• Things that confuse me...

    1282178501
    Doug [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Major General
    • Posts: 536
    • Joined: 4 Jun 2010

    WandA wrote:

    Doug wrote:

    Alicia D'amore wrote:

    Don't worry too much - even if it is poisonous - it's only likely to harm you if you touch or ingest it so just don't eat the caterpillars!

    Adx

    but bear grills told me to, good in protein

    But he also stays in hotels when filming, tough guy ey?

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-470155/How-Bear-Grylls-Born-Survivor-roughed--hotels.html

    (Sorry for quoting that rag, it's what pooped up with 'Bear Grylls hotel')

    seeing as the story is well know, you are not forgiven for quoting the daily mail

    1282178759
    Doug [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Major General
    • Posts: 536
    • Joined: 4 Jun 2010

    so you proberbly haven't heard the one where they couldn't find a bear for him to fight, so they got some guys to dress up as one, and did a very bad job of it

    1282178903
    Alicia D'amore [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 3433
    • Joined: 2 Feb 2008

    Avrielle_Aniko wrote:

    Lol! I'll try not to eat the caterpillers! No, what worries me is that we have a cat that can be curious at times..

    Ahhh yes that might be an issue!

    Can you find how they got in? If there is an entrance maybe you could keep one room that's caterpillar free for the puss until you know more.

    Adx

    1282178908
    WandA [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 6223
    • Joined: 28 Nov 2007

    Avrielle_Aniko wrote:

    I didn't know the story, actually.. So I can forgive it.. sorta! ;)

    WandA likes AA and this.

    (In yo' face Dougie)

    1282179580
    WandA [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 6223
    • Joined: 28 Nov 2007

    Avrielle_Aniko wrote:

    WandA wrote:

    Avrielle_Aniko wrote:

    I didn't know the story, actually.. So I can forgive it.. sorta! ;)

    WandA likes AA and this.

    (In yo' face Dougie)

    I said 'sorta'. You didn't -have- to make the quote. I think most would believe your word on it better than the paper anyway!

    T'was all in jest of course AA!

    And whoo my word is officially more reliable than the most unreliable mainstream media publication in the entire country! Score!

    1282180948
    jackador123 [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Major General
    • Posts: 626
    • Joined: 3 Sep 2009

    Caterpillar eating what is going on

    1282236000
    WandA [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 6223
    • Joined: 28 Nov 2007

    Most modern art. Call me a Philistine but loads of it is complete shite.

    Today I've seen doodles children would be embarrassed by, a huge pile of bread with a man shaped hope in it and a piece by Emin saying "Is anal sex legal, is legal sex anal." in a big neon sign. Seriously, that is not art. It's utter manipulation of the idiot willing to spend thousands on something that took 15 mins... Yes, it is original. Do you know why? Some things are too stupid to even bothering to consider doing (unless someone wants to throw money at you).

    1282248988
    littlepixi [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Major General
    • Posts: 272
    • Joined: 1 Sep 2009

    as stated on the Good Morning thread why do we get these bastard wisdom teeth?! why do they hert and why havnt we evoloved enough yet. xxx

    1282251797
    lookslikefun [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Colonel
    • Posts: 348
    • Joined: 2 May 2010

    WandA wrote:

    Most modern art. Call me a Philistine but loads of it is complete shite.

    Today I've seen doodles children would be embarrassed by, a huge pile of bread with a man shaped hope in it and a piece by Emin saying "Is anal sex legal, is legal sex anal." in a big neon sign. Seriously, that is not art. It's utter manipulation of the idiot willing to spend thousands on something that took 15 mins... Yes, it is original. Do you know why? Some things are too stupid to even bothering to consider doing (unless someone wants to throw money at you).

    the art in much art is convincing someone that it's Art

    1282252170
    WandA [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 6223
    • Joined: 28 Nov 2007

    lookslikefun wrote:

    WandA wrote:

    Most modern art. Call me a Philistine but loads of it is complete shite.

    Today I've seen doodles children would be embarrassed by, a huge pile of bread with a man shaped hope in it and a piece by Emin saying "Is anal sex legal, is legal sex anal." in a big neon sign. Seriously, that is not art. It's utter manipulation of the idiot willing to spend thousands on something that took 15 mins... Yes, it is original. Do you know why? Some things are too stupid to even bothering to consider doing (unless someone wants to throw money at you).

    the art in much art is convincing someone that it's Art

    Without laughing.

    1282254940
    telemachus [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Colonel
    • Posts: 316
    • Joined: 10 May 2010

    What do you mean by Modern though? "Modern" is not enough of a classification to me? Do you mean a modern abstract painter like Pollock, or someone like Tracey Emin, also a "modern" artist, yet completely different.

    I see a lot of classical artwork to be bollocks to be honest - a lot of it was projectors onto a screen that was then traced over. I mean - a portrait shows skill with a brush, but there is nothing conceptual or interesting about it.

    1282257671
    WandA [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 6223
    • Joined: 28 Nov 2007

    telemachus wrote:

    What do you mean by Modern though? "Modern" is not enough of a classification to me? Do you mean a modern abstract painter like Pollock, or someone like Tracey Emin, also a "modern" artist, yet completely different.

    I see a lot of classical artwork to be bollocks to be honest - a lot of it was projectors onto a screen that was then traced over. I mean - a portrait shows skill with a brush, but there is nothing conceptual or interesting about it.

    I guess 'Modern' is too broad a word after all it could encompass some pieces of Realism or Impressionism I quite like.

    What I should have expressed in that post was many the movements such as Cubism, Expressionism, Futurism, Pop Art and Surrealism although often not to my taste (although some is genius and intriguing) are what I would consider art although there often is more chaff than wheat, although that is only my opinion. I would include much of the Picasso I witnessed today. Some pieces were excellent, emotive, skilled and genuinely worth seeing. Most were not. I know it is a cliché but there were pieces a child could have reasonably attempted... In my opinion if you can consider the average child's work to be art then almost everything around you could be placed on a stand and declared art (as some was today). I feel art is a tag that should be reserved for something of special merit, not like the famous 'Campbell's soup' image I witnessed today.

    Then, in my opinion, there is the stuff that is never ever ever art in a million years. Abstract expressionism such as Pollock and many other pieces of abstract art (although not all). I have a special disdain for sculptures or more specifically these exhibit things. Gormley's bread bed today, where he ate his mass in bread and left a cut out in a pile of bread is absurd in my opinion. Likewise the Emin piece I mentioned earlier, a neon sign with a slightly provocative phrase, hell, I make dozens of them a day! Simply because something is original does not make it art (it also doesn't count as original if instead of slicing a sheep in half you do a cow instead).

    I find it a shame and it annoys me, shit like that puts people off 'real' art (including the more abstract pieces of genuine merit). It's similar to philosophy in science, there is always one nutjob making unrealistic demands ideas and everyone sees him/her for what they are, a nutjob. It turns people away and I find it sad.

    Yes, I know art is subjective, blah blah, but I think there is a snobbery around many of the crap on display, if you get it then you're better than the person who isn't wearing a beret. Ha, take that pleb! So many pieces have so many different 'meanings', often running in to the dozen, did the artist really mean that? Are you only looking for something that isn't and wasn't there?

    A gold plated dog turd doesn't represent the falsity of our everyday lives built on material existence, our attempt to hide our inner most secrets from the world around us for fear of security and to be liked, it doesn't represent the hope of eco-friendly technology with the beautiful animal the meat once once before it was a turd then transformed into a horrible nasty turd representing our current fragile brutish existence only to gold plate it and then it to become beautiful once again and thereby demonstrate the hope we can have in transforming our current decline, it's a turd.

    Sorry if a bit ranty!

    *off to watch the dog 'til she turds then get out the gold marker pen*

    1282258661
    WandA [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 6223
    • Joined: 28 Nov 2007

    headsouth wrote:

    I understand your perspective there WandA, but again, I think you're trying to jude things by the wrong criteria. Warhols Soup pictures are a great example, where he deliberately took a mundane object that no one thinks about and presented it as art with no intervention, that's just genius to me.

    I guess I got a bit ranty the first time out of frustration and didn't express myself well. As I said I find it disappointing how some crap can disengage people.

    I do agree art is not all about technique and skill, concepts and ideas are often hugely artistic.

    On the soup... I just don't see it as art, the context of the piece does not change it's intrinsic values for me. It's an interesting idea, that I agree (and I assume it is the idea not the piece many people find artistic) but I don't believe it is art in my opinion, a humble pebble would not become art if in a glass case. Even if I did concede the interesting-ness of the idea was art as some people think and did justify special merit... there is no special merit to the countless spin offs (like a wooden box painted exactly like a Heinz baked beans cardboard box I have seen in the same place) and near identical concepts that appear.

    Horses for courses I guess.

    1282259413
    Rowan [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Major General
    • Posts: 541
    • Joined: 14 Jan 2009

    I Dislike the more 'abstract' post-modern pieces on the basis that many people investing genuine effort and mindpower in their pieces are undermined and mocked by many more that just wish to take the mick. A few of my friends up here are art students, most of whom care about what they do and work at it, however they all have taken classes with individuals who fall into the latter category, one of whom on the morning of having to submit something for exhibit picked up the pizza boxes left from the last week, glued them together, presented with the empty beer/ vodka bottles and called it art. No prior thought, care and it cheapens the effort of others. There are some modern art works that are indeed genius (though I can't class Warhol's in those even after studying them, with the possible exception of the electric chair, which was weird).

    You can dislike something and still esteem it as art e.g. I hate rap, refuse to call it music but it requires time to write, compose etc and thus I can class it as art which really does reflect an element of our dynamic society. An unmade bed in a gallery just makes me want to go and tidy it and tell the poor wee boy responsible for it to go back home to his mammy and learn to make his own bed!

    1282259483
    Doug [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Major General
    • Posts: 536
    • Joined: 4 Jun 2010

    WandA wrote:

    Most modern art. Call me a Philistine but loads of it is complete shite.

    Today I've seen doodles children would be embarrassed by, a huge pile of bread with a man shaped hope in it and a piece by Emin saying "Is anal sex legal, is legal sex anal." in a big neon sign. Seriously, that is not art. It's utter manipulation of the idiot willing to spend thousands on something that took 15 mins... Yes, it is original. Do you know why? Some things are too stupid to even bothering to consider doing (unless someone wants to throw money at you).

    ok throw it back at you, whats the point of art that is just showing a scean or a person, we have cameras for that.

    Also rember tha Van Goth was considered in his time utter shite, as he was painting very "strange" pices, and now is considered one of the best artists of all time

    1282259885
    WandA [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 6223
    • Joined: 28 Nov 2007

    Rowan wrote:

    I Dislike the more 'abstract' post-modern pieces on the basis that many people investing genuine effort and mindpower in their pieces are undermined and mocked by many more that just wish to take the mick. A few of my friends up here are art students, most of whom care about what they do and work at it, however they all have taken classes with individuals who fall into the latter category, one of whom on the morning of having to submit something for exhibit picked up the pizza boxes left from the last week, glued them together, presented with the empty beer/ vodka bottles and called it art. No prior thought, care and it cheapens the effort of others. There are some modern art works that are indeed genius (though I can't class Warhol's in those even after studying them, with the possible exception of the electric chair, which was weird).

    You can dislike something and still esteem it as art e.g. I hate rap, refuse to call it music but it requires time to write, compose etc and thus I can class it as art which really does reflect an element of our dynamic society. An unmade bed in a gallery just makes me want to go and tidy it and tell the poor wee boy responsible for it to go back home to his mammy and learn to make his own bed!

    What I found out today was there was a piece from a feminist artist in the 70's, I think, it was contained a glass panel filled with the contents of her bins. Condoms, tampons, broken mirrors, hair etc... Remind you of anything? Perhaps the original was art but is doing a similar thing but throwing shite on a bed is a fail in my book... (even if she made 150 grand from it)

    1282259891
    Malteser81 [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: General
    • Posts: 863
    • Joined: 2 Aug 2009

    WandA wrote:

    *off to watch the dog 'til she turds then get out the gold marker pen*

    LMFAO! oh thats genius and very funny *still chuckling to herself*

    1282260205
    WandA [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 6223
    • Joined: 28 Nov 2007

    Doug wrote:

    ok throw it back at you, whats the point of art that is just showing a scean or a person, we have cameras for that.

    Also rember tha Van Goth was considered in his time utter shite, as he was painting very "strange" pices, and now is considered one of the best artists of all time

    It is really representational. It captures a time and a place that no longer exists but with the artist's interpretation adding depth (not made up meaning/depth, see the dog turn example above). It contains both technique and concept, some things that might be considered important in art.

    As for Van Gogh? Well, today I saw many pieces by one of the 'greatest' modern artists to live apparently. I still found most of it shite. An argument from authority doesn't mean the authority is correct.

    1282260231
    WandA [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 6223
    • Joined: 28 Nov 2007

    Malteser81 wrote:

    WandA wrote:

    *off to watch the dog 'til she turds then get out the gold marker pen*

    LMFAO! oh thats genius and very funny *still chuckling to herself*

    £15 and it's all yours!

    1282260648
    Alicia D'amore [sign in to see picture]
    • Rank: Field Marshall
    • Posts: 3433
    • Joined: 2 Feb 2008

    headsouth wrote:

    I think this kinda shows that you're missing the point really. It's about ideas, concepts and the likes, as well as technical skill. I like lots, I dislike lots, but never once would I compare the finished result to my ability to create it. I didn't think of doing it, I also didn't *actually* do it etiher.

    I think WandA is against the art that has no sensible ideas.

    We once saw a piece of art that was brightly coloured painted wooden blocks nailed to a plank of wood with stick people faces painted on. Guess what the concept was? Child's art. Yes. Art that a child is capable of. Really? Does that show innovation?

    Some is ok, but there is a lot of dross!

    Adx

    Post a reply to this thread

    Please sign in to post messages to the forum.