Post deleted by User.
Cleaner Removes 'stain' From Artwork
You must be logged in to do that.
Cleaner removes 'stain' from artwork
Bah, no one at that gallery has any sort of imagination. :p
It could be retitled "When It No Longer is Dripping from the Ceilings"--a posthumous collaborative work with the artist and an unknown avant-garde bohemian mixed-media assistant.
New value: £1,690,000
It could be retitled "When It No Longer is Dripping from the Ceilings"--a posthumous collaborative work with the artist and an unknown avant-garde bohemian mixed-media assistant.
New value: £1,690,000
[+]
Some art is meant to be beautiful and appeal to our aesthetic senses. This isn't always the case. Some art is meant to express emotions, or invoke them.
There is an entire other "field" of art that's meant to push the boundaries of the definition of "art." It's meant to make us ask questions. Is this really art? What on Earth was going through the artist's head? Why would anyone like this?
All of you in this thread who criticized this piece took a moment to consider what your definition of "art" is. In that way, it's a lot more thought provoking and successful than any picture of a bowl of fruit ever was.
There is an entire other "field" of art that's meant to push the boundaries of the definition of "art." It's meant to make us ask questions. Is this really art? What on Earth was going through the artist's head? Why would anyone like this?
All of you in this thread who criticized this piece took a moment to consider what your definition of "art" is. In that way, it's a lot more thought provoking and successful than any picture of a bowl of fruit ever was.
[+]
Carbuncle.Asymptotic said: »
Some art is meant to be beautiful and appeal to our aesthetic senses. This isn't always the case. Some art is meant to express emotions, or invoke them.
There is an entire other "field" of art that's meant to push the boundaries of the definition of "art." It's meant to make us ask questions. Is this really art? What on Earth was going through the artist's head? Why would anyone like this?
All of you in this thread who criticized this piece took a moment to consider what your definition of "art" is. In that way, it's a lot more thought provoking and successful than any picture of a bowl of fruit ever was.
There is an entire other "field" of art that's meant to push the boundaries of the definition of "art." It's meant to make us ask questions. Is this really art? What on Earth was going through the artist's head? Why would anyone like this?
All of you in this thread who criticized this piece took a moment to consider what your definition of "art" is. In that way, it's a lot more thought provoking and successful than any picture of a bowl of fruit ever was.
Phoenix.Sehachan said: »
Carbuncle.Asymptotic said: »
Some art is meant to be beautiful and appeal to our aesthetic senses. This isn't always the case. Some art is meant to express emotions, or invoke them.
There is an entire other "field" of art that's meant to push the boundaries of the definition of "art." It's meant to make us ask questions. Is this really art? What on Earth was going through the artist's head? Why would anyone like this?
All of you in this thread who criticized this piece took a moment to consider what your definition of "art" is. In that way, it's a lot more thought provoking and successful than any picture of a bowl of fruit ever was.
There is an entire other "field" of art that's meant to push the boundaries of the definition of "art." It's meant to make us ask questions. Is this really art? What on Earth was going through the artist's head? Why would anyone like this?
All of you in this thread who criticized this piece took a moment to consider what your definition of "art" is. In that way, it's a lot more thought provoking and successful than any picture of a bowl of fruit ever was.
I'll take that as a concession.
Phoenix.Sehachan said: »
Nope.
Too bad.
Carbuncle.Asymptotic said: »
Some art is meant to be beautiful and appeal to our aesthetic senses. This isn't always the case. Some art is meant to express emotions, or invoke them.
There is an entire other "field" of art that's meant to push the boundaries of the definition of "art." It's meant to make us ask questions. Is this really art? What on Earth was going through the artist's head? Why would anyone like this?
All of you in this thread who criticized this piece took a moment to consider what your definition of "art" is. In that way, it's a lot more thought provoking and successful than any picture of a bowl of fruit ever was.
There is an entire other "field" of art that's meant to push the boundaries of the definition of "art." It's meant to make us ask questions. Is this really art? What on Earth was going through the artist's head? Why would anyone like this?
All of you in this thread who criticized this piece took a moment to consider what your definition of "art" is. In that way, it's a lot more thought provoking and successful than any picture of a bowl of fruit ever was.
I totally agree with you.
The only thing vexing and is more controversial than the piece of art itself is the supposed judgment of value attached to it via price tag from some supposedly qualified judge of a field that is ultimately relative in terms of talent and artistic value/vision.
A lot of that price tag is due to him being a highly-regarded artist while alive, and being dead.
If you look up his art, especially his larger installations, a lot of it is quite interesting.
If you look up his art, especially his larger installations, a lot of it is quite interesting.
Phoenix.Sehachan said: »
I think 'modern art' is one of the most overrated and idiotic things we have. I wish more of these 'sculptures' were accidentally ruined.
I once heard on the radio of an art exhibition where you would pay to enter this completely empty room so that you could admire the feeling of nothingness that the artist wanted to go through. I mean seriously? I can stare at a blank wall at home without paying as much as I want. These 'artists' are just swellheads pumped by some idiotic critics that dictate fashion to feel some kind of power.
Some of you may remember the Simpsons episode with Homer becoming a modern sculptor. I can make a pile of junk as well and give it a title and some madeup emotion. Now where is my money?
I once heard on the radio of an art exhibition where you would pay to enter this completely empty room so that you could admire the feeling of nothingness that the artist wanted to go through. I mean seriously? I can stare at a blank wall at home without paying as much as I want. These 'artists' are just swellheads pumped by some idiotic critics that dictate fashion to feel some kind of power.
Some of you may remember the Simpsons episode with Homer becoming a modern sculptor. I can make a pile of junk as well and give it a title and some madeup emotion. Now where is my money?
Exactly my sentiments on modern art. I've visited MOMA (Museum of Modern Art) and it did nothing but irritate the *** out of me.
I DREW A BOX WITH BLACK PAINT. YOU HAVE NO IDEA HOW MUCH THIS EXPRESSES EVERYTHING.
Garbage.
[+]
Carbuncle.Asymptotic said: »
A lot of that price tag is due to him being a highly-regarded artist while alive, and being dead.
If you look up his art, especially his larger installations, a lot of it is quite interesting.
If you look up his art, especially his larger installations, a lot of it is quite interesting.
Yes, but what necessarily warrants that regard when the demographics of art are so interpersonal in nature? Ultimately pieces of art are made to appeal to the individual that creates it more so than being catered to the public eye. At least I would hope so.
Bahamut.Serj said: »
Phoenix.Sehachan said: »
I think 'modern art' is one of the most overrated and idiotic things we have. I wish more of these 'sculptures' were accidentally ruined.
I once heard on the radio of an art exhibition where you would pay to enter this completely empty room so that you could admire the feeling of nothingness that the artist wanted to go through. I mean seriously? I can stare at a blank wall at home without paying as much as I want. These 'artists' are just swellheads pumped by some idiotic critics that dictate fashion to feel some kind of power.
Some of you may remember the Simpsons episode with Homer becoming a modern sculptor. I can make a pile of junk as well and give it a title and some madeup emotion. Now where is my money?
I once heard on the radio of an art exhibition where you would pay to enter this completely empty room so that you could admire the feeling of nothingness that the artist wanted to go through. I mean seriously? I can stare at a blank wall at home without paying as much as I want. These 'artists' are just swellheads pumped by some idiotic critics that dictate fashion to feel some kind of power.
Some of you may remember the Simpsons episode with Homer becoming a modern sculptor. I can make a pile of junk as well and give it a title and some madeup emotion. Now where is my money?
Exactly my sentiments on modern art. I've visited MOMA (Museum of Modern Art) and it did nothing but irritate the *** out of me.
I DREW A BOX WITH BLACK PAINT. YOU HAVE NO IDEA HOW MUCH THIS EXPRESSES EVERYTHING.
Garbage.
Despite what the NBA says, it's the opposite in this field:
Hate the player, not the game. Or rather, hate the artist, not the field.
Not everyone is a tool making random ***to appeal to pseudo-art snobs with a checkbook waiting to get whatever happens to be "highly regarded".
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2026 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.