaning which takes sophistication to appreciate - so they simply project that assumption onto the work of art. Does it not cross their mind that perhaps the work of art appears pointless because it is? They want to feel sophisticated, so they convince themselves it is good. Without people around to flaunt their ostensibly enlightened tastes, most people would not claim to enjoy it.

I pretty much agree with your analysis. Post-modernist art is trash.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2015 11:14:59 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/25/2015 10:22:01 PM, YYW wrote:
At 3/25/2015 2:51:23 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
I find it highly implausible that anyone genuinely finds post-modernist art appealing.

Could you provide a few examples of what you would regard as postmodern art?

https://www.youtube.com...
http://www.sfmoma.org...
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2015 11:16:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/25/2015 10:22:13 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 3/25/2015 6:49:49 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
I forgot to mention another motivation for the separator: consciously or not, they want to feel superior to those who are unable to appreciate it. It's similar to the subtle pretentiousness of logical positivists.

They want to be happy without putting in the work necessary, so they try to redefine reality to suit themselves. When they find that this is impossible, they lash out at everyone who is able to find happiness so that they can at least have some semblance of self-worth left in their miserable lives.

I don't know if I'd go that far, but yeah lol
YYW
Posts: 36,303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2015 11:21:39 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/25/2015 11:14:59 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 3/25/2015 10:22:01 PM, YYW wrote:
At 3/25/2015 2:51:23 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
I find it highly implausible that anyone genuinely finds post-modernist art appealing.

Could you provide a few examples of what you would regard as postmodern art?

https://www.youtube.com...
http://www.sfmoma.org...

Ok.

I don't really know a whole lot about postmodern art, beyond postmodern architecture...

The sort of seminally "postmodern" skyscraper is Phillip Johnson's AT&T Building, which I think is one of the ugliest buildings in the history of human construction. There are some small-scale postmodern architectural projects that I like (really, they're no more than "unlivable houses" which speaks to the ironic nature of postmodernism), but as a rule, I'm more of a modernist than a postmodernist.
Tsar of DDO
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2015 11:30:30 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/25/2015 11:27:30 PM, Maikuru wrote:
Everyone's a psychologist.

This post makes me conclude that you have at least twelve personality disorders.
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,285
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2015 11:30:55 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/25/2015 2:51:23 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
I find it highly implausible that anyone genuinely finds post-modernist art appealing. This gives rise to an obvious question: why, then, do so many people claim to enjoy it, and why do so many artists spend time making it? On the part of the artist, I think it amounts to a jealous rebellion against achievement and a desire for instant gratification. Notice that most post-modernist works of art are exceedingly simple - in many cases, a child could have done it without much effort. Rarely do you see post-moderist works of art that obviously took a lot of time and effort to make. On the part of the spectator, it amounts to a lethargic search for meaning. Post-moderist works of art are so obviously ugly and pointless, that people assume that beneath the surface there lies a grand meaning which takes sophistication to appreciate - so they simply project that assumption onto the work of art. Does it not cross their mind that perhaps the work of art appears pointless because it is? They want to feel sophisticated, so they convince themselves it is good. Without people around to flaunt their ostensibly enlightened tastes, most people would not claim to enjoy it.

"The Freudian racket looks to me as much of a farce as the jumbo thingum of polished wood with a polished hole in the middle which doesn't represent anything except the gaping face of the philistine who is told it is a great sculpture produced by the greatest living caveman"
- Vladimir Nabokov -

I like surrealism (Dorothea Tanning especially)
(http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com...)

But I fail to find any value at all in pretty much any post-modern art.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Maikuru
Posts: 9,112
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2015 11:32:44 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/25/2015 11:30:30 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 3/25/2015 11:27:30 PM, Maikuru wrote:
Everyone's a psychologist.

This post makes me conclude that you have at least twelve personality disorders.

I lul'ed. Carry on.
"You assume I wouldn't want to burn this whole place to the ground."
- lamerde

https://i.imgflip.com...
YYW
Posts: 36,303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2015 11:35:52 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/25/2015 11:30:55 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/25/2015 2:51:23 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
I find it highly implausible that anyone genuinely finds post-modernist art appealing. This gives rise to an obvious question: why, then, do so many people claim to enjoy it, and why do so many artists spend time making it? On the part of the artist, I think it amounts to a jealous rebellion against achievement and a desire for instant gratification. Notice that most post-modernist works of art are exceedingly simple - in many cases, a child could have done it without much effort. Rarely do you see post-moderist works of art that obviously took a lot of time and effort to make. On the part of the spectator, it amounts to a lethargic search for meaning. Post-moderist works of art are so obviously ugly and pointless, that people assume that beneath the surface there lies a grand meaning which takes sophistication to appreciate - so they simply project that assumption onto the work of art. Does it not cross their mind that perhaps the work of art appears pointless because it is? They want to feel sophisticated, so they convince themselves it is good. Without people around to flaunt their ostensibly enlightened tastes, most people would not claim to enjoy it.

"The Freudian racket looks to me as much of a farce as the jumbo thingum of polished wood with a polished hole in the middle which doesn't represent anything except the gaping face of the philistine who is told it is a great sculpture produced by the greatest living caveman"
- Vladimir Nabokov -

roflmao

(I actually lol'd though)

I like surrealism (Dorothea Tanning especially)
(http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com...)

But I fail to find any value at all in pretty much any post-modern art.

I generally do too...
Tsar of DDO
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,285
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2015 11:45:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/25/2015 11:35:52 PM, YYW wrote:
At 3/25/2015 11:30:55 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/25/2015 2:51:23 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
I find it highly implausible that anyone genuinely finds post-modernist art appealing. This gives rise to an obvious question: why, then, do so many people claim to enjoy it, and why do so many artists spend time making it? On the part of the artist, I think it amounts to a jealous rebellion against achievement and a desire for instant gratification. Notice that most post-modernist works of art are exceedingly simple - in many cases, a child could have done it without much effort. Rarely do you see post-moderist works of art that obviously took a lot of time and effort to make. On the part of the spectator, it amounts to a lethargic search for meaning. Post-moderist works of art are so obviously ugly and pointless, that people assume that beneath the surface there lies a grand meaning which takes sophistication to appreciate - so they simply project that assumption onto the work of art. Does it not cross their mind that perhaps the work of art appears pointless because it is? They want to feel sophisticated, so they convince themselves it is good. Without people around to flaunt their ostensibly enlightened tastes, most people would not claim to enjoy it.

"The Freudian racket looks to me as much of a farce as the jumbo thingum of polished wood with a polished hole in the middle which doesn't represent anything except the gaping face of the philistine who is told it is a great sculpture produced by the greatest living caveman"
- Vladimir Nabokov -

roflmao

(I actually lol'd though)

Haha, Strong Opinions is a great book. The fact that he was one of the most blunt people to ever lived while also possessing a prodigal mastery of the English language makes it a very entertaining and enlightening read. Gems like that made me crack up throughout.

I like surrealism (Dorothea Tanning especially)
(http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com...)

But I fail to find any value at all in pretty much any post-modern art.

I generally do too...

Yeah, I'm more Romantic-Impressionist-Surrealist-dippingmytoesintoModernist when it comes to artistic tastes. Dadaists just seem like people with some sort of disorder to me. My one friends took a performing arts school in San Francisco, and said that one person's 'piece' involved him hanging from a tree with a flower stuck in his anus. Apparently that qualifies one for the gallery nowadays, not the asylum.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
YYW
Posts: 36,303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2015 11:51:08 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/25/2015 11:45:57 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/25/2015 11:35:52 PM, YYW wrote:
At 3/25/2015 11:30:55 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/25/2015 2:51:23 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
I find it highly implausible that anyone genuinely finds post-modernist art appealing. This gives rise to an obvious question: why, then, do so many people claim to enjoy it, and why do so many artists spend time making it? On the part of the artist, I think it amounts to a jealous rebellion against achievement and a desire for instant gratification. Notice that most post-modernist works of art are exceedingly simple - in many cases, a child could have done it without much effort. Rarely do you see post-moderist works of art that obviously took a lot of time and effort to make. On the part of the spectator, it amounts to a lethargic search for meaning. Post-moderist works of art are so obviously ugly and pointless, that people assume that beneath the surface there lies a grand meaning which takes sophistication to appreciate - so they simply project that assumption onto the work of art. Does it not cross their mind that perhaps the work of art appears pointless because it is? They want to feel sophisticated, so they convince themselves it is good. Without people around to flaunt their ostensibly enlightened tastes, most people would not claim to enjoy it.

"The Freudian racket looks to me as much of a farce as the jumbo thingum of polished wood with a polished hole in the middle which doesn't represent anything except the gaping face of the philistine who is told it is a great sculpture produced by the greatest living caveman"
- Vladimir Nabokov -

roflmao

(I actually lol'd though)

Haha, Strong Opinions is a great book. The fact that he was one of the most blunt people to ever lived while also possessing a prodigal mastery of the English language makes it a very entertaining and enlightening read. Gems like that made me crack up throughout.

*adds that to my kindle app for subway ride reading*

I like surrealism (Dorothea Tanning especially)
(http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com...)

But I fail to find any value at all in pretty much any post-modern art.

I generally do too...

Yeah, I'm more Romantic-Impressionist-Surrealist-dippingmytoesintoModernist when it comes to artistic tastes.

Cheers. I like Romantic landscapes, I am particularly fond of impressionism (especially Cezanne), and modernism is what I like most.

Dadaists just seem like people with some sort of disorder to me. My one friends took a performing arts school in San Francisco, and said that one person's 'piece' involved him hanging from a tree with a flower stuck in his anus. Apparently that qualifies one for the gallery nowadays, not the asylum.

lol well put

Dadaism is little more than the glorified trash that an 8 or a 9 year old with the appropriate materials would put together at day care.
Tsar of DDO
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,285
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2015 12:11:40 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/25/2015 11:51:08 PM, YYW wrote:
At 3/25/2015 11:45:57 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 3/25/2015 11:35:52 PM, YYW wrote:
At 3/25/2015 11:30:55 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
I like surrealism (Dorothea Tanning especially)
(http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com...)

But I fail to find any value at all in pretty much any post-modern art.

I generally do too...

Yeah, I'm more Romantic-Impressionist-Surrealist-dippingmytoesintoModernist when it comes to artistic tastes.

Cheers. I like Romantic landscapes, I am particularly fond of impressionism (especially Cezanne), and modernism is what I like most.

Cezanne I love, along with Monet and Degas. When it comes to Romantic paintings, I love the Hudson school, and J.M.W. Turner above all else. T. Alexander Harrison is also very underrated, he's a Philadelphia native. Plus, my county actually had it's own school of impressionism: the New Hope school (https://images.search.yahoo.com...). Who are your favorite modernist painters? I'm more familiar with architecture, and only know a few big names.

Dadaists just seem like people with some sort of disorder to me. My one friends took a performing arts school in San Francisco, and said that one person's 'piece' involved him hanging from a tree with a flower stuck in his anus. Apparently that qualifies one for the gallery nowadays, not the asylum.

lol well put

Dadaism is little more than the glorified trash that an 8 or a 9 year old with the appropriate materials would put together at day care.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2015 12:18:42 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I made post-modern art:

http://www.debate.org...
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2015 12:23:30 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/26/2015 12:18:42 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
I made post-modern art:

http://www.debate.org...

I threw my socks on the floor in an act of artistic expression. Where's my millions?
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,285
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2015 12:41:15 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/26/2015 12:23:30 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 3/26/2015 12:18:42 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
I made post-modern art:

http://www.debate.org...

I threw my socks on the floor in an act of artistic expression. Where's my millions?

We once melted a carboy in the autoclave at my work, and joked that we should send the deformed plastic stuck to metal grates to the MoMA, and entitle it 'Frozen Rage'.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
sdavio
Posts: 1,798
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2015 11:05:32 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/25/2015 2:51:23 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
I find it highly implausible that anyone genuinely finds post-modernist art appealing. This gives rise to an obvious question: why, then, do so many people claim to enjoy it, and why do so many artists spend time making it? On the part of the artist, I think it amounts to a jealous rebellion against achievement and a desire for instant gratification. Notice that most post-modernist works of art are exceedingly simple - in many cases, a child could have done it without much effort. Rarely do you see post-moderist works of art that obviously took a lot of time and effort to make. On the part of the spectator, it amounts to a lethargic search for meaning. Post-moderist works of art are so obviously ugly and pointless, that people assume that beneath the surface there lies a grand meaning which takes sophistication to appreciate - so they simply project that assumption onto the work of art. Does it not cross their mind that perhaps the work of art appears pointless because it is? They want to feel sophisticated, so they convince themselves it is good. Without people around to flaunt their ostensibly enlightened tastes, most people would not claim to enjoy it.

Quit trolling me, dylan :(
"Logic is the money of the mind." - Karl Marx
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2015 12:38:10 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/26/2015 11:05:32 AM, sdavio wrote:
At 3/25/2015 2:51:23 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
I find it highly implausible that anyone genuinely finds post-modernist art appealing. This gives rise to an obvious question: why, then, do so many people claim to enjoy it, and why do so many artists spend time making it? On the part of the artist, I think it amounts to a jealous rebellion against achievement and a desire for instant gratification. Notice that most post-modernist works of art are exceedingly simple - in many cases, a child could have done it without much effort. Rarely do you see post-moderist works of art that obviously took a lot of time and effort to make. On the part of the spectator, it amounts to a lethargic search for meaning. Post-moderist works of art are so obviously ugly and pointless, that people assume that beneath the surface there lies a grand meaning which takes sophistication to appreciate - so they simply project that assumption onto the work of art. Does it not cross their mind that perhaps the work of art appears pointless because it is? They want to feel sophisticated, so they convince themselves it is good. Without people around to flaunt their ostensibly enlightened tastes, most people would not claim to enjoy it.

Quit trolling me, dylan :(

I'm confused, do you like postmodern art or something?
AFism
Posts: 1,030
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2015 1:19:42 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/25/2015 2:51:23 PM, dylancatlow wrote:
I find it highly implausible that anyone genuinely finds post-modernist art appealing. This gives rise to an obvious question: why, then, do so many people claim to enjoy it, and why do so many artists spend time making it? On the part of the artist, I think it amounts to a jealous rebellion against achievement and a desire for instant gratification. Notice that most post-modernist works of art are exceedingly simple - in many cases, a child could have done it without much effort. Rarely do you see post-moderist works of art that obviously took a lot of time and effort to make. On the part of the spectator, it amounts to a lethargic search for meaning. Post-moderist works of art are so obviously ugly and pointless, that people assume that beneath the surface there lies a grand meaning which takes sophistication to appreciate - so they simply project that assumption onto the work of art. Does it not cross their mind that perhaps the work of art appears pointless because it is? They want to feel sophisticated, so they convince themselves it is good. Without people around to flaunt their ostensibly enlightened tastes, most people would not claim to enjoy it.

Okay, I think I'm going to disagree with you and be the black sheep of the thread. Surely a child could mush playdough on a tile, but did they try to actually synthesize the two perceived media and find a meaning to what they are doing? No. I'm so not upholding this art as more than what it is though. Beauty can be found in everyday objects, but I pity the artist that only does modern art because they don't have a craft or can't paint/draw. To base your argument based off of how much time the person put into the art, because it takes a photographer a millisecond to capture a picture and maybe a couple of days to develop it or print it out. The fact that people try to science it up more than the artist does though is problematic, the craft itself can be proven as useful though and even moving. To say any art is pointless is a sign of small minded thinking. Artists like to observe what is around them, because out environment is a direct reflection of the current state of mind of our people. Surely they can take one of these objects out of their normal environment, put in in a museum and comment on how the changes in environment affect your perception of the object. Its obvious that it does because if it didn't you wouldn't have made this post.

Lets take a toothbrush for example. You normally see those in the store, the bathroom or a travel pouch. Putting a toothbrush on a white pedestal in a museum is a statement in itself that the artist is trying to make. They are questioning how things are considered art or perceived as art, and attempting to push the boundaries of what is and isn't art. And please don't say that I'm sciencing it up , because thats the whole point of post-modernism, to challenge old ideas.
pressman57
Posts: 12
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2015 3:22:39 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Was Dali considered post modern? If so, I can't agree that all post modern artists lack talent. Jackson Pollock was a lucky hack though.