realism vs modernism

[Ned]

Alrighty! it seems to me that there are alot of modernist sympathizers here at Ca so I figure there could be fuel for a good debate:D , Now I'm a huge realist fan and quite honestly I don't think that modernists who prance around making half assed paintings and claiming that they're more enlightened than realists deserve the status that they enjoy. Now I started this thread because of a debate in another sketch thread (I didn't want to ruin that great thread) and I strongly believe that modernists are traversties, frauds and charlatans. Oh yeh and I have proof!
all I'm asking for is a show of hands of who agrees..8)

[Ilaekae]

Exactly...what...the...fuck...is...a...modernist?

[Ned]

..what? where the hell have you been for the last 90 years?

[Elwell]

For two thirds of them he's been right here.
Ilaekae knows the answer... the question is, do you?

[Hyver]

study and understand art history (which means starting with the cave paintings from Lascaux all the way up to contemporary art) and ye shall find the answer.
It doesn't mean that you personally have to "like" every single piece of art, but it should help you gain some insight on the matter.

[seba_boi]

Eh... I'm not so much to modernistic paintings either (although Edvard Munch's Scream sure is interesting and memorable)...

But the modernist graphic designs however are tops (gave birth to Late Modern movement artists Saul Bass and Paul Rand)!... Dadaism is cool too...

[Snarfevs]

When did modernism become a) an institution and b) the antithesis of realism? As Elwell said, do you know what you're talking about? Because I sure as hell don't understand. All I've seen is you tearing apart senbdoij because his art- not specifically designed with your arrogant criterion of being a still life with grapes in mind - didn't quite get you off, in one of the most surreal threads I've seen here. There's modernism for you.

Frankly you need to stop being such a bucket of bitch and realise that art is art is art. Why aren't you drawing so that you have a leg to stand on when you dig into someone's work? You can only live vicariously through your favourite genre for so long.

[senbdoij]

you should be doing photography... thats pure realism...
edit: or is it...

anyhow... i think all conflict start from misunderstanding...
so lets settle this... when you say modernism you mean abstraction?
realism figuration?

or was it "half assed painting", what do you mean by that?
if someone puts "works" on an abstraction, what the heck happens?

in art history realism is part of your modernism by the way

art is more and more about the research you know, not the rendered piece

if all your asking for is hands that support u...
havent i already told you that i agree about not giving up on the devellopement
to me, thats a realistic statement...

[Ned]

I never understand why, when I put a point of view forward it creates so much damn anamosity. Is everyone at Ca naturally aggressive?
As Elwell said, do you know what you're talking about?

I'll spell it out for you. Modernism, as in forms of abstraction, primitivism, cubism, expressionism, minimilism etc have been losing popularity since the turn of this century and I'm questioning why it's taken so long for people to realise that modernists (look the word up) are charlatins who have the drawing abiltities of beginner artists and have more or less blindsided the public by leading them to believe that there is some merit in their works which have no technical skill or compositional basis.

[Hyver]

ned - you just proved the fact that you simply don't understand art history. accept that and go back to square one (do not collect $200)

[senbdoij]

Realism is approaching the subject with a straight forward manner without idealizetion...

and modernism is about furniture and art deco...

and over what has this lost its popularity?
probably a mixture of both...

you wouldnt believe what aberation people do these days...
appropriations and instalation are very out of date
just to let you imagine

joking

[Main Loop]

where would you classify someone like:
http://www.caramelito.cz/img/6991.jpg
http://www.abbothall.org.uk/images/Uglow_nude.jpg
or
wayne theibaud?
http://nsm.uh.edu/~dgraur/Images/thiebaud.aroundthecake.jpg

[Snarfevs]

Ned - I do not understand YOU.
I understand modernism well.
I also understand that people know what they like - you cannot trick people into giving modernism critical acclaim, people aren't waking up to deception. Social climates and public tastes change. Modernism isn't being rolled back, it's being superseded. Trailblazers can be accepted or rejected at will by the most bland or recherche elements of society. Modernism is not some aggressive meme that takes over the brains of otherwise rational people and causes them to buy bad art.

You can't assume that your postulated alternate history that brought about modernism (that being charlatans formulating a plot to get people to buy 'bad' art) can be reversed by you telling people that they are wrong because that history doesn't exist. Modernism arose because people realised that they could perhaps start articulating more than verbatim copies of objective reality in their work. Art survives through arousing interest. Not because it is necessarily pretty, not because it is necessarily competent and not because you or anyone else says so.

Now please kindly write off your war on reality and draw. Honestly what do you have to complain about? Did a modernist force you into buying art you didn't want?


http://img319.imageshack.us/img319/2411/100910460mt.jpg
http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/7177/gpcworklarge5484nc.jpg

Mmmm magritte

[Interceptor]

I never understand why, when I put a point of view forward it creates so much damn anamosity. Is everyone at Ca naturally aggressive?


I'll spell it out for you. Modernism, as in forms of abstraction, primitivism, cubism, expressionism, minimilism etc have been losing popularity since the turn of this century and I'm questioning why it's taken so long for people to realise that modernists (look the word up) are charlatins who have the drawing abiltities of beginner artists and have more or less blindsided the public by leading them to believe that there is some merit in their works which have no technical skill or compositional basis.


Wow, that's a pretty arrogant statement right there. Just because something is not your cup of tea does not mean it is without worth or skill. Some might argue that minimalist paintings and photography and architecture require a great deal of skill, by implying a strong image using less resources.

As an artist, especially one who seems to care so much about traditional arts, I think you should be a bit more open minded to other types of art. You can stick entirely to what has been done in the past, and try to live in the shadows of great classical artists. or, you can try to learn from these new approaches to art, along with the traditional, and try to push your work furhter than these.

In the end, I just don't see the point of complaining about an approach people are using to art. It's not going to change the commercial value of these. And therefore people will continue to be doing them. I say if you want to see a change, you make it happen.

[Delight]

I never understand why, when I put a point of view forward it creates so much damn anamosity. Is everyone at Ca naturally aggressive?


I'll spell it out for you. Modernism, as in forms of abstraction, primitivism, cubism, expressionism, minimilism etc have been losing popularity since the turn of this century and I'm questioning why it's taken so long for people to realise that modernists (look the word up) are charlatins who have the drawing abiltities of beginner artists and have more or less blindsided the public by leading them to believe that there is some merit in their works which have no technical skill or compositional basis.
ahahahahaha, Duchamp is rolling in his grave.
Understand history, sir, and you'll understand the answer. It's not something that's up for debate if you know what you're talking about.


(And we're not the ones who need to look the word up... in fact, you are. And not in a dictionary, go for an art history textbook, read a bit, and get a basis of what you obviously have no comprehension of)

I mean your statement is saying that artists like (to name the particularly famous ones) Chagall, De Chirico, Leger, Mondrian, Picasso and too many others aren't artists with technical skill is... absurd. I mean, while you're condemning art movements, where odes it stop? What about pointillism, surrealism, Impressionism? They're not hardcore 'realism', but that doesn't mean that they don't have merit, and don't require a hell of a lot of work to produce.

[fixx]

nope. picasso had no idea how to paint. whatacrook

http://www.picasso.com/images/picasso7.jpg

neither did mondrian

http://www.tenthousandvisions.com/10000visions/inspirations/inspiration%20gallery/Mondrian-evolution.gif

I may not like the "modern" stuff all the time (although Jasper Johns is one cool cat, as is Pollock and his peers) but they do know their stuff, and they had the guts to experiment when no one else did.
Besides, if the rennaissance artists hadn't tried new "modern" things for their era, we'd all still be painting like so:

http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/f/ff/250px-Ac.christimage.jpg

although that's a pretty cool painting too.. :D think ill go paint an icon myself..

[masque]

"modernist sympathizers"?
...

dirty moddies! corrupting the minds of our artistically-inclined youth! there are... 143... maybe more... modernists right here in CA.org! some may even be... admins! I have proof! Are you now, or have you ever been, a subscriber to the Modernist Manifesto?

How, how can we permit these traversties to continue?!
...

yeesh!

[Ilaekae]

My dear Ned (Can I call you Ned? We seemed to have hit it off right up front so well, I figured...well...y'know...)


"...modernists who prance around making half assed paintings..."

I'm still a little foggy on the meaning here, Ned...off the top of my head, I'd be pretty damn impressed by somebody who could do ANYTHING while prancing around. I mean...even if they were "fancy" boys that wear them little pink tennis shoes...(I have to say that because we can't say that "other" word around here anymore).

...and "half assed" has a hyphen...y'know...like a virgin? I really can't comment any further here because all of my paintings are executed by a complete ass...not a half-ass...


"I strongly believe that modernists are traversties, frauds and charlatans. Oh yeh and I have proof!"

Sounds downright suspicious to me, too, and I don't even know what a traversty is! What say you whip this here proof out and we'll look it over while sharin' a beer...I'll buy.


"..what? where the hell have you been for the last 90 years?"

Umm...there should be three of them there little dots in front of "what?", and "where" should have a big "w"--like this--"W"...sorry...I get distracted easily...

Where have I been for the last 90 years...? uummmm...I wasn't really around for the first thirty, but I learned a whole lot about 'em from books and newspapers and stuff...y'know...readin'...edumacation stuff?

The last sixty...well...lets see...I spent the first four or five learning how to spell...and not to poop on the floor...and how to hold a brush and pencil. Then I did a lot of stuff. All kinds of stuff. So much stuff that I stopped cutting my hair around 1973 and stopped shaving around 1984 'cuz I was so busy...which means you're almost as old as my beard. Cool! I guess that's why you ask such intellectually penetrating stuff like you do...


"I never understand why, when I put a point of view forward it creates so much damn anamosity. Is everyone at Ca naturally aggressive?"

Damn, Ned. On behalf of all the clowns here, I really wanna apologize to you for all the yellin'. We just have a bit of trouble hearing you clearly...you're voice bein' muffled and all like that...ain't it awful dark in there where your head is? I mean...we talk loud so you can hear us...

...oh...there's one "a" and two "i"s in animosity...and that should be "CA," not "Ca." Sorry...wandered again...


"I'll spell it out for you. Modernism, as in forms of abstraction, primitivism, cubism, expressionism, minimilism etc have been losing popularity since the turn of this century and I'm questioning why it's taken so long for people to realise that modernists (look the word up) are charlatins who have the drawing abiltities of beginner artists and have more or less blindsided the public by leading them to believe that there is some merit in their works which have no technical skill or compositional basis."

Now see...I thought we were gettin' to a meeting of the brain cells here, but now I'm back where I started from...confused. Modernism is the process of creative innovation while purposely trying to ignore what came before. I'm not sayin' that some folks don't like the newer stuff because...man! Y'gotta admit some of its just damn downright fuckin' freaky, if y'know what I mean, but...

I'm just not sure if I can just be happy with all that traditional stuff from the old days...y'know? I ain't all that bright, but I don't see how all that real-life-lookin' stuff like in them Egyptian tomb paintings and 4th-century Byzantine no-perspective big-eyed portraits and stuff like that is goin' to help me make a living, and don't even get me started on that goofy fuckin' AY-rab and Irish shit! Sorry...got off a bit there again...but I mean...can you see why some of us are confused?

Let me make a suggestion here, Ned (I DO hope you don't mind me callin' you Ned...)...How about you pull your head out of your ass and we sit down like two civil human beans and hash this out...

...beans...hash...must be time for breakfast...gotta go...



:)

[masque]

Ilaekae, "Me 'ats off to the Duke!" :teeth:

[timpaatkins]

Ned. Welcome to the grown up world.

Edit: Correct spellign: grown-up
(Thanks Puck)

[Ilaekae]

There's a hyphen in "grown-up," Timmypattycakes... :)

[MarkHarchar]

Where have I been for the last 90 years...?

The last sixty...well...lets see...I spent the first four or five learning how to spell...and not to poop on the floor...



Did I mention I love you? Not in that Brokeback Mountain kinda way, but in the buy you a beer, punch you in the face kinda way. :yayca:

[Ilaekae]

"Edit: Correct spellign: grown-up
(Thanks Puck)"

We should be good examples for the kid. How's he gonna learn otherwise?

:P

[Delight]

All for starting a church of Ilaekae say aye..

[Red_Rook]

Ilaekae, I must admit, far more eloquent then the audacious "WTF?!!!?!!!" I was going to post.

[Red_Rook]

aye...

[Delight]

Ilaekae, I must admit, far more eloquent then the audacious "WTF?!!!?!!!" I was going to post.
Plus he made the tears of "howthefuckcananyonethinkthat" turn to those of laugher, which is quite commendable.

[fixx]

will there be beer in the church?

[Delight]

will there be beer in the church?
I think it'd be safe to assume a resounding "yes" from all crowds.

[Ilaekae]

Damn right! No beer...I ain't comin'...

[Delight]

Damn right! No beer...I ain't comin'...
Your siggy is amusingly appropriate.

[Floris Didden]

So much stuff that I stopped cutting my hair around 1973 and stopped shaving around 1984 'cuz I was so busy...which means you're almost as old as my beard. Cool! I guess that's why you ask such intellectually penetrating stuff like you do...

Hahahahaha coffee ... on ... my ... monitor.

Hold on .. I'm younger then the beard too..

[Red_Rook]

Plus he made the tears of "howthefuckcananyonethinkthat" turn to those of laugher, which is quite commendable.


ofcourse! thats a given :D

[Delight]

Hahahahaha coffee ... on ... my ... monitor.

Hold on .. I'm younger then the beard too..
I'm not sure that you can pull the youth card, i may just trump it with mine.



ofcourse! thats a given
I am naive, i've lurked for long, but haven't been making with the postage until recently.

[Ramzeal]

Art is about reserch, experimentation, find way to create new thing, is all about creation, not to mimic of somthing. I think there more credit to create things and find techniques thas is new, than just doing zeal on realistic drawing and painting. There one way to be good as realistic, is to draw, draw, draw, and draw more from life reference, if you do it you will be good. But to create somthing from scrach, whit no rule, ro reference, no nothing, tha somthing else. Tha why in art there weird stuff and abstract, it because some artist was bored by the old way, the realistic way, so they want it to create new stuff, by experimentation. Anyway now painting and image reach a certain saturation. new artists are more in the video and instalation, even puppets.

sorry for my bad english:canadapatriot:

[fixx]

crud, im older than the beard.
but if there will be beer im in like flynn :D

um, are we getting off-topic?
Edit: oh no, ramzael brought us back on topic:)

[Scubasteve]

Isn't this kind of like debating which is better between an orange or an apple. It is a matter of taste. As for people being Agressive, Ned I think your first post was pretty devisive and not constructive.

quote: "I strongly believe that modernists are traversties, frauds and charlatans"

There are many different types of artist that frequent here, and coming out bashing an artistic style isn't the best way to make friends on the fourm. Anyways, I understand what your saying, but I can appreciate most forms of art.

[squidmonk3j]

i tend to think of Art as a sublimation of craft...that is, when one's craft is so finely honed by years and years of experience and practising technique that one's creations seem to be experienced as more than the sum of its parts. imho, NO ONE starts out as an artist, you have to learn the craft first.

so, i guess i kinda agree with ned on this one....at least to some degree. i never went to an art school, i'm not "trained" to recognise what's Art ( and what's not ?), i JUST know what i like....it's a simple gut reaction - an appreciation of dedication and insight, i guess.

if i go to a gallery and see a jar of feces displayed, i tend NOT to think in terms of wheter or not it is art, i usually regard it as a political statement. a gigantic canvas with a little, flat red square painted in a corner doesn't register as being art. it's simply a canvas with a square.

[egerie]

And I was afraid to get off topic. Anyway :
Psst fixx, this kind of religious art was stylistic.. It wasn't meant to be bad per se, they just wanted to get as far as they could "style wise" from the pagans... Which means away from the perfection of late greek and roman art, specifically sculpture. But you probably already knew that... ;)

[wakizashi]

Im fairly new to art history, so i cant realy comment on that. However, ive just searched a bunch of the artists named in this thread and all I can say is "WOW". To say that these artists lack skill, or are frauds is pretty ignorant. Its blatantly obvious that these old artists know exactly what there doing. even the most abstract images I could find convey a touch of reality in some way(whether it be in the sense of wheight, the manner in which the shadoes fall ect.) To say that realism is the be all and end all of art is pretty dumb IMO. for every artist here who will tell you how to make an image more realistic, another artist will tell you how to make an image more expressive or dramatic.

[masque]

Psst fixx, this kind of religious art was stylistic.. It wasn't meant to be bad per se, they just wanted to get as far as they could "style wise" from the pagans... Which means away from the perfection of late greek and roman art, specifically sculpture. But you probably already knew that... ;)omg, that means it was... sort of... modernist!

[Scubasteve]

I agree with you Squidy. It should take some skill be it color knowlegde, composition, texture, anything. Not something just anyone can do or think of. I like some abstract art, but it has to have a visual appeal to me. I don't get into all this deeper meaning of some kind of random shape. But if I like the colors or something about it, I can enjoy it. But there are varying degrees between realism, abstract, modern, what have you, and thats what makes art so great. All it varitey.

[Ramzeal]

Art is a comunication media, so you ave to learn how to read it. Give a book to a 6 years old kid, it gonna say is crap, cause he dont know how to read, give him a nice drawing whit giraffe, elephant, super heros,girl whit big boobs ect he gonna go OUUUUhHHHh, he gonna like it. But we all know book are good, cause we learn to read. But there crap book and good book. So yes there crap out there, but good things to.

[fixx]

Yep, masque, egerie is correct. Just as the Egyptian art, and the Mesopotamian art were stylized. Obviously, people weren't stupid, they could see that the art looked nothing like "realistic" humans. But they weren't trying to re-create a perfect image of a human. Neither did the african tribes who created the wonderful masks that inspired Picasso and his peers when they began their cubic period.
Fancy that, modernistic art 4000 years ago... ;)


And I was afraid to get off topic. Anyway :
Psst fixx, this kind of religious art was stylistic.. It wasn't meant to be bad per se, they just wanted to get as far as they could "style wise" from the pagans... Which means away from the perfection of late greek and roman art, specifically sculpture. But you probably already knew that... ;)

[senbdoij]

realism is exempt of idealisation...

are there many people from Montreal here?
where are you ramzeal?

[Denart]

stop being so closed minded ned! pff

[masque]

Obviously, people weren't stupid, yeah, but a few seem to have evolved in that general direction ;) most all of present company excluded, of course.

btw, how come we don't have a smiley for "absurdly under- or overstated irony", anyway? can't be that hard to portray... <insert said smiley right here>

[CCThrom]

Ilaekae, my hat is off to YOU, sir... but you might wanna register that sarcasm as a deadly weapon before you get's yourself into trouble with the PO-lice.

Y'know Ned, I too have a big BIG problem with certain artists... y'know the ones... clearly got no skills, but do have a lot of BS to shovel, and a lot of big words to toss around... gettin' paid good money by art-idiots for nothing... but still, to smear all post-19th century non-realist art with the same "modernist" brush is just ludicrous. Beyond ludicrous. No matter how upset you are.

Of course being well older than the beard at least, and having some art history training does give one a bit of perspective.

Seriously Dude, get some book-learnin' before starting a thread like this.

[Delight]

Yep, masque, egerie is correct. Just as the Egyptian art, and the Mesopotamian art were stylized. Obviously, people weren't stupid, they could see that the art looked nothing like "realistic" humans. But they weren't trying to re-create a perfect image of a human. Neither did the african tribes who created the wonderful masks that inspired Picasso and his peers when they began their cubic period.
Fancy that, modernistic art 4000 years ago... ;)
Yeah, that's true. But there's also the question of what point does art actually begin to exist as 'art'.
I mean, the first things that we recognize as paintings (and call art) aren't that, per say, as they were religions necessities. There was no asthetic value in what they were doing, or atleast logical assumption about their way of life would cause anthropologists and art historians to assume that. (IE if you're spending all your time trying to... you know.. not die... you're probably not going to even have an idea of asthetic. That's something that comes with some degree of leisure)

[Delight]

btw, how come we don't have a smiley for "absurdly under- or overstated irony", anyway? can't be that hard to portray... <insert said smiley right here>
You know, a comment like that on an art forum could be dangerous.

[Ramzeal]

realism is exempt of idealisation...

are there many people from Montreal here?
where are you ramzeal?

Hehe im downtown, i ave a loft in old montreal!were you from?!! i did not realize you was form montreal!! tu parle francais?

[Ned]

Alrighty! I have to say I expected a bit of Ned bashing and I suppose some of your points have merit. Ilaekae since you seem to have the whole anti-Ned policy going for you, this reply is for you pops.

Lets narrow the argument that modernists have merit down to specific artists. Picasso seems greatly admired among the bourgeoisie so why not pick him off first?

1. People say that Picasso painted people in turmoil and there was a deeper meaning to his shoddy paintings, well Picasso's skills where at the level of an amateur and his compositions and ideas would have taken no more than 30 seconds to figure out.
b. So inner ugliness is represented by messy paintings (according to modernist law) well look how well Picasso did that!
c. Now I'm fairly sure that you don't need to be a theorist to realise that there is nothing substantial in Picasso's works. But as I said earlier critics and modernists have led everyone to believe that there is merit in their half assed attempts at painting.

Remember that the Nazi's expelled most modernist work for Germany calling it 'degenerate'. And the Nazi's knew best this time.

Ilaekae: No you may not call me Ned. None of you may

[senbdoij]

du plateau mtroyal et oui, franco^phone

and NED:
your sure dont know shit about picassos work
this dude has made more pieces than you have hair on your head...
and practice makes perfect...

just search abit on google image
youll see the skills he had at observationnal drawing

plus youv ignored most of the posts above...

and you just dont know what modernism is neither what realism is...

[Michael Jaecks]

Camille Paglia, uberscholar, art critic and historian, says that, in the western traditon, all modernism is an extension of Romanticism... as defined (loosely) by the personal search for truth on the part of an individual artist. She once called it (paraphrased) the line an artist draws to contain the chaos of nature. Even minimalism, which often claims to be completely rational with no intuitive or emotional concerns is a part of this overarching movement of Romanticism.

Once upon a time the personal vision of an artist wasn't particularly important to the viewer. Artists worked for the church or they worked for rich patrons. They did what they were told. What personal style became evident was a matter of historical perspective, comparing this work to that, tracing lineage between masters and apprentices, etc. But the work was made for others as commissions, not unlike the goals of many here on CA.org. I would say that what happens here on CA.org, in the illustration industry as a whole and the concept art industry as a whole could then be considered an extention of the patroned tradition of the Rennaisance. More or less.

But I digress... one day a long time ago an individual artist said for the for the first time ever, "I don't give a crapola what the pope thinks, what my patron thinks, what my mentor thinks or even what my mom and dad think... this is what *I* think and/or feel!" Boop! Romanticism is born. It wasn't long before Romanticism would give way to modernism in a new century. They are often thought of (and perhaps mistakenly so) as "seperate styles" or movements or hisotrical trends, but they have very simillar aims.

Another super critical development in the history of image making which guided modernism away from the traditonally figurtive is of course the invention of the photograph. People could make an image very close to the common sense appearance of what the naked eye sees in a short time with little skill. It seemed silly to many to try making realistic images by hand anymore... although the skill of realistic rendering wasn't completely abandoned by all.. it was often called into service by people interested in giving convincing weight to otherwise unreal, or SURreal imagery.

Ah realism. We'll get to that sketchy topic in a moment, but first one more point about modernism: One hallmark about modernism that makes it different from the following period of POSTmodernism is that generally modernists believe in a truth to chase after. Even if each artist was coming up with different solutions year after year, the belief was that some real, objective truth was possible to find.

Until we get to those naughty postmodernists. Postmodernism as a moment in art history is preceeded closely by the Poststructuralist literary critics of France, the most famous and oft read being Michel Foucault. Poststructuralism and postmodernism's hallmark idea is that objective truth is not possible. Postmodernism turns a famous cliche' on its head and says "A word is worth a thousand pictures." ...I say "rabbit." ...You picture a grey one and I see a brown one and someone else sees a white one and yet another person sees the Easter Bunny and still another person sees a car made by Volkswagon. ...Meaning in postmodernism is created out of "play" and "context." Meaning and its gravity waxes and wanes for different viewers based on their different past experiences before coming to the moment of seeing the same thing together. Picasso's Guernica may be incredibly moving and saddening to someone who's lived through a World War, or fascinating and playful to a child. Postmodernism presents the idea that meaning and its pursuit is a fractured business at best, that reality is always relative and as such its definition must change in accord with its constantly shifting context.

Of course, "realism" as an idea occupies territory in all of art history: pre-modernist in the scientific pursuit of understaning perspective and optics, and in the debate between an intellectual truth vs. an emotional truth, leading us back into modernism where the pursuit of the real veers towards and away from photographic reference to postmodernism which simply asks if anything is real.

Twenty to thirty years ago art took a very conceptual turn away from painting and into mixed media, multi media, "new" media and performance. There are many precedents for this turn in modernism, in dada, surrealism and fluxus. But it was really taking hold in the70s, 80s and 90s. I can remember being cajoled in art school for wanting to paint at all. "Object making was passe'." Social and political activism as art was also a huge deal.

But in the last ten to fifteen years, I think we all got bored with our socio-political and conceptual frameworks and started making art again. Figurative art is again a big deal. Big magazines like Art News do articles on artists who have become figurative art converts. Juxtapoz's west coast Pop Surrealism just seems to get more and more fans. Outsider art is getting a lot of press, and much of that is figurative. I think the fact is that all artists, trained or untrained, like making pictures of people. There is pleasure to be taken in doing it. Figurative painting isnt dead. It relaspes for a while and then goes into remission... but it never dies.

but there's really no such thing as 'realism vs. modernism'...thinking so shows a lapse in understanding of EITHER concept.

now lets do 'fine art' vs. 'commercial art'!:P Okay just kidding. you know, what might be interesting is a discussion of commercial art influenced by the tradition of the Romantic or modernist fine artist... how "my style" is balanced with "what the client wants"... how ego and personal desire to self-express changes how "artists for hire" work...or how well they work... or how they create pitfalls for themselves...or how it changes how much latitude art directors are willing to give an individual artist...

"The Holy Roman Empire was neither 'holy' nor an 'empire'... DISCUSS!"

okay I'm showing my age....

Michael

[Elwell]

Man o' man.
Ned, if ignorance were chicken wings, you'd be Colonel fuckin' Sanders.

[Carnifex]

hey ned,if you're so smart about figuring out picassos work,how about you just reproduce this one?
http://www.picasso.com/images/picasso7.jpg

[Michael Jaecks]

You know, Nerd.. .I mean Ned. You might want to look at Picasso again.

I just looked at your little thread to get a pictoral assessment of your understanding of 'realism.' (there's no icon for 'one raised eyebrow' either)

Picasso had traditional training and became in his later years the buffoon you deride. But technically, Pablo drew better at the age of 12 than you do today.

Sorry, dude. You should really try looking stuff up first.

[masque]

Remember that the Nazi's expelled most modernist work for Germany calling it 'degenerate'. And the Nazi's knew best this time.that has got to be one of the most winning arguments i have ever heard expoundulated in a debate, citing Himmler and his jollies as definitive art critics. remember that "heavy duty irony in your diet" smiley i wanted? consider it stuck right it here, Ned.

[aesir]

Remember that the Nazi's expelled most modernist work for Germany calling it 'degenerate'. And the Nazi's knew best this time.



Well, now you've brought up nazis. You do realize that this discussion is officially ended now?

[masque]

great read, Neorepto/Michael, thanks! i'm a bit afeared it may be pearls before swine, but one can always hope.

[Ned]

This argument is about how modernists lacked skill and managed to manipulate the media by denouncing previous avant guarde movements (after the first world war) to boost their own popularity. It's about how people have seen art for the last 90 years it's not about romanticism.

I'm not getting anywhere with this am I?

[masque]

I'm not getting anywhere with this am I?actually, i see you digging yourself deeper and deeper. inverse vertical progress. better than standing still, i guess.

[figure2]

You know, Daz was the last nincompoop who didn't know when to quit and posted nonsense in response to everyone's arguments. It's been kind of boring since he's been gone. Maybe Ned serves a purpose here after all.

[Delight]

Alrighty! I have to say I expected a bit of Ned bashing and I suppose some of your points have merit. Ilaekae since you seem to have the whole anti-Ned policy going for you, this reply is for you pops.

Lets narrow the argument that modernists have merit down to specific artists. Picasso seems greatly admired among the bourgeoisie so why not pick him off first?

1. People say that Picasso painted people in turmoil and there was a deeper meaning to his shoddy paintings, well Picasso's skills where at the level of an amateur and his compositions and ideas would have taken no more than 30 seconds to figure out.
b. So inner ugliness is represented by messy paintings (according to modernist law) well look how well Picasso did that!
c. Now I'm fairly sure that you don't need to be a theorist to realise that there is nothing substantial in Picasso's works. But as I said earlier critics and modernists have led everyone to believe that there is merit in their half assed attempts at painting.

Remember that the Nazi's expelled most modernist work for Germany calling it 'degenerate'. And the Nazi's knew best this time.

Ilaekae: No you may not call me Ned. None of you may
Ahahahahahaha
Picasso, though he was a chauvonistic and egotistical bastard, had VERY good reason to be. He learned classical painting before he moved on to cubism. So no, no manipulation there.
And I think i may lose all civility if i start to try and respond to c there, and may have to start a "can we stab you with a paintbrush?" movement in the name of art.

[Elwell]

This argument is about how modernists lacked skill and managed to manipulate the media by denouncing previous avant guarde movements (after the first world war) to boost their own popularity.

No, the argument is about how you don't know what the hell you're talking about so you keep setting up straw men, and nobody else is buying it.

[masque]

Ned, i'm really struggling to make an effort to understand your obsession with realism in art, but for the life of me i can't understand it in light of your sketchbook. i mean, i have never met a real, nude woman composed of graphite particles arranged on a two dimensional plane before. why aren't you drawing "realisitically?"

[CCThrom]

Remember that the Nazi's expelled most modernist work for Germany calling it 'degenerate'.

...and what's got to do with anything? The nazis did a lot of stupid ignorant shit. (BTW - "nazi's expelled" is not a posessive apostrophe)

did someone say "cough" Troll "cough" ?

[Carnifex]

not yet.

[Craig D]

You know, Daz was the last nincompoop who didn't know when to quit and posted nonsense in response to everyone's arguments. It's been kind of boring since he's been gone. Maybe Ned serves a purpose here after all.

I think Steinmetz sent both of them

[Delight]

...and what's got to do with anything? The nazis did a lot of stupid ignorant shit. (BTW - "nazi's expelled" is not a posessive apostrophe)

did someone say "cough" Troll "cough" ?
Lol, and one could blame a touch of that on Hitler having originally wanted to be an artist, and not having the skill to pull it off. Revenge it seems could have been on his mind.

[Ned]

Ahahahahahaha
And I think i may lose all civility if i start to try and respond to c there, and may have to start a "can we stab you with a paintbrush?" movement in the name of art.

You can't silence my song of protest. Sure Picasso was an average painter with average talent but then he realised that he'd never get recongnition because he could push realism to the limits like say Sargent or Velazquez. And instead of trying harder with his realism he became crazy and adopted the shock value theory. Everyone knows that modernism is a scam and it's time is now limited in the market place as people are starting to see through the fraudsters.:D

[Carnifex]

dude....wtf are you on?

[Delight]

not yet.
WHY THE YET
I swear, if my eye twitches any more, it's going to get stuck permanently that way, AND THEN WHAT WILL THE PHOTO THREAD BE?! SHORTER ONE GIRL!
TRAVESTY I SAY, TRAVESTY.





hehehehehehehehehehehe

[JoshuaTheJames]

Holy Crap!


Art Fight!

[Delight]

You can't silence my song of protest. Sure Picasso was an average painter with average talent but then he realised that he'd never get recongnition because he could push realism to the limits like say Sargent or Velazquez. And instead of trying harder with his realism he became crazy and adopted the shock value theory. Everyone knows that modernism is a scam and it's time is now limited in the market place as people are starting to see through the fraudsters.:D
...........no.
Noooo, you're... delusional.
You have NO idea what you're talking about. You really can't form theories like this.
Wait, no, i'm going to pull a "Ned".
Ohio is actually the only place that exists, everything else is just faked, and these crackpot ideas of other places. They're total frauds. The rest of the world, existing is a scam, simply because i've never traveled and seen the rest of it. I mean, people who have, are obviously lying, because they have oh so much to gain from it.



.....I think i scared my IQ into remission.

[Ned]

ALRIGHT I'M WRONG!!!!! I give up. You win, I don't know what I'm talking about.
I'll go back and think up another 'crazy' argument to post on another rainy day.8)

[Delight]

Holy Crap!


Art Fight!
This isn't a fight... this is a kindergardener challenging the mob (which has muscle behind it), in which hte mob is so stunned by the kidlet that although words are thrown, no bullets are really fired.

[wakizashi]

Ned, i'm really struggling to make an effort to understand your obsession with realism in art, but for the life of me i can't understand it in light of your sketchbook. i mean, i have never met a real, nude woman composed of graphite particles arranged on a two dimensional plane before. why aren't you drawing "realisitically?"

I was just about to say the same thing. In that respect, "realism" is immposable to truly obtain, and thats what far to many people(such as ned) fail to comprehend. its like my art teacher told me "art is not an attempt to recreate reality, its an attempt to interpret it"

[egerie]

Ramzeal and sendbdoij : Bande de salauds! Mes quartiers préférés... ;)

Ned : Joseph Goebbels would be proud of you.

I reiterate that we need to have history of art around here. Too many artists running around like lemmings in the solar cult. I'm glad I had a kickass teacher back in college and wish I could push these studies more. Today I feel it was stupid for me to *hate* abstract art. The said teacher forced me into giving out my final essay (3 years of study) on Esquisse #16 of Kandinsky... Having a great teacher knowing what you need to learn is one of the best thing that could happend to you. Open yourself to new things and to knowledge, you'll rise a better artist. Only LACK of knowledge will hurt you, not the other way around.

[masque]

"art is not an attempt to recreate reality, its an attempt to interpret it"my corollary: "art is not an attempt to recreate reality, its an attempt to enhance it"

[wakizashi]

my corollary: "art is not an attempt to recreate reality, its an attempt to enhance it"
Ah, well put

[Michael Jaecks]

Masque: thank you. I know it was a little long. Sometimes, with me, those wacky yarns just start spinning out of control. At one point while I was writing I said to myself "how the hell did I get to Foucault so fast?" I dont even like Foucault.

I'm fascinated by this conspiracy theory of modernism as well. According to Ned, we should all just be vomitting into ladies purses and selling them to galleries for gobs of money because the poor uneducated masses have been duped into thinking "thats good." I never got that memo, and here I am wallowing in relative obscurity and a meager paycheck to paycheck existence when I could be making new friends and influencing people with feces.

I guess the scams on me then, huh?

And Ned, it is about Romanticism,, as I defined it before.. All of it. All of it is the personal search for truth. Some people look in interesting places in interesting ways, and some people draw pedestrian looking half-assed graphite ladies. But it's all the same game. You're either in it with the rest of the conscious beings on the planet or you're asleep.

[Delight]

Masque: thank you. I know it was a little long. Sometimes, with me, those wacky yarns just start spinning out of control. At one point while I was writing I said to myself "how the hell did I get to Foucault so fast?" I dont even like Foucault.

I'm fascinated by this conspiracy theory of modernism as well. According to Ned, we should all just be vomitting into ladies purses and selling them to galleries for gobs of money because the poor uneducated masses have been duped into thinking "thats good." I never got that memo, and here I am wallowing in relative obscurity and a meager paycheck to paycheck existence when I could be making new friends and influencing people with feces.

I guess the scams on me then, huh?

And Ned, it is about Romanticism,, as I defined it before.. All of it. All of it is the personal search for truth. Some people look in interesting places in interesting ways, and some people draw pedestrian looking half-assed graphite ladies. But it's all the same game. You're either in it with the rest of the conscious beings on the planet or you're asleep.
I really REALLY like how you said that. Comendable.

[masque]

[B]ALRIGHT I'M WRONG!!!!! I give up. Ned, don't just capitulate, self-educate! back up, open them baby-blues (or whatever) just a notch wider & perhaps perceive a whole new slant on "reality."

i guarantee you'd be a better artist for it.

[Ramzeal]

egerie: HAHAHA! je pense beaucoup de gens aiment ces quartiers;)...pour ca q'ils coutent la peau du cul!! Tes ou toi?

NEDTry to open your self to other things, dont mean you ave to like it, but just to realized they are there for some resons. People like you, who just stay in what they are confortable or were they like dont learn nothing and stay were they are for a loooonng time. But im sure the NEW Ned think different now ;)

[Ned]

NEDTry to open your self to other things, dont mean you ave to like it, but just to realized they are there for some resons. People like you, who just stay in what they are confortable or were they like dont learn nothing and stay were they are for a loooonng time. But im sure the NEW Ned think different now ;)

Until the next topic comes up and I feel that I need to educate you the masses. again.
watch the space,..8) and think of me as your teacher...
Realism rules!!!

EDIT: haha sigged. AH yes

[nathonicus]

Ummm..... do you think Ned is maybe putting us on? You know, just saying provocative things to watch the fun ensue?

Seriously Ned, I don't think you need to worry about convincing the masses here about the values of "realism" -- they seem to be a pretty good bunch with waaaay more realist AND expressionist painting ability than I'll ever have, and they seem to be making good use of it.

To be Fair, I think I might know some of what you're getting at. When I went to school, I was all but ridiculed by my instructors for wanting to learn to paint realistically -- "You're art looks like Hallmark cards" a professor once told me. (ouch!) But that's just as closed minded as saying that all modern or abstract art is bunk. There's good and bad stuff in both camps, and I think some of the most stunning art is that which is informed by both schools.

Check out the artwork at www.donatoart.com. This guy can paint your fucking socks off, but his compositions, color choice and overall use of the picture frame are heavily influenced by abstract art.

Yes, there have been some arrogant abuses of figurative art by snobs and narrow-minded people who are hanging on the coat tails of "hot" artists, but that's no reason to become an arrogant abuser of figurative art. If you don't like it, fine. There's a lot of it I don't care for, and a lot that doesn't fit my definiton of good art, but then again, there's a lot of realist painting that bores me to death as well.

[Xpose]

A very good read in this thread.... not so much on Ned's part but all the others were great. I haven't been so pissed and laughed so much at the same time in a very good long while. No one can rip on Picasso's art. You can tear the man himself to shreds but his art was the shit. Sure there are some people who take advantage of the definition of art but the for the most part all want to create something that gives off a message. There's really not anything else that can be said that hasn't already been addressed.

-peace

[nathonicus]

And perhaps the most pertinent bit of wisdom I can throw out there is something my old Kung-fu teacher used to say:

"If you have time to talk smack, you're not training hard enough!"

*takes own advice as goes back to draw*

[|NTeRN]

im not a huge fan of most moderism art, but to say i downright hate it would be stupid. as in everything. theres good and bad. that includes bad realism and good moderism.

check out a painter named Nicholai Fechin. his painting look realistic, are are damn simple. infact, its soo much harder to indicate something in a simple manner correctly then it is to draw it as is. dont believe me? try it.

[Ned]

Ilaekae I can see you lurking..please grace this thread with your infinite wisdom and casual sarcasm.

BTW, NM

[Ilaekae]

Me? Infinite wisdom and casual sarcasm? Hell, I'm lucky I can find my mouth when I'm eating without a map and an assistant with a laser pointer...

You're fun, Ned. You just got putzed a little because you used your vocal cords while your brain was stored in the fridge. Next time, I'm guessing you won't be so easy. Please don't prove me wrong... :P

[fixx]

all hail the messiah has spoken!

No, seriously, it's not about discarding past art movements. It's about learning and moving on from them.
Btw, i dunno if it was ever mentioned, but Ned, what artist's do you refer to as realism-artists? I'm sure we can show how they were "modernists" in their time as well :P

[Prometheus|ANJ]

I like art that looks pleasing, which often means I like to see believable/familiar components, rendered in a manner that presents them easily but with enough details to allow a bit of exploration. If the picture is too simple there's less mood, expression or variation possible, and if the picture is too realistic it's not as instantly readable, it's harder to hide or exaggerate, plus there's stuff you can't do with realism, like Wolverine's colorful spandex or Samus' huge orange shoulder pads.

The skills of the artist is irrelevant to how pleasing the picture is. If Picasso were to poop on a paper it's not automatically art because he also knew how to paint realistic. The fact that he spent time on a piece doesn't make it art either. The pictures have to be judged on their own merit.

However, I'd admire the artist itself if the picture looks like it took some skills to make. In the case of realism there can be a technical skill but not neccesarily an artistical skill involved. In the case of abstract stuff the skill is more compositional or whatever. As an concept artist I'm not very interested in any of those. I like to see cool monster/vehicle/trooper ideas and neither realism or abstract art has much of that.

[Delight]

all hail the messiah has spoken!

No, seriously, it's not about discarding past art movements. It's about learning and moving on from them.
Btw, i dunno if it was ever mentioned, but Ned, what artist's do you refer to as realism-artists? I'm sure we can show how they were "modernists" in their time as well :P
He did somewhere, he mentioned velasquez and... someone else.

[PHATandy]

Interesting thread...

I understand in a way where Ned is coming from here... to be fair a little rash and totally the wrong way.
Most of us here i guarentee have seen some paintings that are of some little boxes and mad brushstrokes which looks like nothing but apparently resembles a lot of stuff, and is worth like a million $$$ or something.
I think thats the arguement here, where honestly some stuff is no brainer art.
- NOT all MODERNISM....

Maybe a bad choice of terms and stuff, but slating picasso and so on.. not good. Id kill to see anyone and i pretty much mean anyone... paint that Alter painting, when they were 14. cus to be fair thats just down right impossible... so why did u start the, 'they cant do realism' argument.

Its like a lot of things you see on this forum are the same i guess.
Anime anyone? A lot of people slate newbie anime.. and normal anime to an extent. But alot the best have a background in impressive traditional art and anatomy, and then work onto the whole stylalized work. This applies to alot of modernism, always brought up with strict traditional ways and skills.

This argument should really be against the few that get away with doing very little and make alot of money/recognition. but then again.. that would show how much money hungry/jealous people we are (not saying we are.)
Its funny how this probably boils to the fact that these dudes make more money than you for not doing alot ned.
Not a very honest approach to art, i know u gotta make a living, but try doing art cus u love doing art and u want to become very good (realism). Not cus u want to make money and become recognised.

A little of topic there but i think it applies.

i just think u need to be a little more appreciative and not so judgemental of art just cus they get more recognition than you. Try looking at the good point s of the abstract art. Most of them are about colour and composition like Prom pointed out.

[Red_Rook]

did you have to resurect this?

[PHATandy]

do you know whats really confused me...

When i looked at this earlier (no idea how i got to this thread...) all the dates were like today and yesterday. Now, its like a month old.

Ah man i feel real stupid, i seriously have no idea how this happened. it was right at the front of the lounge posts...

shit me :dead:
but rook - no .. i didnt.. and hopefully i havent :nohope:

[tongue-fu]

I could be making new friends and influencing people with feces.


GG Allin already beat yah there I'm afraid. He was a total lunatic he'd get on stage and throw his filth at the audience.

[llothcat]

:O

what an enlightening thread.

I personally don't like most post-modernism works, simply becasue the training for it is non-existant. I went to a school that simply worshipped post-modernism. ( Hence why my skills are still lacking. I can't even write a decent man-e-fest-o.)

[Ned]

AAAllrighty. Since this argument isn't going to die neither will the creator.

I'm talking about High art now, I'm talking about what defines a masterpiece, I'm talking about the rule that allows a masterpiece to become a real masterpiece and that rule is simple. A masterpiece has to have every element properly mastered. Vermeer, a great example of a true master, every element concievable is evident in his works, he truly has created masterpieces. 8)

BUT!! the works of the modernists, even if they had every compositional element worked out in their paintings, they would always lack the refinment in their works, because having a compositionally elite picture and yet painting like an 8 year old doesn't fit into the category for a masterpiece.
To sum up, you gotta paint realistically.
Now lets see anyone find the flaws in that argument!!!:D

[Tobin]

If something is beautiful and provokes you to think It is a stronger piece regardless of realism or abstraction.

Pointless realism is just technique over function.
Pointless abstraction is just aesthetics over function.

Both are equally crap.

The good values in both are equally great also. Good abstraction still needs to have good composition and the like.

One of the reasons you might not like abstract works is because you cant tell the good from the bad. And If you cant tell the good from the bad in abstract I'd be very worried about your judgement of art all together and pretty much disregard your comments.





/me reads rest of thread, regrets typing ^ as is redundant.

[AndreasM]

All I can say, is that your title suits you very well. Now that you have it all sorted out, glue a "Shut up and draw!" sticker to your forehead, or better yet; "Art is fun". Might even help you put use to that mirror on your desk.

Seriously, putting modernism and realism up against each other is stupid. Neither will win. It´s like dicussing religion. Your faith won´t maky more right than the other. I don´t know much, but as both parts keeps neglecting each other, they also keep them selves back from evolving futher. The audience defines the masterpiece, not the artist. I can understand if you are frustrated at the modernists neglect towards classical figurative painting in the 80-90s, but when you react in the same manner, you contributes to nothing.

Your sig won´t help you much either.

[Chingwa]

Man o' man.
Ned, if ignorance were chicken wings, you'd be Colonel fuckin' Sanders.

THAT is a classic!!! :D

[Avarwen]

I'd take this thread more seriously it you weren't such a fucking asshole. While I don't care for most modern art. I know that the true modern artist knows their basics. This goes for any artist worth their salt. With realism you can't fake knowing the basics you have to know them. With SOME forms of modern art you can fake it, but this dosen't mean the ALL modern artisit do. If you would pull you head from your ass and do some reaserach you'd see that most of the great modern artists did learn their basics and some even started off with realism. The fact some one as uneducated as you claim to be an art fan shows that people need to learn more art history before they can even call themselves a true art fan.

[That fat kid]

I regret typing here at all, but somebody just close this thread.

~A