CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
While I do think it's art I also think it's "lazy" art. Compared to some other great works of art that have detail and depth, Splatter paint isn't as personal or thought provoking, at least to me. Some of it is beautiful, but I prefer a different style.
Really quite the opposite. It is an attempt to take art away from the artist and bring them to a more natural, primordial, and child like state. Let the universe do the painting for you.
Really, the artform is in selling the splatter paint art. These people are the real geniuses. Why do you know about any of this crap to begin with? People with way too much money throw their money at it. Maybe they have such a low opinion of everyone else that they see splatter painting as the best the lower class plebeians can come up with. Buying their finger paintings and sticking it to the fridge with a magnet is really the charitable thing to do.
Crazy people need to make a buck too, ya know? Some pretty good art comes out of crazy people.
Then there is splatter painting..... Sounds like some kind of side hussle a land sharking used car salesman would come up with. Surely some dumb rich schmuck would buy this canvas with my guacamole diarrhea splashed all over it. This painting really takes you to a place.
Neither is a host of other works commonly classify as art.
First, to be clear, Pollack's work was called poured painting not splatter painting. In addition to poured paint, drips, and splatters, there are footprints, cigarette ashes, and cigarette butts in them.
Also, computer analyses of pieces by Jackson Pollack reveal fractal patterns. This is one of the ways genuine Pollack pieces are distinguished from counterfeits.
Even so, I don't see how the mere presence of a pattern qualifies a piece as art. Many things have patterns, but are not art, leaves and the scales of a fish, for example. I hardly would classify a dried fish skin as art.
Second, the basic premise behind a lot of modern art is that all that is required to make something into a piece of visual art are the following things:
- 1 - Some physical object It does not matter whether the Artist made it.
- 2 - A title It does not matter what the title is, or even if it is Untitled number 2, or just Untitled.
- 3 - Someone to call it art This can be done by explicit statements, or by putting the object in a museum or gallery with a museum label next to it.
The problem is that none of this has anything at all to do with applying skill or discipline to make a work with creative intent that is automatically apparent to the viewer. There is no requirement of intent or skill in a splatter painting.
There are countless similar examples in all sorts of things called modern "art".
Mark Rothko
When my wife and I talk about painting a room, and we get tester quantities of colors that are candidates for the room, she paints colored rectangles on the wall of the proposed base colors, and above and below them she puts thick stripes of the trim colors under and over the proposed base colors.
Each set of colors looks like a Rothko painting.
It is not art when my wife does it. It was not art when Rothko did it.
Marcel DuchampWhen I go into a bathroom and relieve myself in a urinal, or see one displayed in a building supply store, it is not art.
It was not art when Duchamp laid one on its back and titled it Fountain.
Andres Serrano
When a mentally ill person urinates in a jar, and then puts something in the jar, it is not art, even if he/she photographs it.
It was not art when Serrano did that, and then called it Piss Christ.
Richard Serra
When scrap metal is melted down into ingots or blocks and piled or stacked together, it is not art.
It was not art when Serra had other people do that, and called examples of it One Ton Prop and Elevation Mass.
Jeff Koons
When I go into a department store, and vacuum cleaners are displayed on shelves, it is not art. It is not art when Koons does the exact same thing in a museum.
Third, There is more to art than personal taste, metaphoric content, or beauty. These can all occur independently of skill or intent. The creator's intent both in developing skill, and in creating a particular piece is a deciding factor in whether something is art. There are some pretty basic questions that differentiate art from things that are not art.
- 1 - Can it happen by accident?
- 2 - Was it an incidental product, or a byproduct of something else?
- 3 - If nobody told you it was art, would you assume it was not.
- 4 - Could an untrained child make it?
- 5 - Is it the product of an activity special education teachers try to keep their students from doing?
If the answer is yes to any of these questions, then the piece in question is not art, however interesting or beautiful it may be.
I’m am indeed , I’ve no problem posting work up but I have a problem posting it up here Cruzaders as I don’t want certain nut jobs knowing exactly who I am and polluting my website and social media
I’ve no problem posting work up but I have a problem posting it up here Cruzaders as I don’t want certain nut jobs knowing exactly who I am and polluting my website and social media
Yes--I have my picture posted up on another site (with a different screen name), though I would never reveal as much here due to particularly 'unhinged', 'loose canon' members on CD; by which I'm of course referring to primarily Nomenclature. God only knows the kinds of things he would do with it; its sick, really (gives Humanity a poor reputation)
That particular individual is a very sick individual who seems to get worse every day , he does not actually debate but just spends his day attacking others
You contradict this by now stating what you claim art is
The "what art is" post is additive to the "what art is not" post, halves of a whole.
Marcus you stated ......Pollack's work is not art.
Neither is a host of other works commonly classify as art........
My definition is not law by any means. It is just how I look at it.
I don't see evidence of intent in Pollack.
I don't see evidence of skill or discipline in Rothko.
Neither Serra nor Duchamp made the pieces I discussed.
Serrano did something we would try to keep special education students from doing. If Michelangelo had sculpted David in his own feces, I would not consider it art for the same reason.
However, as far as I am concerned, people can call anything art.
Marcus , that’s fine I just wanted to see exactly where you’re coming from
I’ve spent my life working in the arts , I’m a full time watercolour artist and occasionally oils , my work is mainly landscape and seascapes and weekly I sell my work at a weekend gallery here in Dublin .
At my weekly showings I’m surrounded by all types of art and every year more and more so called modern and abstract art is on show , the trends every year indicate that the world is slowly been won over to purely abstract art
Art colleges over here no longer teach kids to paint or draw as it’s all about “ ideas “ now , kids are encouraged to make installations and art using video and of course performance art , college kids come to me from some of the best Art colleges begging for lessons in painting , it’s tragic to say the least
Another remarkable trend is colleges world wide now offer courses in Art speak which is basically learning to talk absolute bollocks and applying it to art , huge money is made by people who can effectively use this language whilst talking to a customer about a piece of abstract art
It’s remarkable to think that in a hundred years maybe people will think that abstract and modern art were in fact the real deal and people who did not “ get it “ were just ignorant , impressionist art caused outrage when first shown and paintings were hung high so spectators would not destroy them in a rage , now look at the public and their almost universal love of impressionist art
It’s interesting to watch people in a gallery looking at modern art , men normally adopt a pose where they knowingly stroke their chin and proceed to explain to their other half what the artist is trying to “say “ the gallery owner then presents himself and shovels the bullshit using the most bizarrely nonsensical arty sounding language , a lot of times the buyers are buying to present an image of being worldly and upwardly mobile and buy the art because it’s what others are buying and it surely must be brilliant because the lovely man in the gallery used language that sounded artistically intellectual
Incidentally I caused outrage online last year by saying I detested Van Gogh and rated him as a dreadful artist ( I still do ) , his later pencil drawings were superb compared to his clumsy earlier works but showed how much he advanced in this medium as in the pencil , his paintings to me are clumsy and truly appalling
I am impressed by good watercolors simply because the medium is so unforgiving. There is no reworking a shoddy bit later, as can be done with oil paints. My hat is off to you, man.
I have taken several art classes (sculpture, jewelry making, ceramics, drawing, art history surveys) and I have done some oil painting. I appreciate how hard it is to be good, or even mediocre. I had to work my ass off just to suck.
My wife got her B.A. in Art History at Southern Methodist University (SMU) and most of her undergraduate classes were at a graduate level. The exception were the two required classes in modern art. The standards for writing and research were as low as for the art.
What was Amazing was that while Pollack, Duchamp, Warhol, Serrano, and Serra were all studied as "serious artists", Norman Rockwell and Boris Valejo were considered "merely illustrators". I honestly think the reason they were discounted was because they bothered to be good in the same way Renaissance masters bothered to be good. Apparently, after the impressionists, skill and discipline, and making a painting look like something was just too old-fashioned.
Rockwell is brilliant. He is in the Dutch and Flemish tradition of capturing mundane life with poignancy and humor. Valejo paints fantastical and mythical scenes, and while his work is more flamboyant, he includes the same attention to musculature as Jaques Luis David.
I honestly think a lot of modern art is the result of people who were just plain too lazy to develop real skills. Since the advent of photography, nobody bothers to paint photo-realistically, anymore, so the peak of painting achieved in late 18th Century portraits will forever be the high water mark of portraiture. Nobody bothers to capture embroidered fabric like Van Eyck, or make cloth and shadows look like cloth and shadows.
Absolutely we will never again see the likes of Albrecht Durer, because it would be too hard and take too much time; folks will just get a computer to convert a photo or sketch to a crosshatched engraved plate.
Do you know that there are murals in Herculaneum that look like mid to late Renaissance classical scenes? They have proportional bodies, painterly faces, atmospheric and one-point perspective, and if you did not know, you would swear they were from the 17th century. Those skills and techniques were lost, and not rediscovered until the Renaissance.
Maybe there is hope that when we come to the end of this modern art oriented iconoclasm (and the accompanying disdain for skill) Art will again be associated with discipline and skill and conscientiousness.
Watercolour is to me a fabulous medium to work in , I’ve painted everyday for the last 15 years and at least twice a week when I was working 9 to 5 , when light hits a well painted watercolour the colours glow with a beauty similar to stained glass
Your wife studied art history which to me is truly a fascinating subject , I specialized in Renaissance art which is something I still have a love for as i’m still constantly astonished at just how brilliant these true masters of art were
I agree with what you say regards Rockwell and Valejo and it’s gross ignorance and arrogance to dismiss them to the role of just “ illustrators “ ; recently an abstract artist over here make a comment about my work saying “ your work is realist which to people like me is meaningless as we abstractionists are looking for “ deeper “ truths “ my reply was “ go and fuck yourself sideways you pretentious cretin “ he stormed off in a mighty huff which pleased me no end
I don’t know if you’ve watched David Hockney talk about the Dutch school of photo realistic painting and how Vermeer tackled his very complex subject matter , he claims certain artists used a Camera obscura / Camera-Lucida , there was a documentary on you tube regarding his findings it was fascinating to say the least
Durers watercolour of a Hare is incredible and when one thinks all the paints were ground by hand , have you seen his self portrait ? It’s amazing
Modern artists and kids coming out of college over here cannot paint or draw to a competent level , there are one or two exceptions , the arts council over here give out awards to students who create the “ most cutting edge art “ , recently a guy was awarded 84 ,000 euro a year grant for basically finding washed up rubbish on a beach and placing it on a studio floor
That’s fascinating about the murals in the Herculaneum I did not know that , I remember looking at ancient paintings from India and the way the perspective was all wrong and European artists had the very same problems with perspective until they figured it out
David Hockneys piece on you tube is fascinating regarding realist art several hundred years ago , here is a link to the documentary
On a brighter note , artistically there are a growing band of hyper realist artists around the world a lot are to be found in the U S and their influence is being felt worldwide , I know a few of them and they are true craft men’s and women with a love and reverence for this beautiful way of expressing ones self
Your wife studied art history which to me is truly a fascinating subject , I specialized in Renaissance art which is something I still have a love for as i’m still constantly astonished at just how brilliant these true masters of art were
My wife approached art history (in part) as a way to examine history, to get a better feel for changes in culture, (clothes, mores, technology, philosophy, commonly known stories.) She thinks it is disadvantageous and limiting that Art History departments are in Universities' schools of Fine Arts, not associate with the History, or even literature departments. (She also thinks that people need to study a period's or culture's art to understand the history.)
Despite the rigors of the program at SMU, she came to the conclusion that there were big holes in the required curriculum for the degree. Art historians need to learn about mythology and religion (she minored in world religion.) She thinks that Art History programs should include required coursework in those topics. Otherwise the subject matter is often mysterious and opaque, and the pieces make no sense.
Many artists produce works that are religious or mythical scenes, or from literature. Knowing each story is critical to understanding the insight into deeper truths the artist is showing through the inclusion of an object/element, the look on a face, or the gesture of a hand.
For example, try understanding the deeper truths of Carpeaux's Ugolino and His Sons without knowing it is an image from Dante's Inferno, and that Ugolino is in hell for treachery, having died of starvation when locked away with his sons. Without that information, there is nothing for the truth to be about. The piece is expressive of suffering, but without context, it could say nothing about justice. Hell, you might not even recognize that Ugolino is eating his own hands!
recently an abstract artist over here make a comment about my work saying “ your work is realist which to people like me is meaningless as we abstractionists are looking for “ deeper “ truths “
The problem is that so many think that they can approach "deeper 'truths'" by careless finger painting or playing with garbage. (Excuse me, playing with found objects.) They don't want to be accountable for knowing their truth before they try to express it in the artwork. They certainly don't want to be accountable for mastering the medium well enough to actually articulate their insight.
It is so much easier to throw something together, and let the viewer project some "deeper truth" onto it. The artist then has the option of pretending to have known it was there all along.
I do not mean to minimize the challenge. Even as a writer, in a much more forgiving and exact medium, it is difficult to articulate my observations and ideas clearly enough for my readers to understand what I actually mean. What I post on this site are not hastily written first drafts. I spend a lot of time and effort on my posts, and often I still fail to enable my audience to understand what I mean.
I can understand why so many "artists" do not want to spend decades mastering a medium to the degree that when they envision or plan an artwork, they can bring that mental image into reality in a block of marble or a painting in detail that supports the preexisting intent.
On the other hand, it could be that Mr. Abstractionist would not know a "deeper truth" if it chewed his dick off, and he is actually an Abstractionist because he has nothing to say or show to the world, and is waiting for the world to say it to him and simultaneously give him the credit.
That’s fascinating about the murals in the Herculaneum I did not know that , I remember looking at ancient paintings from India and the way the perspective was all wrong and European artists had the very same problems with perspective until they figured it out
Here is a link to a good one in Pompei. (http://buffaloah.com/a/virtual/italy/pomp/jpegs/murals/4b.jpg).
Note the combination of atmospheric and one-point perspective, and the shading on the edges of curved surfaces like the trees and pillars. We don't see anything this good until the 15th Century. Although Giotto used some of these techniques, his work still looks cartoonish.
Durers watercolour of a Hare is incredible and when one thinks all the paints were ground by hand , have you seen his self portrait ? It’s amazing
I actually held a couple Durer prints in my hand. I was allowed to join my wife's class in the Dallas Museum of Art Archives. The detail, and evenness of the lines was almost inhuman.
The professor was a Yale graduate, and was on loan from the Yale art history department. She had the difficulty with clear and logical thought common to every Yale graduate I have ever met. We were looking at two Durer prints:
One of Samson rending the Lion. (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ commons/6/6c/Albrecht Dürer-SamsonFightingwiththeLion(NGA_1964.8.1789).jpg), and
The professor asked, "What would be the connection between these if you were to put them together on the same wall?" She asked it as if she did not really know what the answer was. NONE of the students responded, so I ventured an obvious answer:
- Samson is a biblical Hercules, and they are different cultures' takes on heroes who possess strength of divine origin.
- Samson and Hercules were both personally flawed and lived lives marked with tragedy.
- - - Both Samson and Hercules had mischievous and malicious streaks.
- - - Both Samson and Hercules had relationships with women that ended unhappily.
- Each print includes imagery that is connected to the myth of the other.
- - - A Lion is featured in the Samson print, which resonates with Hercules killing the Nemean Lion.
- - - Behind Hercules in the print is a crone wielding the jawbone of an animal, which in turn resonates with Samson killing Philistines with the jawbone of an ass.
These are not particularly insightful observations, but that Yale-educated "scholar" scribbled like mad to record my response.
Really?
I was a guest to the class, and I had nothing to say about the medium or the artist's techniques.
How is it that just knowing common stories and identifying similarities is impressive enough to write down.
We don't just have a problem with sloppy or undisciplined artists. We have a problem with sloppy and undisciplined art scholarship and criticism.
I do not know what to think about AI, truthfully. What you are really asking comes down to "Is AI equivalent to human?"
I saw I Robot, and Sonny was as human seeming as any anthropomorphized cartoon character ever has been in a movie, but that is a result of my suspension of disbelief. That he makes art is some of what supports the audience buy-in that Sonny is essentially "human" (A "real boy" in the parlance of Pinocchio.)
I doubt that is how real AI will work. I think it will be VERY different than us.
Consider that the emotional content of human experience and expression is not based on logic, and it is not only neurological, but hormonal and visceral.
As a result, I am distrustful of the proposition that a being that cannot feel butterflies in its stomach when nervous, or is incapable of indigestion can feel real emotions, or create art by means that surpass the merely mechanical.
Marcus you have not defined what art is , you’re merely saying what art is not , so what is art ?
My observation is that in many modern academic and artistic circles, merely saying something is art has been given authority.
Often, the only way anyone would know it was supposed to be art is that it was given a title, put in a museum, and some critic/scholar/curator wrote some explanation of it in an article or museum label, regardless of whether the artifact meets any defined criteria whatsoever.
My son and I have a game we play in the modern art galleries of museums.
We stand in front of some mundane, purely functional object, for example, a fire extinguisher or drinking fountain mounted on the wall, or we contemplate a green exit sign mounted above a doorway, and then, in earnest tones, talk about it as if it is on exhibit.
. Me: The artist is clearly making a comment on modern man's frustration with societies sexual mores. The red cylinder, an obvious phallic reference, is constrained by a gauge, a handle, and a directable nozzle. This symbolizes the control society seeks to exert over men's sexual urges.
. My Son: Oh, clearly you are correct. This theme is further reinforced by the fact that society has put male sexuality into a closed box with a glass front, so we can see the male sexual self, but it is contained, separate from society, unable to express itself.
. Me: The artist even made a pun, writing on the case that imprisons the phallus 'In case' of emergencies, break glass.' This symbolizes the fragility of societies sexual rules, and a tacit admission that men are only wanted when there is grave societal need of masculine services, like war.
. My Son: This is a complex piece. There is a subtext about feminine power. The penis is painted red, a clear reference to menstruation. The case symbolizes the vagina, called a 'box' in slang, and the case is also a literal box. The male power is locked in the vagina....
And so on...
People can think anything is art if they want, and I am fine with that.
But that does not mean I won't make fun of them for it.
Yes , saying something is art holds sway academically , art is defined by many in academia as “ anything that gets a reaction “ ,
You and your son are pretty good at a game I love to play myself and it’s very funny and great fun , I convinced some tourists in Dublin years ago that three guys digging a hole outside the National Gallery were actually performance artists , the startled workers were astonished at the amount of photos this group started to take of their efforts at digging a decent sized hole .
Here is a little sample of art speak which I really like .......
My work explores the relationship between postmodern discourse and emotional memories.
With influences as diverse as Kierkegaard and John Lennon, new combinations are generated from both simple and complex layers.
Ever since I was a teenager I have been fascinated by the ephemeral nature of meaning. What starts out as triumph soon becomes corrupted into a tragedy of power, leaving only a sense of what could have been and the chance of a new understanding.
As temporal impressions become clarified through emergent and personal practice, the viewer is left with a glimpse of the inaccuracies of our future.
My work explores the relationship between postmodern discourse and emotional memories.
With influences as diverse as Kierkegaard and John Lennon, new combinations are generated from both simple and complex layers.
Ever since I was a teenager I have been fascinated by the ephemeral nature of meaning. What starts out as triumph soon becomes corrupted into a tragedy of power, leaving only a sense of what could have been and the chance of a new understanding.
As temporal impressions become clarified through emergent and personal practice, the viewer is left with a glimpse of the inaccuracies of our future.
As the viewer explores the imagery implicit in the negative space, the influences of the Neopretensionist movement become self-evident.
Here's the thing: some art classified as minimalism is actual art. Closing your eyes and moving a large paintbrush around a canvas is not art. Doing a splatter painting and selling it for $2,000 dollars is the equivalent of microwaving Top Ramen and selling it as genuine Japanese cuisine. In other words, it's an insult to everyone who's actually done something worth noticing.