how can they call this art?

[DragonGX]

http://www.julesjewels.com/works.html

It really upsets me that people like her make alot of money from glorified grade school art, while there are so many truely great artists that are struggling just to get by..

I really dont understand how people can see that and actually like it.. I mean seriously.. anyone can create junk like that..

Using her as an example, Ive noticed a few things. She only draws women. from the front. with only different hairstyles. sometimes with flowers. sometimes just flowers.

Just curious as to what other artists think.

[Kortez]

Wow that brings new dimensions to the word "suckage".

I've seen more creativity and better drafting skills from a 10 year old. No pun intended.

I agree, it's sad that people like that, are cashing in while some talented and creative artist is having trouble making ends meet.

Really sad.

[jwo]

omgeee thats sassy! , i heart friends.

no.

im pretty sure the same people who buy similar art, are the same also buy overpriced designer shoes BUT have to have there feet surgicaly altered to wear.

just bitter cuz she probably has a 20,000 square foot studio and got a picture taken with richard simon's ::kicks stone::

[Android]

i think its dangerous to judge artists based on the fact it dosent meet your personal criteria of "good" art. beauty is in the eye of the beholder. and i bet it really makes her happy.

do I like her art, no i dont, but i am glad that there is another artist on the planet.

[Fozzybar]

who cares?

[DragonGX]

Originally posted by Android
i think its dangerous to judge artists based on the fact it dosent meet your personal criteria of "good" art. beauty is in the eye of the beholder. and i bet it really makes her happy.

do I like her art, no i dont, but i am glad that there is another artist on the planet.

I know art is subjective, but its hard for me to even call that art.. It takes no talent. If it makes her happy that is great, but it just seems wrong to me that someone can produce work like that and actually think of it as real "art"..

I dont like to judge people or flame other artists, but I just dont get it..

[egerie]

try to study a bit of Kandinsky and/or the Blue Rider period. Cubism, abstract art, even editorial illustration is very subjective. It's not art I enjoy but she's an artist. And if her art sells, GOOD FOR HER ! Heck, whatever floats the buyers' tuna.

jwo : :rolleyes:


(The only thing I HATE about this page is the stupid middle-button/right-button popup message. Can't scroll in peace ! Stupid webmaster !)

[xdisciplex]

Art goes a lot further than Robots and girls with guns.

Im sure a lot of artists wouldn't accept concept art as 'real' art.

Have you ever studdied art? It isn't just about line and color, think of all the different styles. Expressionism, Cubism, Surrealism...

To quote someone who's name escapes me right now -

"No, Fuck you. This is art."

[DragonGX]

Originally posted by egerie
try to study a bit of Kandinsky and/or the Blue Rider period. Cubism, abstract art, even editorial illustration is very subjective. It's not art I enjoy but she's an artist. And if her art sells, GOOD FOR HER ! Heck, whatever floats the buyers' tuna.

jwo : :rolleyes:


(The only thing I HATE about this page is the stupid middle-button/right-button popup message. Can't scroll in peace ! Stupid webmaster !)

I was waiting for someone to say something about Cubism or abstract art.

Take Picasso for example.. You could relate his famous works to this ladys work, but he was very talented.. He could create realistic drawings as well as many great artists. He chose to use Cubism to express himself. I would be VERY surprised if Jules could draw realistically at all. The only reason she is popular is because it is the "in" thing, and has been lucky enough to be featured toa wide audience (Friends, TV talk shows, etc)..

[DragonGX]

Originally posted by xdisciplex
Art goes a lot further than Robots and girls with guns.

Im sure a lot of artists wouldn't accept concept art as 'real' art.

Have you ever studdied art? It isn't just about line and color, think of all the different styles. Expressionism, Cubism, Surrealism...

To quote someone who's name escapes me right now -

"No, Fuck you. This is art."


Yeah, but that can be taken to an extreme.. if you look at it that way, then every being on this planet is a great artist. They just have an abstract style. The 3 year old at the day care taht scribbled crayons all over the walls is a genius because of his abstract style. :rolleyes:

I know that some people think that it is wrong to say, but there is such a thing as "bad art"..

[winjer]

i dont think you can say art is good/bad . it depends on what you like. highly subjective. my mom doesnt like giant robots and chicks with guns but i do. and she likes that georgia o keefe stuff and i dont. doesnt make one better than the other.

[stalecracker]

All's I know is I like Sausage McGriddles.

[DragonGX]

Originally posted by stalecracker
All's I know is I like Sausage McGriddles.

http://forums.offtopic.com/images/smilies/ugh2.gif

[stalecracker]

Sausage McGriddles?!?! You know... they have the Syrup BAKED IN!!!

i.e.-

A discussion based on someones art as crap is a MOOT one at best. Scroll up and REread what andriod wrote... eloquent, simple and to the point...



NOW, Sausage McG's for EVERYBODY!!!

[DragonGX]

Yeah, its really a catch22.. I didnt really want it to end up being a debate about the subjectivity of art but in the end, that is what it all boils down to..

[OneBigCelt]

its not bad art.... its really good coloring... for wall candy.. chic dig this stuff. there are many people out there that want to be artists desperatly. Shes made it possible... I know that alot of theses folks are fine artists that finially found away to make some cash and they stick with it.

I myself am trying to find a means to pay for my art habit... haven't found it yet

[thomasaurus]

Originally posted by Fozzybar
who cares?

I like his idea

[bat]

At least it's her art, and not somebody else's work photoshopped to look like a spill of ten different flavors of Baskin-Robbins ice cream. She makes money, good for her.

bat

[ceenda]

If it was Government or taxpayer's money going into this kind of art then I'd probably agree. The key here is that people _choose_ to purchase this art, but as the saying goes:

"A fool and his/her money are easily parted."

Just depends who you consider to be foolish for their taste in art. Someone might say the purchase of Graphic Novels was equally pointless, but it brings enjoyment (usually) to the one who wants it.

(Just to verify, I don't believe _any_ form of art from Abstract to Realist Illustration should be subsidised by the goverment, but that's another debate.)

[Szyslack]

oh well. i like dada myself :bash:

[winjer]

i think im gonna buy one of her dealies

[Ant4d]

I actually like her stuff.
I am more worried when it comes to shitting in the can or paint with the shit and that sort of stuff.

and I believe art is what majority takes as art. its rather objective than subjective.
for example if a guy gets cought by killing 50 ppl and he says : "I am artist" then u dont go : "well art is subjective, maybe killing is art..." law puts him in the jail and he is artist and bla bla bla? me dont thinks so.

but in the meantime I believe that every subject it subjective and there is no point of talking about it and I should better shut up and world sucks ass and I better shut up and I shut up.

[davi]

so... this isn't art?

what do you think this artist thinks of some of our work?

guys running around with swords and goblins? You can ignore art you don't like, but i would suggest never saying that an artist isn't good because i'm sure anyone could say the same thing about your art, NO MATTER HOW GOOD YOU ARE, someone will dislike your art. it's a fact of life. That's why we don't have one cell phone apperence, we have hundreds.

[otis]

She is making a shit load of money, meeting famous people, partying like a rockstar, ..I really don't think she cares what you think about her art.

[Erik]

Like making a shitload of money is a healthy goal. Most artists need to die first before they start making a shitload of money. I think it's about something else: the personal desire to improve and create something you can be proud of.

If you don't like it, don't buy it. Don't waste your time complaining: grab a pencil!

(If you want to make a shitload of money and have no ethics: try selling aspirins as extacy in Amsterdam ;-) )

[drbriefs]

just my two cents. yeah, her art is pretty out there (all women in her art look alike), it's a radical style. but i mean, look at the famous people buying her art; i think the only person sane on that list is uma thurman. but oh well, to each his own and nobody should be jealous of anybody; sometimes we're ahead, sometime's we're behind, but in the end the race is only with ourselves (yes, blatantly copied from the sunscreen speech).

oh and after a second read at the starting post, yeah, i kind of get where he's coming from. that people that work hard to better themselves artistically usually have to work harder, train a lot, educate themselves and help others, do things for the art community, teach art, etc. to be able to get recognition (and $) and most of the artists out there may not be able to get the resources to do so (and the talent's there), while artists like this one just think of something "different" (even if it's half assed) and people start buying it because it looks..well, um, different.
art is suppose to convey a feeling, emotions, etc. and for me, personally i get zero from those paintings. but as android mentioned, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. only that sometimes beauty is imposed by money, corporations, trends etc.

[Beer Baron]

Speaking of making money, did anyone happen to catch the 60 Minutes interview with Thomas Kincade (sp?) a while back? Talk about making a shitload of money! He has entire stores dedicated just to his, rather simplistic, landscape paintings; housing subdivisions modeled after the homes featured in his pictures; and conventions with rabid fans that snatch up anything he creates.
What pissed me off the most about this guy, is that he would literally just add a few dabs of paint to a finished print of one of his paintings and jack up the price. You could then claim your painting was "an original."

Many of the arguments featured in this thread ("That's not art.", "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.", etc.) were featured in that interview when his work was scrutinized by art critics and fans alike. If that episode should ever come on again try and catch it.

[jwo]

1 more nail in the coffin:

well then i guess greeting card stores should be treated more like museums and gallerys.

:)

[otis]

My hat goes off to Tom Kinkade, and others like him. To make a living doing your own art so that you can spend time with your family and provide is a goal of mine. There are two types of artists in this world: The hired guns, and the guys who march to thier own drum beat. Thomas in my opinion has found a way to make (more than a living) off of his OWN work.

anyone who bashes him as a "sell-out" is just pathetic and envious as the musicians who bash other musicians that make it big.
Are artists's supposed to live humble, finacially pathetic lives? I'm sick of the mentality that art is only true if the artist is either psycho or poor. Fuck that!! Have more respect for your work...I believe that ALL our works has the potential to be "priceless". Art is relative, and cheers to those who find thier market and collectors...we all have them, we just have to find them.

[drbriefs]

we were talking about the other female celeb artist (the one with the neo modern art female paintings). i don't know much about Mr. Kinkade or his art, landscape pictures sound nice, i like those. still, nobody called him a sellout, the object of this post is that of wonder. "how they'd do that?", "how'd they get celebrity status?", etc. no one's bashing anybody (well at least not me), so there's no need to get into heavy discussion and name calling, methinks.

oh and i re-read the post on Mr. Kinkade -
"What pissed me off the most about this guy, is that he would literally just add a few dabs of paint to a finished print of one of his paintings and jack up the price. You could then claim your painting was "an original."

surely it must be admitted that THAT isn't gaining money to make it, that's pure plain and simple greed. It's like saying that Microsoft does everything it does (basically screwing computer users on each release with small "paint daubs") for the good of the computing world and users, and not for money. :rolleyes:

so in the end, it all boils down to "striking it rich". think of the people like the female painter (the subject of the post) a pop star, per say, that studied marketing, psychology, business administration, etc. to a large extent, has some talent (or then again, maybe a lot of talent and she knows how to sell with the most minimal artistic effort?), opens up shop, has/attains the right contacts, and voila! cash city.

there are people that a) start doing it for the money and others that b) start doing it as their passion, hobby, etc. and maybe suddenly are given a big break. these particular two artists are a).
i'm no good artist, but i see all the enormous talent here and (i'm taking a wild guess here) they don't make half of what those mentioned in this thread make. why? effective selling techniques, which, when applying for a job in a field like this one is the same thing, but to a much lesser extent and less greedy way.

so, in closing (finally), to each his own. just don't get too greedy.
my 4 cents.

[Erik]

I think making money of your art is cool but i don;t think becoming a complete sellout is. If you like what you do and make money of it (not necessarily all the time and not necessarily in that order) what is the problem?

I just think that being proud of your work does mean not signing your name on some sell-out product.

But well, who cares anyway. As long as we're happy! Start drawing already.

[Beer Baron]

I just wanted to clarify something in my last post. I didn't call Mr. Kincade a sell-out. What I meant to say, is that in the interview he came across as a bastard for milking his gullible fans for every penny they had. His licensing practices were so reckless that he reminded me of Krusty the Klown; just signing his name on anything and not caring.

But I think this has more to do with his morality and not his art/talent. I should have more clearly stated that here was a popular artist using his fame to exploit others for a quick profit. I meant to draw attention to this guy as a shady character. A bit off track from the original topic. My bad.

Anyway, the interview certainly affected the way I view his art. Probably why I didn't see how such basic landscapes could be so popular.




Ah, shit it’s only 9:00 a.m.…I need a beer.

[Szyslack]

davi is right.


i would only add that history will reveal the truely influencial artist that exist today. if one looks back through art history one will find that there were many artists who's work was popular at the time, but are now not viewed as being very good/important.

[Duchess]

Yo! OneBigCelt, I Resent Your Comment: "Chicks Dig This Stuff", I Am a Chick And I Disliked Them Immensely, More Power To Her An All But Nah:nono:

[3bleadpencil]

It's an old debate if this is art or not.......if I like it or not.....personally it's not my cup of tea......if you don't like it don't buy it and dont' look at it. What's the big deal?....Live your own life already!!!
But in the end I believe it is still art......anything can be art really......I think the mainstream public is so used to aesthetic art.....something that they can enjoy visually. Art dosen't have to be technically beautiful but still be enjoyed.....take duchamps "Urinal" piece....or the "meat dress"-forgot the artist name.......but these artists questioned art......does art have to beautiful to be art?......I think they questioned all of the art that was made before their time because art was generally aesthetic in nature.....also they began to immerse themselves on intellectual/philosophic/politcal(to name a few) topics other than just aesthetics.....I like dada, German expressionism, and certain dissident artists from Russia because it takes more than just the eye to enjoy them....it's also takes a brain........but that's just my cup of tea.

ahhh..what am i saying....just be glad that you have the freedom to do whatever art you want......believe me it would suck to be an artist in Europe during WWII.

anway...thanks for the time
3b

[amphex]

i like it...=\
sorry
chill out

[gasmask]

Im sorry but, that would be killer to get fame for art and to do stuff shes doing so definetly i give her a big up, and i dont think her art is what carries her, im sure shes a good business women.

[PeggyChung]

lets just say, its a fad, everyone wants it -.-''

in my opinion the art she draws doesnt suit my taste but hey, its art right? who is to judge what art is and isnt? also, the eyes are creepy :(

[-W.-]

H.
As far as i care, it's always art and "good" or "bad" is just a personal opinion.
Of course this dosen't mean you have to like it :D

I've seen more creativity and better drafting skills from a 10 year old.

Isn't that the dictionary description for modern art ?

[Kortez]

Well though i may sound a a bit modernistic when saying this I'm gonna quote E.H. Gombrich and throw this into the ring -

"There's really no such thing as art, just artists"

Cause if there would be such a thing as art you could always say "everything is art" and therefore "nothing is art"

so it's a tricky little game this whole art thing :)

[DragonGX]

Originally posted by Kortez
Well though i may sound a a bit modernistic when saying this I'm gonna quote E.H. Gombrich and throw this into the ring -

"There's really no such thing as art, just artists"

Cause if there would be such a thing as art you could always say "everything is art" and therefore "nothing is art"

so it's a tricky little game this whole art thing :)

:bow: :bow: :bow: