If a person posts a piece of art, writing, etc. On line, then they should be prepared to be criticized, and beyond. It is, after all, the internet. I have to assume that nearly all online public spaces can/will be brutal.
I also, think that only “allowing” positive and encouraging criticism is ridiculous. The truth of what a person thinks is pretty important. Again, if generic you are putting your art out there, suck it up, take genuine criticism to heart, and stick with your passion. Don’t let the trolls get you down.
You were trying to do something and it didn’t work (e.g. photorealistic painting that isn’t photorealistic)
You were trying to do something, and it worked, but I just don’t like that particular thing. (you are imitating Jackson Pollack, or perhaps you are Jackson Pollack)
You weren’t really trying to do anything, or it’s not clear what you were trying to do.
The intent matters, but it’s not everything. A lot of folk art can be good in ways that the artist didn’t intend.
Anyway, I don’t find the critique of “bad art” super instructive, as that’s really a more of a judgment, but at the same time I don’t think adult artists ought to be coddled and praised. They need to know how the viewer is receiving it, so they can understand how their style is working (or not working). Maybe that means they need to do more of something, or less of something, or change approaches altogether. But either way, critical feedback is important to growth. If you can’t handle less-than-positive feedback, then you’re not going to grow as an artist.
There’s plenty of bad art in the world, you just have to visit a seaside resort and drop into a gallery, where you can avail yourself of some terrible seascape to help fund some old dear’s retirement.
This is a great comparison. I think the Kinkade stuff definitely takes more skill - I could probably produce something more or less matching Hirst’s spin paintings, but Kinkade’s nuclear-furnace powered cottages are far outside my technical skill.
But I actually like the Hirst paintings. They’re not hard to make, they don’t really “say” anything, but they’ve got a vitality and a sense of action that’s much more appealing than Kinkade. I could see hanging one of those on my wall, especially if I was going for an overall “60s mod” aesthetic for the place I was decorating.
I could certainly see hanging a spin painting on my wall, but it wouldn’t be a Hirst spin painting, because I could make my own, that I’d enjoy just as much, for much cheaper than a genuine Hirst.
And Kinkade did actually produce some decent art, early in his career, before he realized that the schlocky stuff would sell better.
I agree. But I can’t get my head around someone paying top dollar for Hirst’s. Do they not realize that ANYone can buy a kit to do it at home (or make their own using a power drill… I know a woman who does those at local fairs with old LPs, after masking off the center labels).
I made dozens of those as a kid until I realized that they took almost zero skill and got bored with them.
I will say that “simple” art isn’t the same as “bad” art. Spin art can certainly be pretty, which is enough to make it “good” if pretty is what you are looking for.
The issue with Hirst’s spin art is less that it’s bad than it’s respected and priced well above what it should be for the effort and skill put into it, an example of how much of professional art is about status games. And to be frank, scamming people; looking it up Hirst is now turning art into NFTs, selling them for high prices and destroying the original.
I mean google “pretty spin art”; there’s any number of examples of such art that one could happily hang up on a wall just because it looks nice. It’s just not Deep and Meaningful art that takes an expert to make and is worth thousands or millions of dollars.
Oh my. Kandinsky and Rothko are two of my absolute favorites and whose work most informs, though very indirectly, the “fine art” side of my photography. Few works impel in me the kind of transcendental ecstasy those two artists do (though I can do without Wassily’s geometric Bauhaus work.) Miro is also one of my favorites. That general era of art is my sweet spot. Damien Hirst, though, is perhaps one I have negative feelings towards, though I try to mostly ignore.
