"art"- what is it good for?

[ProgMatinee]

So I read some recent thread that got closed in the Buffy section because a piece of art got called out as gross or whatever and the maker was up in arms.

Anyway, it got me remembering how much I love art but hate artists....well, their apparent attitudes they often have anyway.

A year ago or so I was at the Denver Museum or Art and they had this painting which I found personally appalling:

Anyway, I mentioned to the museum people I didn't appreciate seeing it and they basically blew me off and said that the whole point of art was to challenge my beliefs or whatever. I was like, "f-that" and I cancelled my membership.

Anyway, I really like beautiful art, but often can care less about the political or social statement some artist is trying to force on me, but what really gets me is the artist's belief that I have no right to call it appalling or lame or criticize the message.

Anyone have thoughts on that?

 

[gdb]

"Art" is a very personal thing. You have every right to react to it. You're out of line if you want to propagandize your reaction and/or try to have something removed because, after all, everyone else has their right to react to it as well.

 

[willowswarlok]

So I read some recent thread that got closed in the Buffy section because a piece of art got called out as gross or whatever and the maker was up in arms.

Oh my god

the reason the maker.....ME...."got up in arms" about this wasnt because my piece of art was being called gross. I knew it wasnt everyones thing when i made it.

The reason i got "up in arms" as u put it. Is because the comments were personally directed at me. I dont appreciate being called sick/twisted or perverted, or the "lowest of the low" simply because i create a figure for a special niche of fans

Also, i didnt ask that the thread be locked. Im all for people having an opinion. I really am. But when comments get nasty and start getting directed at me. Thats not an opinion, thats being plain nasty

 

[nash]

I agree it is personal and opinionated. You have every right to hate it as much as they have every right to paint/create it. But for someone to want something to be taken down because it is offensive to them....are you really in the right? If you have your right to express your feelings and beliefs then what about the artist?

 

[Rook]

Sure I do: The museum guy was right.

Art is more than just paintings of pretty flowers and a finely-crafted likeness on an action figure, man. Art at its best goes way deeper than that, and reflects or challenges notions and ideas that deal with human nature. It questions the political dogma du jour, and points fingers at the ugly things about ourselves that we find uncomfortable to look upon.

But most importantly, it reminds us that the world is bigger than each of us as individuals, and that out own beliefs are simply our own beliefs, and that there are an infinite number of alternate perspectives out there. It teaches us to question our assumptions and, in so doing, and with any luck at all, to grow from the experience.

So open up to it, take it in. If you find that something within you has changed, excellent. If not, ignore it and move on.

But to step up onto a soapbox and call it wrong, obscene, inappropriate or whatever is to encourage censorship. Which, in the end, always stems from close-minded arrogance, or a poorly conceived urge to shape the world in one's own image.

No one wants to believe these things about themselves. I certainly didn't want to 15 years ago. But I opened myself up to new things, new ideas. And I feel I've grown and become better for it. And I'm not finished!

It's been my firm belief for years now that when you give up on growing, you give up on living. If, at any point in your life, you start to behave like what you know at any given moment is everything you're ever going to know, then you've effectively ended your life at that moment. As soon as you stop letting in new ideas and new possibilities, what's the point? After that, all you're doing is just standing around and waiting to die.

 

[nash]

well said monk

 

[El Roranous]

I agree it is personal and opinionated. You have every right to hate it as much as they have every right to paint/create it. But for someone to want something to be taken down because it is offensive to them....are you really in the right? If you have your right to express your feelings and beliefs then what about the artist?

I agree.

It was really rude of you to ask them to take it down just because you didn't like it- who are you, king of all Morality and all that is Good? No, they have a right to paint and express themselves just as you have the right to dislike it. You just have to get over yourself and learn to cope and if you can't cope then don't bother to look at the art that you question.

 

[ProgMatinee]

As an individual, I don't have the right to take down someone's art in a museum because that would be against property law.

However, I have every right as a museum member to voice displeasure and as a museum they had the right to decline my opinion and thus I had the right to cancel my membership.

The attitude that I shouldn't have said anything is exactly the point I disagree with. Just because someone has artistic ability doesn't put more credence to their socio or political ideas and therefore be given a place to freely air it without rebuke.

The idea that I should have "ignored" it as much a move of censorship as me voicing my displeasure about it. I daresay it smacks of fascism more than my humble and democratic request.

 

[willowswarlok]

As an individual, I don't have the right to take down someone's art in a museum because that would be against property law.

However, I have every right as a museum member to ask it be taken down and as a museum they had the right to decline and thus I had the right to cancel my membership.

The attitude that I shouldn't have said anything is exactly the point I disagree with. Just because someone has artistic ability doesn't put more credence to their socio or political ideas and therefore be given a place to freely air it without rebuke.

But you cant exactly expect to go to a gallery and like everything inside. every person is different. something you love, might be loathed by another person. You wouldnt be very happy if someone else had complained about a piece of work you loved, would you?

If they had a piece removed, you would be upset because you never got the chance to see it, because someone else didnt like it.

ive been to plenty of galleries, i absolutely hated some of the things. but i didnt complain.

Did you ever hear about that stupid thing in a gallery in London. Cant remember which, i went there. Maybe Tate Modern. They had a video of David Beckham, sleeping. How pointless is that? Yet it was considered art, therefore, people have a right to see it, despite the fact it was stupid

 

[ProgMatinee]

But you cant exactly expect to go to a gallery and like everything inside. every person is different. something you love, might be loathed by another person. You wouldnt be very happy if someone else had complained about a piece of work you loved, would you?

If they had a piece removed, you would be upset because you never got the chance to see it, because someone else didnt like it.

ive been to plenty of galleries, i absolutely hated some of the things. but i didnt complain.

Did you ever hear about that stupid thing in a gallery in London. Cant remember which, i went there. Maybe Tate Modern. They had a video of David Beckham, sleeping. How pointless is that? Yet it was considered art, therefore, people have a right to see it, despite the fact it was stupid

I agree with you, but its all a democratic process, especially at a publicly funded facility. To not speak up when you think something is stupid or sick or whatever is basically allowing the funds to be spent foolishly. Likewise, its beneficial to voice your pleasure with a work so the museum know to bring more of that in.

Also, I want to say I didn't "demand" it be taken down. I just told them I didn't like it. If they said, "noted" or even "others do like it" I might not have canceled. But they had the "tough crap get over it" smug response that artists seem to have.

 

[lcummins]

I think that a healthy, civil, discourse about this subject is good so please stay on subject, and no insulting other members please.

 

[Trevolver]

Yep Art should be as varied as people themselves are. We need it all.

Trev

 

[Batty]

Anyway, I really like beautiful art, but often can care less about the political or social statement some artist is trying to force on me, but what really gets me is the artist's belief that I have no right to call it appalling or lame or criticize the message.

Was this the artist's belief or the museum's?

 

[Bannister]

"I am just a simple Cave Man. I do not understand all these big words and discussions about art."

 

[nash]

"I am just a simple Cave Man. I do not understand all these big words and discussions about art."

 

[Bannister]

That is obscene cave art. Remove that picture immediately.

 

[ProgMatinee]

Was this the artist's belief or the museum's?

The artist wasn't there to hear my side. Maybe I should send him some "art".

 

[Bannister]

Did you ever hear about that stupid thing in a gallery in London. Cant remember which, i went there. Maybe Tate Modern. They had a video of David Beckham, sleeping. How pointless is that? Yet it was considered art, therefore, people have a right to see it, despite the fact it was stupid

 

[bidge1000]

So I read some recent thread that got closed in the Buffy section because a piece of art got called out as gross or whatever and the maker was up in arms.

Anyway, it got me remembering how much I love art but hate artists....well, their apparent attitudes they often have anyway.

A year ago or so I was at the Denver Museum or Art and they had this painting which I found personally appalling:

Anyway, I mentioned to the museum people I didn't appreciate seeing it and they basically blew me off and said that the whole point of art was to challenge my beliefs or whatever. I was like, "f-that" and I cancelled my membership.

Anyway, I really like beautiful art, but often can care less about the political or social statement some artist is trying to force on me, but what really gets me is the artist's belief that I have no right to call it appalling or lame or criticize the message.

Anyone have thoughts on that?

you must ask yourself why you are so offended? Is it the innocence or the evil? Or apparent evil. I mean what gets you, the fact that a couple of joes are wearing SS Nazi uniforms? Or the fact that a baby is naked? Does it make that person in the photo any more bigoted than yourself by your generalised hatred of artists? Sometimes artists challenge people views because they need to be challenged? The very fact that you posted on here with an opinion I don't agree with appalls me, but there it is, it's there for the world to see and more power to you for expressing yourself. Just don't be so quick to stifle other peoples expression.

D

 

[Batty]

The artist wasn't there to hear my side. Maybe I should send him some "art".

So who are you angry at? Are you mad at the artist for creating this piece or the museum for saying you shouldn't have an opinion? What exactly did they say to you at the museum, btw?