Aug 27, 2008 10:33PM GMT
Question
•
Entertainment - Arts
Do you think this is Art?
I had a huge discussion about this at an art club I go to and I wouldn't consider it art,I just see it as spilled paint on a canvas lol but other's will pay good money for this when they could do it themselves.What is your opinion of it?
I feel the same for the paintings of just colours or brush strokes etc but each to there own I guess.
Loading...-
raves +1 posted Nov 01, 2008 06:22PM GMT (edited)
Answered Yes
the thing is..
everytime you look at abstract paintings, u see something different, whereas, if its only monaleeza "which i also adore" you only see a face of a woman..!
eventhough.. art is devolping along the years, who knows, oneday they might think a torn paper as a wonderful art piece..
then again, art is taste.. mine is different that yours..
nice question..!
Peace. -
raves +1 posted Oct 02, 2008 11:58AM GMT
Answered No
i know that everyone has their own idea of what art is and to some it can be as simple as just a concept but to me art requires time and talent and needs to have SOME aesthetic value. this looks like it was done in 5 seconds by a reckless two-year-old and is nothing to look at. but that's just my opinion =) -
raves +1 posted Sep 14, 2008 12:49AM GMT
Answered Yes
I think it looks like a face. I see the nose, and the eyes, eyebrows, mouth. I think it sort of represents anger, with depression thrown in.
Not all art is artistic or accurate, but all of it says different things to different people. It looks like art to me. -
raves +1 posted Sep 07, 2008 09:07PM GMT
Answered No
I suppose it's all down to intent and meaning. If the artist truly just splashed some paint on canvass and said 'it's art,' then no, no, no...it's not art. If the artist did this in a way to represent something, a thought, or an idea, then it's debatable. I personally don't think I should have to sit and study splashes of paint and try to decipher some hidden meaning. Mostly I think that artists pulling that kind of crap are trying to create some sort of eliteism and saying a work is complex to make up for a lack of talent and laziness. I would rather look at a painting and be astounded at the detail and know from first glance what it was. This isn't to say I don't appreciate abstract or surrealist art and ideas, but sometimes it's pushed too far. -
raves +2 Sep 14, 2008 05:41AM GMTIn a way...as I said, it's debatable. Art is always in the eye of the beholder and I feel that if the artist threw red splatters on a black canvas to represent their anger, and I can look at it for 4 seconds and say, "Wow! I really feel the rage behind those paint splatters!" Then yes, I would consider it art. As I also said, sometimes it's pushed to far. A lot of the times the only message I get from splatters all over a piece of canvas is, "some idiot will pay big bucks for my lack of creativity."
-
raves +1 posted Sep 07, 2008 08:43PM GMT
Answered Yes
Actually, for me, it isn't. But you had no "none of the above" options.
Art isn't defined by one thing. To someone, this is art. To another person, it isn't. You can't judge what is or isn't art, because art cannot be defined. While this particular piece is rather simple compared to some abstract pieces, it doesn't distract from the point that it is, to someone art. To me, it's not something I particularly like. This piece isn't my cup of tea, though I do quite like abstract art. To each their own. -
raves +2 posted Aug 30, 2008 02:57PM GMT
Answered Yes
I studied Pollock during my last year at College and initially I felt the same as you, 'How is this art?'...but after I looked further into it and attempted it myself, I realised it’s a hard process.
Paint consistency and flow has to be perfect, colours and timing is essential and you have to know what you’re trying to say with your art. Anyone can splash paint onto a canvas but it takes someone with a real eye to make it art.
I love abstract work because it’s different and interesting. When I look at a Pollock, I look at the texture, the flow of the lines and the way they interact with each other. You can create your own meaning and interpretation. You can never be wrong with Abstract art.
-
raves +1 posted Aug 29, 2008 02:32PM GMT
Answered Yes
It's like an odd Rorhshac. I took a look and I saw two people having sex. The curvy line was the outline of a womans body. The little splash at the top was her hair. The paint to the left was the guy facing her. At the bottom of the larger portions of paint are a few shapes that look like a hand on her thigh. I see two people in a dark room with red light coming in from outside to the right having sex. -
raves +1 posted Aug 28, 2008 09:47PM GMT
Answered No
Being an actual artist, i have to bust my ass to create works of art. I feel no way that splatter of paint mean anything ( i wont accept this, 'their creative thoughts' bull) if they were genius in anyway with a paint brush, they'd paint me something good. -
raves +1
![Chris [Ninja]™](http://images.sodahead.com/images/profiles/0/0/0/2/9/6/7/8/4/profiles_n3311696390390541354_5742_109876_media_small.jpeg)
Answered Yes
Looks are decieving, it's hard to get the paint to fall in just the right place and to splatter the right way. I tend to prefer abstract art over traditional.I find abstract to be a little more interesting to look at because everyone can have a different opinion on what it is and what it means.