Does a famous artist's religious affiliation matter to you?
ANGEL
2012/04/11 16:07:16
|
|
|||||
|
3 votes
|
|
15% | ||
|
17 votes
|
|
85% | ||
|
0 votes
|
|
0% | ||
When I admire a musical composition, or the amazing talent of a singer, or the gifted painter, or the prolific author, their religious affiliation is the last thing on my mind. I might find it interesting as background information, in addition to where they grew up or if their parents also had such talent. It may peak my interest if the content of their creation is religious in nature...but whether they are involved in Christianity, Judaism, Scientology, whether they are a Jehovah's Witness or a Muslim or a Pagan, whether they are an Atheist or an Agnostic - this does not diminish or expand on my opinion of them as an artist.
Does a famous artist's religious affiliation matter to you? If so - why so?
NOTE: As in all my polls, I ask that you be respectful and that you not insult or bash someone for their religious affiliation or if their opinion differs from yours. Thank you.
Does a famous artist's religious affiliation matter to you? If so - why so?
NOTE: As in all my polls, I ask that you be respectful and that you not insult or bash someone for their religious affiliation or if their opinion differs from yours. Thank you.
When they decide to paint about something real, and not just the feeling they get from seeing the world as the lords creation, I will take notice.
I also agree with your response. I don't think that Luke has any understanding of what "shallow" is. Perhaps if he takes a good look in the mirror he might recognize it staring back at him. But to be fair - he is only 18. Lets give him a little slack. He has a lot of growing up to do.
Age is not an excuse for willful ignorance. This "boy" is defaming some of the greatest artist ever. Da Vinci, Michelangelo, Rafael and so one. Growing up in philly by time I was 18, I was at numerous museums that displayed great art of all categories. I had also dropped out of HS and still went to museums. I also went to Woodstock at 17. But age is not an excuse to me.
At any rate - you are right and 18 isn't really all that young. It would be interesting to see his art and what he considers to be 'deep' or 'real'.
To me religion has always been the corrupt version of philosophy, and anyone that thinks they have found deeper meaning in it is only fooling themself, you call it faith but I think most people are just afraid to think of the world in any other way than there church has made it out to be.
I like to see people decide there own beliefs, and if people use fantasy or sci/fi to portray those beliefs, well at least they know the difference between reality and there beliefs.
You had no point to make. You said something stupid, plain and simple. If you wanty to mentally masturbate over your pseudo philosophies have at it. but masturbation should also be done a one.
That sort of talk only works on stupid people, and oh yeah, in real life. You cant win anything here with that kind of talk, you havent even proven to me that you actually read my reply.
As for reading your reply it would help if it made sense and was in real English.
You failed to engage in basic debate, only making my statement more credible. My posts have been completely eligible, unlike your spelling mistake ridden, arrogant, childish, ignorant responses. Get off Sodahead son, its not like your learning anything or teaching anyone else.
In your original post you talk about "religious paintings" being "100% pretentious shallow crap." This would mean that you are discounting the brilliance of the art work by Michelangelo and Leonardo da Vinci, for example. And what about the music composed by Schubert (such as Ave Maria) and Bach and so many more?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?...
http://images.search.yahoo.co...
http://www.chinatownconnectio...
http://www.leonardoda-vinci.o...
Whether you think that religion is a bunch of crap (which is something Headhunter certainly believes) the fact is that the art that some created motivated by their religious beliefs, is anything but "100% pretentious shallow crap." It may just be that you cannot see the depth and the beauty. But I must say that you are surely in the minority. I have never met anyone, Agnostic, Atheist included, who has not/cannot still admire and acknowledge the genius although they don't share in the artist's religious beliefs.
And, by the way, you both had some misspellings. You be...
In your original post you talk about "religious paintings" being "100% pretentious shallow crap." This would mean that you are discounting the brilliance of the art work by Michelangelo and Leonardo da Vinci, for example. And what about the music composed by Schubert (such as Ave Maria) and Bach and so many more?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?...
http://images.search.yahoo.co...
http://www.chinatownconnectio...
http://www.leonardoda-vinci.o...
Whether you think that religion is a bunch of crap (which is something Headhunter certainly believes) the fact is that the art that some created motivated by their religious beliefs, is anything but "100% pretentious shallow crap." It may just be that you cannot see the depth and the beauty. But I must say that you are surely in the minority. I have never met anyone, Agnostic, Atheist included, who has not/cannot still admire and acknowledge the genius although they don't share in the artist's religious beliefs.
And, by the way, you both had some misspellings. You better believe I carefully spell-checked this post before ending off (LOL)
I would love to hear a discussion behind the meaning of religious paintings, until then it is only an illustration of a religious story or proverb. I would like to see the creativity behind these paintings explained, otherwise to me they equal the work of someone who draws/paints illustrations for a book, he/she is not creating a visual piece from his own creativity but instead working from the idea of another person in this, and the case of the Bible, an author.
To put my idea in a hypothetical, if every artist in the world followed the one religion, no work would be entirely unique. There would be no room for new ideas, no experimentation.
Your friend Headhunter seems to have a chip on his shoulder, weather or not he is in the right, he can not express himself at all. He thinks he can win a debate by ridiculing me, he may very well have just read the first line of my po...
I would love to hear a discussion behind the meaning of religious paintings, until then it is only an illustration of a religious story or proverb. I would like to see the creativity behind these paintings explained, otherwise to me they equal the work of someone who draws/paints illustrations for a book, he/she is not creating a visual piece from his own creativity but instead working from the idea of another person in this, and the case of the Bible, an author.
To put my idea in a hypothetical, if every artist in the world followed the one religion, no work would be entirely unique. There would be no room for new ideas, no experimentation.
Your friend Headhunter seems to have a chip on his shoulder, weather or not he is in the right, he can not express himself at all. He thinks he can win a debate by ridiculing me, he may very well have just read the first line of my posts (to find I had not yielded). I am happy to report and block him, I am sure others will take the same approach with him, he has no intention of using this site for any of its uses. Rant over.
I cant get any of my own work online at the moment, but I will add it all to my own page as soon as I find the time.
Of course, as someone who is not religious, you would not see relevance in such work to your life or beliefs. However, that would not make it "crap" or "pretentious". The artist is sincere with his subject and it certainly isn't "pretentious" to him. I am not a Christian, but I can listen to Ave Maria, and hear the passion, appreciate the harmonies, and the piece can move me to tears. Does a work of art need to have relevance in my life for me to appreciate that it is still brilliant? No, not to me.
I find Edward Hopper, while colorful, rather boring in subject matter, with the exception of a few - such as the "automat", "Room in New York" and a few ot...
Of course, as someone who is not religious, you would not see relevance in such work to your life or beliefs. However, that would not make it "crap" or "pretentious". The artist is sincere with his subject and it certainly isn't "pretentious" to him. I am not a Christian, but I can listen to Ave Maria, and hear the passion, appreciate the harmonies, and the piece can move me to tears. Does a work of art need to have relevance in my life for me to appreciate that it is still brilliant? No, not to me.
I find Edward Hopper, while colorful, rather boring in subject matter, with the exception of a few - such as the "automat", "Room in New York" and a few others. While I can appreciate "ground swell", "Lighthouse at two lights", "Route 6", "Portrait of Orleans", I find the subject matter to be rather boring - using your word "shallow" and it does not measure up to other works by other artists who have chosen similar subjects. For example, here are other artists renditions of lighthouses: http://www.google.com/search?...
Thomas Kinkaid took such subject matter and added a new dimension in his use of light. Always a favorite of mine. http://www.thomaskinkade.com/...
He was a religious man. But whether you are Christian or not, it doesn't detract from his art and has been the impetus behind his work: http://www.thomaskinkade.com/...
Unless you have walking in to a Kinkaid gallery, you cannot appreciate why he earned the name "painter of light".
Francis Bacon's work is deep, too dark for my tastes, but he also gets his inspiration from religion.
What is it about Edward Hopper's work that you find unpretentious and deep -- as opposed to "100% pretentious shallow crap."?