Exhibition at MOCA in L.A.

[KanadaHye]

Re: Exhibition at MOCA in L.A.

Meanings? Meanings are not so important when interpretting art.

Here's a good example... I just made the attached. It has lots of meaning - how I want to be with my grandfather and I'm wearing his clothes to be close to him but really it's useless and he's still dead. And it's crap art. Meaning is great as a source of inspiration for the artist but neither that nor technique is responsible for carrying the esssence of its art.

I like your crap art better. I can relate to it. The value on art isn't priced by your run of the mill average joes. It's like baseball or basketball cards, some authority sets the price.

[Stark Evade]

Re: Exhibition at MOCA in L.A.

I never discussed price, queefer.

[KanadaHye]

Re: Exhibition at MOCA in L.A.

What you consider essence and what I consider B.S. is separated by the value. If meanings aren't important when interpreting art, what are you interpreting? Everyone looks for vision.

[bell-the-cat]

Re: Exhibition at MOCA in L.A.

Meanings? Meanings are not so important when interpretting art.

Here's a good example... I just made the attached. It has lots of meaning - how I want to be with my grandfather and I'm wearing his clothes to be close to him but really it's useless and he's still dead. And it's crap art. Meaning is great as a source of inspiration for the artist but neither that nor technique is responsible for carrying the esssence of its art.

Of course meanings are not so important - but that is because Modern Art is mostly without a discernable meaning. Ask a artist what his/her work means and he'll either come away with some "what do you think it means?" bull, or act insulted about the impertinance of expecting an artist to explain anything.

But actually most modern art is devoid of meaning because most artists have absolutely nothing to say beyond "look at me, look at me, I'm an artist, my work is meaningful because I'm an artist, now pay me lots of money!".

I think Gorky has become more important/popular in recent years because people, fed-up and unsatisfied with the empty arrogance of today's typical artist, assume that there must be something important in and behind Gorky's work because of who he was and the life he led.

[Yedtarts]

Re: Exhibition at MOCA in L.A.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

Looks like a crap, maybe it's just a crap. it smells je_wsy

As I predicted, I rest my case!

http://www.huntfor.com/absoluteig/rothko.htm

Mark Rothko was born Marcus Rothkowitz to xxxish family in Dvinsk, Russia (now Latvia)

[KanadaHye]

Re: Exhibition at MOCA in L.A.

As I predicted, I rest my case!

Who else can afford to put 8 pieces of junk in a shiny white room?

[Yedtarts]

Re: Exhibition at MOCA in L.A.

^^^

[Stark Evade]

Re: Exhibition at MOCA in L.A.

Of course meanings are not so important - but that is because Modern Art is mostly without a discernable meaning. Ask a artist what his/her work means and he'll either come away with some "what do you think it means?" bull, or act insulted about the impertinance of expecting an artist to explain anything.

But actually most modern art is devoid of meaning because most artists have absolutely nothing to say beyond "look at me, look at me, I'm an artist, my work is meaningful because I'm an artist, now pay me lots of money!".

I think Gorky has become more important/popular in recent years because people, fed-up and unsatisfied with the empty arrogance of today's typical artist, assume that there must be something important in and behind Gorky's work because of who he was and the life he led.

Either meanings are important or they are not. One can make (or could have made in any era) crappy art that has a discernable meaning and yet it will never be anything other than crappy art. That is an illustration of why the meaning doesn't make the art and it has nothing to do with whether it is a modern work or otherwise.

And by the way, most old paintings are also lacking in meaning. There are no meanings in the many landscapes. And the fact that it is a landscape doesn't guarantee that it would be a good painting or a bad one or even average. Countless portraits are completely without meaning. They were painted because noblemen paid to have them painted. That's it. Many of them are wonderful and even more are forgettable. And yet you can argue that the religious paintings have "meaning" but does the fact that they have a religious subject matter guarantee that they would be remarkable works? No.

Gorky has always been important, actually. He was one of the older members of and a strong influence on the Abstract Expressionists of the New York School, which is the most celebrated group of abstract artists.

[KanadaHye]

Re: Exhibition at MOCA in L.A.

I never discussed price, queefer.

And.... yes you did

If I were to then ask you which painting has the most artistic value and has made the most impact in the art world, would you honestly be able to answer the question? I don't think so. The difficulty then is to consciously accept what you already feel at some level unconsciously. It doesn't matter that it is simple.

[Stark Evade]

Re: Exhibition at MOCA in L.A.

And.... yes you did

I wasn't talking about price in that quote. Nice try.