THIS THREAD IS FOR THOUGHT PROVOKING PICTURES (NSFW)

[PadArch]

Originally Posted by gothicform

that's because most of the former isn't art, and most of the latter is



tracey emin shits on a bed... where's the quality or skill? aesthetic principles? beautiful? appealing? would anyone call tracey emin an artisan? the only thing that gives it special significance is it is in a gallery and thus afforded that significance.

You clearly don't have a clue about art, but that's fine. Artisan =/= artist. We already have enough pretty oil paintings in the world, if you start doing the same thing over and over again (painting pretty oil paintings) then what are we really learning from the process. If you look at art history you'll find that almost al art to a greater or lesser degree is contingent upon history, and the best art is sign of the times we are in. Whether or not you like tracey emin, her work tells us something about ourselves.

I think this old parable is interesting and describes the meaning of art somehow:

"A king once told his prime minister, who was also his good friend, “I see in the stars that whoever eats any grain that grows this year will go mad. What is your advice?”
The prime minister replied, “We must put aside enough grain so that we will not have to eat from this year’s harvest.”
The king objected, “But then we will be the only ones who will be sane. Everyone else will be mad. Therefore, they will think that we are the mad ones. It is impossible for us to put aside enough grain for everyone. Therefore, we too must eat this year’s grain. But we will make a mark on our foreheads, so that at least we will know that we are mad. I will look at your forehead, and you will look at mine, and when we see this sign, we will know that we are both mad.”

[Nightjar]

Oh God, don't get into a 'debate' with gothicform about semantics PadArch - you might find yourself writing page upon page of "superfluous waffle" just trying get out of it.

[gothicform]

You clearly don't have a clue about art, but that's fine. Artisan =/= artist. We already have enough pretty oil paintings in the world, if you start doing the same thing over and over again (painting pretty oil paintings) then what are we really learning from the process. If you look at art history you'll find that almost al art to a greater or lesser degree is contingent upon history, and the best art is sign of the times we are in. Whether or not you like tracey emin, her work tells us something about ourselves.

where did i mention oil paintings. i mentioned the definition of art, as taken from my oxford english dictionary. i mean imagine having a certain skill to produce art, and that it should have aesthetic values. nah i clearly don't have a clue. meanwhile time after time people have successfully shown you can literally put any old shit in a gallery and call it art and the only reason it is considered art is because it's in a gallery. every object tells us something about ourselves, go read yourself some durkheim.

btw, i'm on france 4 next month. they were doing a documentary on the leading architectural photographers in the country, looking at our work, and our thoughts on buildings. the segment on the shard is me. i clearly know nothing about art though! be sure to catch me.

[jerseyboi]

[Octoman]

Having been exposed to a lot more art by virtue of the missus doing an art degree I suppose I have become more tolerant of the more esoteric work. The work of Rothko for instance which I really quite like I would have readily dismissed as pointless shite only a year ago. Likewise, my wife introduced my to Juan Miro and I absolutely love it. She did explain the meaning to me after which I found a deeper appreciation of the work. I guess I am happy to be lectured by my wife whereas I might have immediately baulked at some 'art world fanny' trying to make me look thick.

That said, I have come to realise that the so called intelectualisation of a piece of work tends to come after the event. Having a decent story behind the work is as much part of the process as the work itself. The students universally find this whole concept bullshit but feel compelled to go along with it. They tend to produce a piece of art and then afterwards create a convincing back story, research etc. I met a lot of the course the other week when we met for dinner and this topic came up. Most of them agreed that a bit more honesty from artists would go a long way. Simply saying 'its a pretty painting' rather than having to come up with some contrived nonsense should suffice but like athletes all forced to use steriods wishing they could all just agree to stop together they seem to be stuck in this intellectual cul-de-sac. Not in all cases but in many.

[Jack Rabbit Slim]

[kids]

Most of Tracey Emin's work (like most artists) is strongly visual and makes use of vivid colour and "artisan" skills (use of neon, drawing, painting, sewing). The bed is probably the only thing of hers that you could say "I could do that" and yet it defines her work and all contemporary art.

[Nightjar]

Originally Posted by Octoman

Having been exposed to a lot more art by virtue of the missus doing an art degree I suppose I have become more tolerant of the more esoteric work. The work of Rothko for instance which I really quite like I would have readily dismissed as pointless shite only a year ago. Likewise, my wife introduced my to Juan Miro and I absolutely love it. She did explain the meaning to me after which I found a deeper appreciation of the work. I guess I am happy to be lectured by my wife whereas I might have immediately baulked at some 'art world fanny' trying to make me look thick.

That said, I have come to realise that the so called intelectualisation of a piece of work tends to come after the event. Having a decent story behind the work is as much part of the process as the work itself. The students universally find this whole concept bullshit but feel compelled to go along with it. They tend to produce a piece of art and then afterwards create a convincing back story, research etc. I met a lot of the course the other week when we met for dinner and this topic came up. Most of them agreed that a bit more honesty from artists would go a long way. Simply saying 'its a pretty painting' rather than having to come up with some contrived nonsense should suffice but like athletes all forced to use steriods wishing they could all just agree to stop together they seem to be stuck in this intellectual cul-de-sac. Not in all cases but in many.

Top post Octo.

Originally Posted by gothicform

where did i mention oil paintings. i mentioned the definition of art, as taken from my oxford english dictionary. i mean imagine having a certain skill to produce art, and that it should have aesthetic values. nah i clearly don't have a clue. meanwhile time after time people have successfully shown you can literally put any old shit in a gallery and call it art and the only reason it is considered art is because it's in a gallery. every object tells us something about ourselves, go read yourself some durkheim.

btw, i'm on france 4 next month. they were doing a documentary on the leading architectural photographers in the country, looking at our work, and our thoughts on buildings. the segment on the shard is me. i clearly know nothing about art though! be sure to catch me.

As ever, you're just having a debate with yourself.

[gothicform]

i am? by responding to a poster quoting me who i then quote in a response. is that poster me too?

Originally Posted by kids

Most of Tracey Emin's work (like most artists) is strongly visual and makes use of vivid colour and "artisan" skills (use of neon, drawing, painting, sewing). The bed is probably the only thing of hers that you could say "I could do that" and yet it defines her work and all contemporary art.

ummmm artisan does not refer to the skill set... a child can do all that too. artisan refers to a certain ability at doing it.

take a look through her drawings and tell me this is someone with skill? i suspect most people here can draw as well.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=tr...JcnF8gOJ47HiBg

the alternative is that not all artists are artisans, and that then suggests very strongly they are lacking skill - so why should they be considered artists? it's a bit like calling a 7 year old badly playing a recorder a musician, because they can play music.

Having been exposed to a lot more art by virtue of the missus doing an art degree I suppose I have become more tolerant of the more esoteric work. The work of Rothko for instance which I really quite like I would have readily dismissed as pointless shite only a year ago. Likewise, my wife introduced my to Juan Miro and I absolutely love it. She did explain the meaning to me after which I found a deeper appreciation of the work. I guess I am happy to be lectured by my wife whereas I might have immediately baulked at some 'art world fanny' trying to make me look thick.

interesting you mention rothko. he's a good example of actual art i think for a number of reasons. if you saw his work lying around and you didn't know who it was or what it was you'd probably think it was art. he certainly had a high level of skill in using colours and oils. if you saw tracey emins drawings lying around you'd probably conclude they were done by a school child who likes drawing bad nudes.

[Kampflamm]

If I can do it, it's not art.

[Nightjar]

Don't be so hard on yourself.

[kids]

Originally Posted by gothicform

ummmm artisan does not refer to the skill set... a child can do all that too. artisan refers to a certain ability at doing it.

take a look through her drawings and tell me this is someone with skill? i suspect most people here can draw as well

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=tr...JcnF8gOJ47HiBg

the alternative is that not all artists are artisans, and that then suggests very strongly they are lacking skill - so why should they be considered artists? it's a bit like calling a 7 year old badly playing a recorder a musician, because they can play music.

Yeah, that is someone with clear skill. No one in here (nightjar might disagree) could produce anything anywhere near as striking with a pen and a piece of paper.

[gothicform]

if that is considered skill i despair. clearly i spend too long hanging around with architects to know what a good draughtsman is. do you think that she would be capable of doing anything more complicated than a doodle of half a torso? now dali was a draughtsman.

[Kampflamm]

This is proper art:

[kids]

Originally Posted by gothicform

if that is considered skill i despair. clearly i spend too long hanging around with architects to know what a good draughtsman is. do you think that she would be capable of doing anything more complicated than a doodle of half a torso? now dali was a draughtsman.

She can imbue lines with intense feeling, you can't do that. She's skilled at drawing.

[gothicform]

Originally Posted by kids

She can imbue lines with intense feeling, you can't do that. She's skilled at drawing.

you mean she stabs at the paper like a seven year old. imbue lines with feeling. jesus. there is no tone, poor layout, mangled perspectives, and an almost complete lack of artistry. if imbuing lines with feeling is the qualification these days then every school child around qualifies.

and you know the really sad thing. tracey emin got appointed as professor of drawing at the royal academy.

someone else said it best

She has no craft - so she's covers this up with bad pictures which are called expressionist

Many expressionists were skilled in the art of drawing and painting - the thing was they did not to make placemats or chockybox designs but things which would impact - they used their great artistic skills to convey this. Emin has severely limited skills and what she produces is at best derivative if not mediocre and boring.

THIS is how to draw

[JackSwan]

Originally Posted by kids

She can imbue lines with intense feeling.

ha!

[kids]

To be frank I think most people would go with the Royal Academy's position to judge a good drawer over yours or some commenter under a blog. Have you actually never considered that all those things you mentioned could be intentional? And you seem to be picking up on specifically her craft now when before you were using her as an example of all contemporary art.

[Core Rising]

Originally Posted by gothicform

THIS is how to draw

There is no way that would sell. Needs more chandeliers.

[kids]

Originally Posted by JackSwan

ha!

I'm shrugging because that is precisely what she does with her drawings. I don't know how else I could have described them and it's depressing to me that you would think it's pretentious of me to say that.