Off Topic This is the time I like to call the 'gentlemen' hour

I like art to look at, not think over.

If it looks cool, is pretty, or just a generally really good portrait of someone/landscape piece then it's gravy

None of that "ooh here's a yellow circle and it means i'm sad"

 

There can be deeper meaning, but I don't search for it, enjoy it or care to be exposed to people discussing it. I don't mind so much if it's something clearly represented, but once it gets abstract and the tiniest stroke is interpreted in some fanciful way that makes it sound profound...

 

I like that Intergalactic art ****!

Its mint!

 

Yeah, I agree to a degree. There's a lot of bullshit out there which represents essentially nothing but could fill a book with the amount of 'hidden depths' attributed to it. But at the same time, the most interesting things about paintings are found when they're studied and examined. What does this mean, why is 'x' doing this or 'y' doing that? etc.

Ah right, yeah. As I said above I agree with you there.

 

I just get bored by all these people talking bollocks and really believing themselves. I could chuck a few eggs at a canvas and pass it off as it symbolising the chickens' fight for acceptance in their predominantly airbourne species. It also shows the chickens fighting on another front, against the multi-national corporations who exploit them for their meat and eggs and have no form of profit-sharing program for the fowl community.

 

I always get annoyed when people ask 'why he painted this?' etc.

The answer always gets looked into and is never just 'cos he felt like it'.

 

Yeah I know what you mean. The type of art that biggeordiedave is on about annoys me
Being an english study I generally have to read into things loads anyway. Had to study modernist art this term.

 

Ralph Vaughan Williams famously responded to speculation over the depth and meaning behind his sixth symphony by essentially saying 'Can't a guy just write a piece of music?' What's interesting is that most artists in all areas of the arts will be making art for art's sake and not for some bullshit reason that critics or pretentious snobs come out with.

 

I know many don't class it as art but I think he's very clever anyway.
Banksy.

please log in to view this image

 

I'm totally serious.

For example, I queued for over two hours to get into the Picasso museum in Barcelona. I then spent the entire time walking around looking at the pictures and thinking "this is absolute ****e, a moderately talented child could do this so what is the big deal about Picasso?".

Now I know that my thoughts on this are in absolute opposition to the accepted opinion of the worlds art experts. Most of the other visitors seemed to be appreciating his art too.

Therefore I am happy to accept that I either don't understand or appreciate the finer points of art. I'd also add that I don't think I have ever looked at a picture and thought "wow" and only have two pictures up in my home and they are there to make use of picture hooks I couldn't be bothered to remove.

 

Frederic Edwin Church

please log in to view this image

Botticelli

please log in to view this image

 

While on the subject of graffiti (banksy picture) can someone please explain tagging to me?

Like the guy who went all over Newcastle and wrote "iNCH" on basically every surface he could find. What purpose does this serve?

 

please log in to view this image

Don't really know art but always liked that.

 

The one artist I do remember liking the work of is Caravaggio.

please log in to view this image

 

I 100% echo your opinion of Picasso by the way. I think a good way to begin 'getting' more out of art than simple aesthetics is by looking at lesser works or sketches by good artists. I love many Goya sketches because of the feeling and atmosphere I get from them and because they look pretty great too.

Pictures like Turner's Great Western Railway:

please log in to view this image

or Gilbert's Market Day:

please log in to view this image

To give a few contrasting examples, give a real sense of atmosphere and can influence a person's mood, something which is a lot more than simply pleasing the eyes.

 

None what so ever. Tagging is just a yobs way of showing they were there. (in my opinion anyway) A lot of people consider Banksy paintings to be graffiti but it's not like it's everywhere, only in chosen places and the picture is usually linked in some way to that location.

I think it's tastefull unlike what you saw (What does it even mean anyway?)

 

'INCH' was probably the size of something he was trying to compensate for.

I like the works of Banksy, but it's a bit samey.

 

Not a fan of Banksy. Not because I dislike graffiti (which I don't, I like good graffiti) or simply because I think his whole hidden identity thing is cringeworthy (which I do, however ) but I just find his stencil style very unattractive.

 

I get what you are saying. What little appreciation I have seems to be for landscapes. I like that Aivazofsky picture you posted earlier for example.

Really don't get modern art at all though.

Good to know that i'm not alone in disliking Picasso as well. Maybe there is hope for me after all!

Edit: forgot to say that Market Day is good too. I can see the quality of picture, it looks almost lifelike.

 

I just ate a yoghurt with a fork

Tricky business