"I can do that too" when looking at art in museums

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There's a textile art exhibit up right now. Technique-wise, I can do a lot of what I saw there, because that's my job (though if you were to ask me to paint you a picture of it, I couldn't, even to save my life.)

The thing that makes it art isn't always the technique. It's the process (pollack), the environment in which the artist created the piece (ai weiwei), the narrative story behind the work (Mark Bradford's "Pickett's Charge" jumps to mind, but all art has a story), the time invested and what the artist missed to devote that time/energy to the work...

People saying "I can do that too" out loud in museums are probably either trying to sound important/cool, or having a tough time relating to the work(s) on display. Neither is a good look.

Ok arr snob.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m highly educated and even studied the humanities more than the average person I come across.

There’s a lot of art and a lot of art commentary that is absolutely vapid. The people who fawn over this subculture and create an air of importance and prestige around this art should be ridiculed more than they are.

I like art, I like modern art, and I appreciate a wide array of art that may not be everyone’s cup of tea. But there has to be a line drawn somewhere and the breathless descriptions of the genius of a paint splatter or a black line across a canvas deserve nothing. It is a grift.

Where have you seen/heard this? (other than parodies of the art world)

Glenstone has several rooms right now filled with nothing but colored panels. A canvas painted red, another black, another green, etc. They're just titled that too, "red panel." Very little detail on what it's supposed to mean and no there isn't texture or anything besides just the application of paint on canvas. It's worth checking out. I'm not generally skeptical and like modern art but this felt like a joke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m highly educated and even studied the humanities more than the average person I come across.

There’s a lot of art and a lot of art commentary that is absolutely vapid. The people who fawn over this subculture and create an air of importance and prestige around this art should be ridiculed more than they are.

I like art, I like modern art, and I appreciate a wide array of art that may not be everyone’s cup of tea. But there has to be a line drawn somewhere and the breathless descriptions of the genius of a paint splatter or a black line across a canvas deserve nothing. It is a grift.

Where have you seen/heard this? (other than parodies of the art world)

Glenstone has several rooms right now filled with nothing but colored panels. A canvas painted red, another black, another green, etc. They're just titled that too, "red panel." Very little detail on what it's supposed to mean and no there isn't texture or anything besides just the application of paint on canvas. It's worth checking out. I'm not generally skeptical and like modern art but this felt like a joke.

Maybe it is a joke. Maybe not. But if you’re telling us it’s worth checking it out, it made an impression on you.

[Anonymous]

I recommend this book, which recounts a journey by a NYC writer who feels like she’s missing something because she doesn’t “see” art in the way people say she should.

Get the Picture: A Mind-Bending Journey among the Inspired Artists and Obsessive Art Fiends Who Taught Me How to See https://a.co/d/5hsfSPR

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m highly educated and even studied the humanities more than the average person I come across.

There’s a lot of art and a lot of art commentary that is absolutely vapid. The people who fawn over this subculture and create an air of importance and prestige around this art should be ridiculed more than they are.

I like art, I like modern art, and I appreciate a wide array of art that may not be everyone’s cup of tea. But there has to be a line drawn somewhere and the breathless descriptions of the genius of a paint splatter or a black line across a canvas deserve nothing. It is a grift.

Where have you seen/heard this? (other than parodies of the art world)

Glenstone has several rooms right now filled with nothing but colored panels. A canvas painted red, another black, another green, etc. They're just titled that too, "red panel." Very little detail on what it's supposed to mean and no there isn't texture or anything besides just the application of paint on canvas. It's worth checking out. I'm not generally skeptical and like modern art but this felt like a joke.

Maybe it is a joke. Maybe not. But if you’re telling us it’s worth checking it out, it made an impression on you.

That’s Cy Twombly and his works go for millions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re: some modern art, it's understandable and likely true.

+1

Yup. I saw a news report about a preschool aged kid who is selling paintings for thousands each. They are no different than what any little kid can paint and I truly don't understand why people are shelling out thousands for a painting.

You don’t understand art history. It’s okay—a lot of people don’t.

I do find bragging about it odd.

That is okay. A lot of people brag about things they don't understand, especially in politics.

It’s tedious in all arenas and a nonzero number of people avoid those who do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m highly educated and even studied the humanities more than the average person I come across.

There’s a lot of art and a lot of art commentary that is absolutely vapid. The people who fawn over this subculture and create an air of importance and prestige around this art should be ridiculed more than they are.

I like art, I like modern art, and I appreciate a wide array of art that may not be everyone’s cup of tea. But there has to be a line drawn somewhere and the breathless descriptions of the genius of a paint splatter or a black line across a canvas deserve nothing. It is a grift.

But how does it hurt you? I mean, ignore it, don't buy it, don't go to exhibitions, you'll be fine. There are plenty of contemporary artists who work in conventional, traditional ways. Support them. Go to their gallery openings. Buy their art. Post about them on social media. Ignore what you don't like and we're all good. No need to artificially draw a line. Just choose what you like. No need to censor others because you don't like it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m highly educated and even studied the humanities more than the average person I come across.

There’s a lot of art and a lot of art commentary that is absolutely vapid. The people who fawn over this subculture and create an air of importance and prestige around this art should be ridiculed more than they are.

I like art, I like modern art, and I appreciate a wide array of art that may not be everyone’s cup of tea. But there has to be a line drawn somewhere and the breathless descriptions of the genius of a paint splatter or a black line across a canvas deserve nothing. It is a grift.

Where have you seen/heard this? (other than parodies of the art world)

Glenstone has several rooms right now filled with nothing but colored panels. A canvas painted red, another black, another green, etc. They're just titled that too, "red panel." Very little detail on what it's supposed to mean and no there isn't texture or anything besides just the application of paint on canvas. It's worth checking out. I'm not generally skeptical and like modern art but this felt like a joke.

Maybe it is a joke. Maybe not. But if you’re telling us it’s worth checking it out, it made an impression on you.

That’s Cy Twombly and his works go for millions.

That doesn't sound like Cy Twombly. His work is infused with references to classical antiquity and is often in grays, beiges or other somber colors, with lots of markings all over the canvas. When he paints in more vibrant colors, it's always multi-hued, never monochrome and never just flat color. What PP describes sounds more like Ellsworth Kelly.

[Anonymous]

I meant Ellsworth Kelly! Sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Inspired by that thread about menu items in restaurants, I've heard this about art on museum and gallery walls.
Is it low class, or unaware or uneducated? Or maybe it's a perfectly normal response to contemporary abstract art.

NP. As always this depends on the situation. Sometimes a comment like this demonstrates a lack of education. There are situations in which abstract art is remarkably compelling and deep. Usually the artists in those situations are very skilled, and have the ability to make a leap in genres that is impactful.

Sometimes a comment like this reflects a precise identification of a grift. The idea that grift doesn’t exist in the art world is just the narcissism of artists at work and a deep fear that the grift won’t be perpetuated. They lash out at those accurately identifying their grift as “uneducated” because the correct identification of grift will stop it.

[Anonymous]

A lot of contemporary art I could do, yes. The overly Complicated masterpieces and what not? No. I was in complete awe at the Vatican that someone had that kind of talent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m highly educated and even studied the humanities more than the average person I come across.

There’s a lot of art and a lot of art commentary that is absolutely vapid. The people who fawn over this subculture and create an air of importance and prestige around this art should be ridiculed more than they are.

I like art, I like modern art, and I appreciate a wide array of art that may not be everyone’s cup of tea. But there has to be a line drawn somewhere and the breathless descriptions of the genius of a paint splatter or a black line across a canvas deserve nothing. It is a grift.

Where have you seen/heard this? (other than parodies of the art world)

Glenstone has several rooms right now filled with nothing but colored panels. A canvas painted red, another black, another green, etc. They're just titled that too, "red panel." Very little detail on what it's supposed to mean and no there isn't texture or anything besides just the application of paint on canvas. It's worth checking out. I'm not generally skeptical and like modern art but this felt like a joke.

I had a friend who spent several years working at Glenstone. She reported a backstabbing, ultra-condescending culture among her colleagues. It shows in the way they display the artwork and the restrictions placed on the public.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m highly educated and even studied the humanities more than the average person I come across.

There’s a lot of art and a lot of art commentary that is absolutely vapid. The people who fawn over this subculture and create an air of importance and prestige around this art should be ridiculed more than they are.

I like art, I like modern art, and I appreciate a wide array of art that may not be everyone’s cup of tea. But there has to be a line drawn somewhere and the breathless descriptions of the genius of a paint splatter or a black line across a canvas deserve nothing. It is a grift.

But how does it hurt you? I mean, ignore it, don't buy it, don't go to exhibitions, you'll be fine. There are plenty of contemporary artists who work in conventional, traditional ways. Support them. Go to their gallery openings. Buy their art. Post about them on social media. Ignore what you don't like and we're all good. No need to artificially draw a line. Just choose what you like. No need to censor others because you don't like it.

Nobody's censoring anybody, PP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A lot of contemporary art I could do, yes. The overly Complicated masterpieces and what not? No. I was in complete awe at the Vatican that someone had that kind of talent.

Lots of contemporary artists do have that kind of talent, but it’s been done, so they work in a more conceptual mode to show us something we haven’t seen. To get us to think about things we might take for granted, like, say, the color blue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m highly educated and even studied the humanities more than the average person I come across.

There’s a lot of art and a lot of art commentary that is absolutely vapid. The people who fawn over this subculture and create an air of importance and prestige around this art should be ridiculed more than they are.

I like art, I like modern art, and I appreciate a wide array of art that may not be everyone’s cup of tea. But there has to be a line drawn somewhere and the breathless descriptions of the genius of a paint splatter or a black line across a canvas deserve nothing. It is a grift.

But how does it hurt you? I mean, ignore it, don't buy it, don't go to exhibitions, you'll be fine. There are plenty of contemporary artists who work in conventional, traditional ways. Support them. Go to their gallery openings. Buy their art. Post about them on social media. Ignore what you don't like and we're all good. No need to artificially draw a line. Just choose what you like. No need to censor others because you don't like it.

Nobody's censoring anybody, PP.

+1

I would say the censoring is coming from the people who want to squelch all negative commentary about art.