Author Topic: "I don't get art"  (Read 11667 times)

Aunt Maud

  • Le Flâneur.
Re: "I don't get art"
« Reply #100 on: November 20, 2015, 09:33:01 am »

A powerful juxtaposition of the quotidian and the sublime. <strokes chin>

 the obscure language of art that deliberately makes it challenging to understand

That would be, er, English then?

Of course that's written in English, but it's not the form of English which the majority use.......If that makes sense.

There are very few who would use a word like "quotidian" to describe anything.

Re: "I don't get art"
« Reply #101 on: November 20, 2015, 09:35:12 am »
No, it's not in quotidian use on this forum that's for sure.
Sic transit and all that..

Aunt Maud

  • Le Flâneur.
Re: "I don't get art"
« Reply #102 on: November 20, 2015, 09:55:57 am »
No, it's not in quotidian use on this forum that's for sure.

The quotidian man in the street wouldn't use quotidian at all, and it's a great example of a word which would be found in an art essay that would be challenging for most people to understand.

This is why most people don't "get" art, as they approach it in a visual way and rate it on it's technical merits when they first see it. If it's poorly made, no amount of clever, verbal gymnastics will make them change the way they view it, because they don't understand what's being said.

citoyen

  • Cat 6 Racer
Re: &quot;I don't get art&quot;
« Reply #103 on: November 20, 2015, 10:23:39 am »

I heartily recommend John Berger's 1972 classic Ways of Seeing

That is superb. I've heard of it but never seen it before. Thanks for the link.

Aunt Maud

  • Le Flâneur.
Re: "I don't get art"
« Reply #104 on: November 20, 2015, 10:29:59 am »
I made a reference earlier to Malevich's Black Square. For most of us, and possibly Malevich too, it's just a black square......it might mean something, or it might not.

Ruthie

  • Her Majester
Re: "I don't get art"
« Reply #105 on: November 20, 2015, 10:30:07 am »

A powerful juxtaposition of the quotidian and the sublime. <strokes chin>

 the obscure language of art that deliberately makes it challenging to understand

That would be, er, English then?

Of course that's written in English, but it's not the form of English which the majority use.......If that makes sense.

There are very few who would use a word like "quotidian" to describe anything.

I disagree.  It's a word I'm very familiar with, and I am most ordinary.
Milk please, no sugar.

Aunt Maud

  • Le Flâneur.
Re: "I don't get art"
« Reply #106 on: November 20, 2015, 10:33:12 am »

A powerful juxtaposition of the quotidian and the sublime. <strokes chin>

 the obscure language of art that deliberately makes it challenging to understand

That would be, er, English then?

Of course that's written in English, but it's not the form of English which the majority use.......If that makes sense.

There are very few who would use a word like "quotidian" to describe anything.

I disagree.  It's a word I'm very familiar with, and I am most ordinary.

Lets have a poll, I'd be interested in how many use quotidian regularly.


red marley

Re: "I don't get art"
« Reply #107 on: November 20, 2015, 10:36:06 am »
Good idea. We could then have rule that said no-one should ever use a word someone has not heard of. That way, within  a generation we can cease to use language completely.

Re: "I don't get art"
« Reply #108 on: November 20, 2015, 10:43:45 am »
Good idea. We could then have rule that said no-one should ever use a word someone has not heard of. That way, within  a generation we can cease to use language completely.

"..........................."

Cudzoziemiec

  • Solar powered, tea fuelled cycle-wol
Re: "I don't get art"
« Reply #109 on: November 20, 2015, 10:45:31 am »
I heartily recommend John Berger's 1972 classic Ways of Seeing that includes an informed and accessible discussion of obfuscation and insight in art appreciation. It's handily available in paper and video media.

https://youtu.be/0pDE4VX_9Kk
Bearing in mind what he says in the last 90 seconds, it would be funny to see that remade as some sort of blog.

Also: paintings silent? After he's told us many were altarpieces and shown us the icons at what looked like Easter?

Also: subtitles full of mistakes!
sideways bounding monkey lounging under fruit tree

Aunt Maud

  • Le Flâneur.
Re: "I don't get art"
« Reply #110 on: November 20, 2015, 11:33:14 am »
Good idea. We could then have rule that said no-one should ever use a word someone has not heard of. That way, within  a generation we can cease to use language completely.

Or a sign.

......."In an attempt to make sense of this work and the artists incoherent ramblings, each viewer is issued with a hardback thesaurus at the gallery entrance."

citoyen

  • Cat 6 Racer
Re: "I don't get art"
« Reply #111 on: November 20, 2015, 11:56:15 am »
The quotidian man in the street wouldn't use quotidian at all, and it's a great example of a word which would be found in an art essay that would be challenging for most people to understand.

The word was carefully chosen. The intent was parody. I could easily have conveyed the same meaning by phrasing the comment in more accessible terms.

Quote
This is why most people don't "get" art, as they approach it in a visual way and rate it on it's technical merits when they first see it. If it's poorly made, no amount of clever, verbal gymnastics will make them change the way they view it, because they don't understand what's being said.

Berger's take on this is most entertaining. If you haven't watched the vid linked to upthread, you should - you'd enjoy it, especially the bit where he gets a bunch of schoolkids to interpret Caravaggio. He's brilliantly scathing about the National Gallery's guidebook.

There's a balancing act involved in talking about art. The challenge is to find something more interesting to say than the vacuously banal ("it's nice", "I like it") without resorting to art critic wankery.

clarion

  • Tyke
Re: "I don't get art"
« Reply #112 on: November 20, 2015, 12:13:13 pm »
I heartily recommend John Berger's 1972 classic Ways of Seeing that includes an informed and accessible discussion of obfuscation and insight in art appreciation. It's handily available in paper and video media.

https://youtu.be/0pDE4VX_9Kk



Useful mention.  This is my favourite book on art.  And my favourite book on photography, though it is not about photography.
Getting there...

clarion

  • Tyke
Re: "I don't get art"
« Reply #113 on: November 20, 2015, 12:14:33 pm »
Art should speak emotion to whoever's looking at it. Again that's just my opinion. It should also show some degree of skill.
It's also my opinion. Dumping shit on someone's doorstep elicits emotion, but doesn't require skill. Skill can be in thinking of something novel, not only in execution (e.g. Rachael Whiteread's House, which I liked, & I don't care that she had to get others to make it for her), but I think it should be present.

Of course, cans of artist's poo* were in themselves an artwork

* perhaps.  This may be Schrodinger's cack.
Getting there...

clarion

  • Tyke
Re: "I don't get art"
« Reply #114 on: November 20, 2015, 12:19:37 pm »
It did cross my mind earlier in this thread, when would that ^ image crop up? (and it has been cropped  ;))
Smell, what about smell as a medium?
And light, what about light.
The work of Dan Flavin, anyone?
Or Olafur Eliasson?

Light is totally an artistic medium, and one I've crafted myself on occasion.

(You could reasonably argue that light is the medium of photography, and all that film-sensor-print-project stuff is just a way of reproducing it later.)

Smell?  Perfumes, wines, cookery... plenty of scope for art there.

I have used light as a creative medium on many occasions.

As for smell, I did so unintentionally.  I had a sculpture displayed entitled 'Violets'n'Herring In The Cistern'.  The herring were real (as were the violets, and the cistern, but that's not important right now).  They were all the more real on hte Monday morning after the Opening Night party, when I had forgotten to remove and dispose of said fish. :-[

For what it is worth, I love Fischli & Weiss.
Getting there...

Re: "I don't get art"
« Reply #115 on: November 20, 2015, 12:28:44 pm »
So a painting is only worth doing if it is something pretty?

Can I refer you back to my definition of art being to do with communication?
You can, but that doesn't necessarily make it the truth, or at least the whole truth. I agree that it's partly about that, but I think it's got to also look good.

Lowry didn't just paint landscapes, he painted people in landscapes. He painted unpleasant, ugly landscapes that (at the time) most of society would rather pretend didn't exist.

Yes, and I wouldn't want to hang a  Lowry on my wall because I don't think it looks particularly nice.
I make the distinction between Lowry and most abstract art in that a Lowry is art, but bad art, because it took skill to think up and create, but just doesn't look good, whereas most abstract art is dubious as to whether I would even class it as art.

You could paint a really intricate detailed picture of the inside of a sewer and it would have probably took skill to create and might even convey an idea but I wouldn't hang it on my wall.

Flowchart:
                                                                           Did it take skill to create AND think up ?
                                                                           /                                        \
                                                                          /                                          \
                                                                       No = not art.                        Yes
                                                                   e.g. Damien Hirst                        |
                                                                                                         Does it look good?
                                                                                                                   /     \
                                                                                                                  /        \
                                                                                                              Yes=       No =
                                                                                                        Good art     Bad Art e.g. Lowry

You are to 'Art' as Steve Jobs was to 'Fatherhood'?
Sic transit and all that..

Aunt Maud

  • Le Flâneur.
Re: "I don't get art"
« Reply #116 on: November 20, 2015, 12:35:43 pm »
The quotidian man in the street wouldn't use quotidian at all, and it's a great example of a word which would be found in an art essay that would be challenging for most people to understand.

The word was carefully chosen. The intent was parody. I could easily have conveyed the same meaning by phrasing the comment in more accessible terms.

Quote
This is why most people don't "get" art, as they approach it in a visual way and rate it on it's technical merits when they first see it. If it's poorly made, no amount of clever, verbal gymnastics will make them change the way they view it, because they don't understand what's being said.

Berger's take on this is most entertaining. If you haven't watched the vid linked to upthread, you should - you'd enjoy it, especially the bit where he gets a bunch of schoolkids to interpret Caravaggio. He's brilliantly scathing about the National Gallery's guidebook.

There's a balancing act involved in talking about art. The challenge is to find something more interesting to say than the vacuously banal ("it's nice", "I like it") without resorting to art critic wankery.

I've read it about 25 years ago, but I can't remember any of it.

When I studied at The LCP I didn't go to any lectures, as I thought it was a complete load of bollox. Luckily I could bunk off and gatecrash the Professional Photographic Practice course which was running parallel to the BA Hons. I got into big trouble though, as the BA lecturers couldn't handle that I wasn't towing the "party line" even though I regurgitated the necessary art speak for essays.

I still like art though, although if it has to display a high level of craft for me to really appreciate it.


Eccentrica Gallumbits

  • Rock 'n' roll and brew, rock 'n' roll and brew...
Re: "I don't get art"
« Reply #117 on: November 20, 2015, 12:58:19 pm »
Good idea. We could then have rule that said no-one should ever use a word someone has not heard of. That way, within  a generation we can cease to use language completely.
And only communicate by emoticon?
My feminist marxist dialectic brings all the boys to the yard.


Re: "I don't get art"
« Reply #118 on: November 20, 2015, 01:10:22 pm »
Good idea. We could then have rule that said no-one should ever use a word someone has not heard of. That way, within  a generation we can cease to use language completely.
And only communicate by emoticon?

 :facepalm:
Sic transit and all that..

Cudzoziemiec

  • Solar powered, tea fuelled cycle-wol
Re: "I don't get art"
« Reply #119 on: November 20, 2015, 01:24:33 pm »
Only if those emoticons are affectless.
sideways bounding monkey lounging under fruit tree

LEE

  • "Shut Up Jens" - Legs.
Re: "I don't get art"
« Reply #120 on: November 20, 2015, 01:30:44 pm »
Art is identical to music in that you either "get it" or you don't.

I don't "get" the huge slabs of Rothko colour.  OK, I may hang one in a room if it sort of matched the colour scheme but I can't see why it's so valuable.

However I love "Warm Leatherette" by The Normal and I expect many people would say "WTF?" if they heard its monotone tune and emotionless delivery.

"Modern" Jazz basically "does my f***ing head in" and yet millions love it, so the problem is mine it seems.  Apparently lots of it is, musically, technically brilliant where "Warm Leatherette" most certainly isn't, but I really "get it".

Art as an investment is not at all related to talent, craft or "getting it" though. 
That's a different topic altogether. If I could afford a Rothko I'd probably buy it, knowing I could sell it in 5 years and buy a 4 Bed detached house in Clapham with the profit. 
That's nothing to do with "getting" art, that's about "getting" good business.
Some people say I'm self-obsessed but that's enough about them.

red marley

Re: "I don't get art"
« Reply #121 on: November 20, 2015, 01:56:48 pm »

Re: "I don't get art"
« Reply #122 on: November 20, 2015, 02:18:24 pm »
I used to get art a lot more than I do now.  I think it's because I have a better diet now.

Aunt Maud

  • Le Flâneur.
Re: "I don't get art"
« Reply #123 on: November 20, 2015, 02:21:49 pm »
You don't need to "get anything" to appreciate art.

If you like it because of the colour or shape, that's fine. If you pretend you like it because someone who appears a bit more "art savvy" likes it and you just want to fit in with the crowd, that's a bit worrying.


Mr Larrington

  • A bit ov a lyv wyr by slof standirds
  • Custard Wallah
    • Mr Larrington's Automatic Diary
Re: "I don't get art"
« Reply #124 on: November 20, 2015, 02:24:09 pm »
You are in a maze of twisty little galleries, all alike, except for the ones that aren't.  In your pocket is a guidebook.  You have skipped lunch to avoid the crowds of gawking hipsters, Norwegian students with huge rucksacks and art critics.

Ahead of you is a plinth.  The plinth is tastefully lit in a manner that suggests little expense has been spared to give the impression that no expense has been spared.

On the plinth is a salami.

>TAKE SALAMI

A hollow voice says "PLUGH"

>TURN AROUND

On the wall hangs a framed picture.  It looks like something your dog has sicked up.

>CONSULT GUIDE

The Guide tells you that the picture is a powerful juxtaposition of the quotidian and the sublime.

>EAT SALAMI

Alarm bells start ringing.  The noise is like being trapped in a lift with three separate music systems each playing a different Laibach album.

>RUN THE FUCK AWAY

You are now at a T-junction, and hopelessly lost.  To your left is a long corridor lined with display cases.  Each case appears to contain a shrunken head.

To your right is a long corridor.  It is poorly lit but there appears to be a door at the end.  Of it.

>TURN RIGHT

>WALK FORWARD

All the lights go out.  There is a scuffling noise.  You are eaten by Waldemar Januszczak.

GAME OVER
External Transparent Wall Inspection Operative & Mayor of Mortagne-au-Perche
Satisfying the Bloodlust of the Masses in Peacetime