We can see intentionality in abstract paintings, the fact that the artist may have included a repetition of shapes or a particular rhythm to show movement or emotion or anything else is what obviously distinguishes the work from that of a child or an elephant who won't think to include techniques like repetition or rhythm. As a figurative artist, I personally find it insulting to my dedication to learning and exploring skills, techniques, anesthetics, history and so many other things that are involved in being an artist and making art, only for someone to come along and graze the canvas with a bunch of very basic level brushstrokes or to pour or splash paint on a canvas and that to be considered as a great work becausethey were keen enough to add a balance of color or rhythm or something else. It is a disservice to the artist whose work also includes all of those aspects and even more.
I understand and appreciate what is being said from a Western psychological discipline, (some of it sounds familiar to symbolic interactionism). Also embroiled in this psychological approach is the philosophy of the mind, i.e. belief (Gendler). But to say "art" and not "painting" in the case discussed in the video is reductionist. Also some things in art cannot be made solely by children, animals or machines as indistinguishable from an artist such as certain kinds of sculpture, photography, ceramics etc.
and the fact he didn't even try to conceal the psychological priming. Asking "explain why it's good" and then trying to call abstract art a hoax because they said good things about it... not to mention it doesn't even remotely look like a Pollock.
25:51 so when we see art, we become entranced by it and we can also see the mind behind the art.... I wonder if it also applies to nature when people go hiking or just observe and experience the outdoors?
I think it happens every time we really take the time to observe something, be it art, nature or anything else. We try to understand ourselves through the world, and reflecting on ourselves I think is one of the most natural things, it just happens when you contemplate anything. I think that's why, through the ages, there have been so many types of divination, we see ourselves everywhere.
so the "less abstract" an abstract art is, the more likely people think it's made by an adult human? doesnt that invalidate the whole argument of abstract art to begin with?
I don't understand how people find kids and animals work are the same as abstract art made by the artist?! The canvas the paints, the quality of movement and shapes are so much more supreme, it is obvious. No need to underate artists because of your own ignorance.
this is another example of why we are where we are today,why do we as humanity feel that we need to examine the shit out everything?even our perceptions of simplicity in all it,s beauty!
Not offended by saying Chinese culture is primitive, because I don’t know if this is true, but I can say original art and forgeries in Chinese culture are valued vastly different. I wonder where you got the idea that’s the opposite? 😂 Interesting lecture and seriously good questions asked by the audience.
You haven't answered why a urinal kept in an exhibition is considered as art. So the artist decides what is art.no academic can put artists in their conceptual vision. Ever since artists rebelled against the French academy artists are rebels who don't just break rules but create the new rules.ary is whatever the true artist does next.
Art can not be engineered by scientific understanding. If it was than we wouldnt need artist we would follow a series of rules and we would create a work of art. But that is not to say there shouldnt be scientific studies on art. Such studies keep academics busy at psychology/philosoohy departments but are meaningless when you try to create real art.
All this sykology is measuring iz whut we already know: any given culture has pre-loaded its members with normative values of authenticity versus not and ethical-emotive responses accordingly. And her 'essence" proposition is purecumbaya nonsense, as well because it's our own emotive state that creates said essentialities to begin with.
@Michael Lochlann true. There is only one good art, the invisible one. It is to such an extent part of our lives, that we dont recognize it as seperate from us.
Modern abstract “Art” requires the conjunction of opposing imaginative terminology and the assistance of media’s hype to create value in a worthless object. Abstract art requires what the lazy artist who created it lack, the fortitude to completely create something identifiable that a random stranger could create a link between image, experience and observation. The abstract is so abstract it’s unrecognizable on any level
A well trained artist friend many years ago in nyc told me that it’s too much work to paint a traditional portrait. So she changed to make some abstract art, just splash around according to her. She got invited to Spain for her abstract works not long after. She splashed on some big plexiglass
Hot take: The intrinsic value of art is received by the creator and not the viewer. All value given by the viewer is subjective and there are no wrong views. The amount of intrinsic value of art is closely tied to what level of transformation the artist has received from doing the work. It can be a soup can or a Rembrandt or even a AI image, but I would argue that the transformation recieved by the artist for making an AI image can be far less than other forms, for example. And yet there IS transformation using AI tools, however little or great, and therefore art.
