Yes, but you’ve never really tried the potato salad in question, because you’re too ignorant to know what it is and how to consume it. It doesn’t belong up your nose or in your ears.
I think of this as the ‘Primacy Fallacy’ - just because something is the first example of its kind doesn’t mean it is best, or even good. The answer in this case as to why no one did it before is because it’s such a patently silly idea that most would’ve feared that they would’ve been laughed out of a career.
Why should I distinguish between them? I don’t care for abstract art, and I believe most of it takes no talent. They’re two separate beliefs, both of which I hold. If you folks want to mix them together, that’s fine.
As for me being an idiot - Hmm. I didn’t post to the smart-certification thread a while back, perhaps I should have? I’m sure there are Dopers with a bit better credentials than my own, but I’m not stupid by any stretch of the imagination.
Honestly, if you think of me as an ignorant troglodyte, that’s okay. I won’t lose any sleep over it.
Assuming you’re trying to imply that I haven’t properly experienced the abstract art I’m judging, what am I supposed to do? Lick it? Do the snozzberries taste like snozzberries?
You are entitled to your own opinions, but you are not entitled to your own facts. It’s been shown to you again and again that these artists have chops. That you refuse to acknowledge that speaks more about your obstinancy than the artists’ talents.
So - are you saying I should be impressed that Kandinsky can trace a circle and manipulate a ruler? Or that Mondrian owns a t-square? Some of their other works may demonstrate talent. That’s great. I’m not saying that they completely lack talent - I’m saying that the abstract works, for the most part, lack any evidence of talent.
You could begin by challenging your assumption that the point of art is to look like the object being painted, and that anything else is a con. You’re wrong about that. I’m telling you this as someone who can do it. I am an artist. I can draw and copy a photograph exactly, or paint something to look like it does in reality (my drawings are tighter than my paintings). I’ve done hundreds of quick-sketch portraits, and often when I draw kids I make the Mom’s cry. I have been to art school and I am trained. And I am telling you, the point of (most) art, whether it’s realistic or abstract, is to relate a visual experience. If the artist’s experience is foreign so much the better, then it’s an opportunity to expand your understanding.
Take a look at Edward Hopper’s work sometime. His goal was to paint light. He didn’t give a rat’s ass about the particular buildings he chose - he cared about his experience of seeing them, particularly the light he saw.
Think about it. What would be the point of doing visual art in order to relate intellectual information? Why wouldn’t you do that in written form? If Hopper was concerned about those buildings, wouldn’t a photograph have been a better way of recording them?
Look at Francis Bacon sometime. His work has elements of realism and abstraction combined, and it’s powerful and eerie.
Do you ever get tired of “quoting” things I haven’t said?
Which suggests that they were making artistic choices, as opposed to just showing off. Which invalidates your claim that no thought went into those works.
Many years ago I went to see Weather Report in concert. Now, there is no doubt that Wayne Shorter is an excellent technician who can play a lot of notes really fast. But that night, he played maybe five notes, total. And they were good notes, well played and well placed. And they worked. They added to the overall musical texture, whereas a lot of scales and flourishes would have taken away from it. But by your reasoning, I guess I saw no evidence of talent. I should have asked for my money back. Just how many notes does $15 entitle one to, anyway?
I have to say, you’re the biggest ingrate I’ve run into at SDMB. We’ve all spent time and energy trying to expand your understanding and erase your ignorance, and you respond with despicable, ungrateful, rude remarks.
Fuck you.
Where didn’t you say that?
Mm… no. One can make choices without consideration - happens all the time. Of course, maybe they were thinking. Frex, the Red Square painting’s artist - maybe he was thinking “I’ll put a big honkin red square on the canvas, and sell it for $50,000!”
Disanalogous. He was providing subtle accompaniment to other music playing at the same time - judging purely from your description of events. On the other hand, if his keyboard(?) had been the only instrument, and for an entire hour-long concert he played five notes - then I would label him a lazy, pretentious jerk.
And thank you, O Noble Missionaries of the Way, the Light, and the Truth, endeavouring to bring Your Light, Which Of Course Can Be The Only True Light, None Others Will Do, to my dark corner of civilization.
How dare I not be grateful for your attempts to “Enlighten” me, a lowly peon?
…
Seriously, what the hell? Were you expecting me to convert to your point of view, kiss your feet, and say “Thank you sir, may I have another?”
Jeebus. ‘Stuck-up’ doesn’t even begin to cover it.
Heh. That’s funny. Good one.
Saxophone.
And there would have been nothing lazy or pretentious about it. He’s a professional whose talent I trust, and he makes artistic choices I trust. If it’s his decision to not fill up the air with a lot of unnecessary blather, then good for him. And it was my decision to sit and enjoy the music instead of standing up and shouting “I’ve been duped!”
I’m not attempting to enlighten you, but I’m trying to get you to see that an artist doesn’t necessarily lack talent simply because a square doesn’t look like a bowl of fruit.
Then why did anyone do it?
And if you felt that the scenario, $15 for the five notes over an hour, was a fair exchange for the concert’s aesthetic value to you, I wouldn’t say you were duped either.
Good. Then why does the same thing not apply to visual art. Or what, in your opinion, is the cutoff value for abstract art? At what dollar value do you demand a nude instead of a circle? And do you intend to enforce this amount on all consumers?
That invective was directed at fessie, not you. You don’t come off as ‘imperious’.
Let me spell it out.
Artist A paints Picture B, “Bowl of Fruit”. “Bowl of Fruit” is a blank canvas with a 3-inch by 3-inch robin’s-egg-blue square on it.
I am not impugning Artist A’s talents when I say that Picture B requires none. Artist A may have many wonderful pieces that are talented, effortful, whatever. What I’m saying is that either A) He really took a lot of time and effort to paint B, and therefore I question his sanity, or more probably, B) he took a ruler, pencil-sketched the square on the canvas, filled it in, and picked a random name for it, in hopes of selling it as abstract art.
Whimsy?
Spotted the potential for a dollar?
It’s like all the goth/counterculture T-shirts that scream ‘I’m an individual. And so is everyone like me.’ - mass produced and available for purchase at the local hot topic. There’s money to be had in appealing to a counter culture - if you get people fed up with traditional art, you can make a buck by giving them something arbitrary but nontraditional.