Is studying contemporary art important?

[civilicious]

From what i've studied, some of the works in this genre are pretty bizzare. It's a genre where scribbles, painted squares, and balled up hair can be worth thousands. Its a genre where some artwork looks like my 5 year old cousin could create. i suspect the focus has more to do with subject matter and concepts rather than technical skills.

what do you think? does contemporary art significantly affect society? the world?

 

[Luthien]

NO

 

[Alone]

No?

 

[Kadarin]

The correct answer is: It depends.

It depends on what you're going to do with what you learn from studying it. For example, if you're going to go into business selling such "art" to young, wealthy, insecure people, then you might want to know what you're talking about.

 

[mooglemania85]

Will studying help you get laid?

 

[civilicious]

i posed the question in the most general sense, not pertaining to me in particular. I wanted to get a response to see what people outside the "elitist" art community thought about wacko contemporary art. i dont see what the big deal about contemporary art is either.

Originally posted by: mooglemania85
Will studying help you get laid?

It just might. There are some cute gallery assistants in the Pearl District in Portland.

 

[theprodigalrebel]

Is that something like this?

 

[DaWhim]

NOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooooooooooooo...............

 

[bobsmith1492]

Studying the drying patterns of the paint used in the art is probably more worth the time.

It would seem all the good art has been done. Now people are just going for shock value or less-is-more...

 

[Excelsior]

Originally posted by: civilicious
i posed the question in the most general sense, not pertaining to me in particular. I wanted to get a response to see what people outside the "elitist" art community thought about wacko contemporary art. i dont see what the big deal about contemporary art is either.

Originally posted by: mooglemania85
Will studying help you get laid?

It just might. There are some cute gallery assistants in the Pearl District in Portland.

I was the only guy in my AP Art History class in HS. :thumbsup:

 

[Aluvus]

Important in a "save the world" sense? No.

 

[toolboxolio]

If your dad gave you a trust fund.... then I can say it's a worthwhile venture.

Otherwise, stick with why real people goto school.

 

[imported_Tango]

Originally posted by: civilicious
From what i've studied, some of the works in this genre are pretty bizzare. It's a genre where scribbles, painted squares, and balled up hair can be worth thousands. Its a genre where some artwork looks like my 5 year old cousin could create. i suspect the focus has more to do with subject matter and concepts rather than technical skills.

what do you think? does contemporary art significantly affect society? the world?

Yes. Contemporary art is not bizarre nor more hard to understand and appreciate than more traditional works.

In fact, art from the medieval and modern periods is significantly more complex and most people just appreciate the very first layer of interpretation, the aesthetically pleasant figurative composition.

Most people do not understand contemporary art because they do not know the language. It' like asking somebody who doesn't speak German to have an opinion on a Goethe play in German. He would complain he doesn't understand the plot, but simply because he wouldn't understand the language.

In my opinion studying contemporary art should be a must for everybody. Living in a world without understanding its art is sad in my opinion. Artists are a society's eyes and consciousness, and keeping in touch with the contemporary arts scene can tell you a lot about the world you live in.

Plus, it can be a lot of fun, and it's a fascinating journey.

Depending what your knowledge on art in general is, I can advice you a couple of very good readings and galleries to get started, if you fell like you are interested in the subject.

P.s. there is no "elitist art community". As I said, there are people who know the language and people who don't. Just like in sciences or sport, you need to know the rules of the game before you can have an opinion.

People with a refined taste for the arts do not share the same opinions about different artists and school. Contemporary art is not monolithic. You can very well educate your taste about it and then dislike many artists of currents among what people usually call contemporary art.

 

[Lola]

Originally posted by: Tango

Originally posted by: civilicious
From what i've studied, some of the works in this genre are pretty bizzare. It's a genre where scribbles, painted squares, and balled up hair can be worth thousands. Its a genre where some artwork looks like my 5 year old cousin could create. i suspect the focus has more to do with subject matter and concepts rather than technical skills.

what do you think? does contemporary art significantly affect society? the world?

Yes. Contemporary art is not bizarre nor more hard to understand and appreciate than more traditional works.

In fact, art from the medieval and modern periods is significantly more complex and most people just appreciate the very first layer of interpretation, the aesthetically pleasant figurative composition.

Most people do not understand contemporary art because they do not know the language. It' like asking somebody who doesn't speak German to have an opinion on a Goethe play in German. He would complain he doesn't understand the plot, but simply because he wouldn't understand the language.

In my opinion studying contemporary art should be a must for everybody. Living in a world without understanding its art is sad in my opinion. Artists are a society's eyes and consciousness, and keeping in touch with the contemporary arts scene can tell you a lot about the world you live in.

Plus, it can be a lot of fun, and it's a fascinating journey.

Depending what your knowledge on art in general is, I can advice you a couple of very good readings and galleries to get started, if you fell like you are interested in the subject.

P.s. there is no "elitist art community". As I said, there are people who know the language and people who don't. Just like in sciences or sport, you need to know the rules of the game before you can have an opinion.

People with a refined taste for the arts do not share the same opinions about different artists and school. Contemporary art is not monolithic. You can very well educate your taste about it and then dislike many artists of currents among what people usually call contemporary art.

I could not agree more... you are right on. :thumbsup:

 

[Double Trouble]

Waste of time. There is nothing to "study". Either something is enjoyable to see/hear/touch/whatever, or it is not. All the other BS that artsy folks try to add to it is useless.

 

[SampSon]

It's important for all aspects of humanity to be studied. If they weren't studied then they would most likely disappear.

 

[imported_Tango]

Originally posted by: SampSon
It's important for all aspects of humanity to be studied. If they weren't studied then they would most likely disappear.

Art will never disappear. Human beings have always been making art and alway will. From prehistoric paintings in caves to celebrate good hunting never man has stopped producing art.

Making art is a basic need, just like breathing and eating.

 

[Quasmo]

I'm sitting in a 20th century art class right now. I'm gonna say yes. It's completely about the concept behind the painting. Before art was about the asthetic, but with more contemperary art is about the art itself. So paintings like "White on White" where it is simply a white square on a white canvas, but how do you paint white on white, and that what it is about. Painters like Mondrian (the red, blue, yellow squares) are trying to get painting down to the purist form, getting rid of color until they have got to the purest form. Some installation art is simply about chance, and not about art at all, but the fact that everything is random chance. One artist went into a gallery with a wad of pink felt, dropped it, and the way that it fell is the piece. I believe it is important to study contemperary art, but more the message than the art itself, the art is there to make you think, if you can't look at it and think something, you are a sheep and can't appreciate art in the first place.

 

[Howard]

Depends on the kind of art. Contemporary paintings don't speak to me.

 

[imported_Tango]

Originally posted by: Quasmo
I'm sitting in a 20th century art class right now. I'm gonna say yes. It's completely about the concept behind the painting. Before art was about the asthetic, but with more contemperary art is about the art itself. So paintings like "White on White" where it is simply a white square on a white canvas, but how do you paint white on white, and that what it is about. Painters like Mondrian (the red, blue, yellow squares) are trying to get painting down to the purist form, getting rid of color until they have got to the purest form. Some installation art is simply about chance, and not about art at all, but the fact that everything is random chance. One artist went into a gallery with a wad of pink felt, dropped it, and the way that it fell is the piece. I believe it is important to study contemperary art, but more the message than the art itself, the art is there to make you think, if you can't look at it and think something, you are a sheep and can't appreciate art in the first place.

I think anybody can appreciate it, if educated to understand the language. In my opinion the crucial point is studying the passage between Impressionism and the post-Cubism period. That is the key moment in the contemporary age that changed our world forever.

It's hard to jump straight to Warhol or Kosuth without passing through the period that shaped the very concept of Avant-gardes.

Personally I think Hopper provides an amazing starting point for somebody interested in contemporary art. His work is so complex and evocative, yet always equilibrate. His career alone is a small framework for understanding how art disengaged from purely figurative aesthetics.

 

[civilicious]

Originally posted by: Tango

Yes. Contemporary art is not bizarre nor more hard to understand and appreciate than more traditional works.

In fact, art from the medieval and modern periods is significantly more complex and most people just appreciate the very first layer of interpretation, the aesthetically pleasant figurative composition.

Most people do not understand contemporary art because they do not know the language. It' like asking somebody who doesn't speak German to have an opinion on a Goethe play in German. He would complain he doesn't understand the plot, but simply because he wouldn't understand the language.

In my opinion studying contemporary art should be a must for everybody. Living in a world without understanding its art is sad in my opinion. Artists are a society's eyes and consciousness, and keeping in touch with the contemporary arts scene can tell you a lot about the world you live in.

Plus, it can be a lot of fun, and it's a fascinating journey.

Depending what your knowledge on art in general is, I can advice you a couple of very good readings and galleries to get started, if you fell like you are interested in the subject.

P.s. there is no "elitist art community". As I said, there are people who know the language and people who don't. Just like in sciences or sport, you need to know the rules of the game before you can have an opinion.

People with a refined taste for the arts do not share the same opinions about different artists and school. Contemporary art is not monolithic. You can very well educate your taste about it and then dislike many artists of currents among what people usually call contemporary art.

Tango, you've brought up some very good points. Thank you for your insights! :thumbsup:

 

[TravisT]

art, in my opinion has little impact if any. Primarily because art can be interpreted many ways. Granted, i'm not very good at the whole interpreting thing, most abstract stuff is simply annoying in my opinion.

 

[imported_Tango]

Originally posted by: TravisT
art, in my opinion has little impact if any. Primarily because art can be interpreted many ways. Granted, i'm not very good at the whole interpreting thing, most abstract stuff is simply annoying in my opinion.

Well, I guess it depends a lot on what you want art to have an impact on. If we are talking about having an impact on people's life my personal experience is that nothing shaped my life more than encounters with some works of arts.

Art is immortal, and the feeling you get from encountering the same questions, desires, ambitions and passions in art created 600 years ago (or 2000 years ago) can be exhilarating. Men haven't changed that much after all. Personally, while I enjoy contemporary art and try to keep up with the current art production, I love more than anything else the 14th to 17th century art. I feel never men have been so highly refined in their thoughts. Illuminism gave us a completely new mindset and now most of the renaissance approach to life and knowledge is lost forever. Every single Da Vinci painting is literally an encyclopedia of allegories, a whole architecture about the political, religious, scientific and metaphysic world of his time.

Today it's literally an archeology-type of experience, as we try to retrieve the symbolism in his work, but at the time (when many couldn't read) those paintings were a major medium for ideas and knowledge to be preserved or spread.

Back on topic.

If you instead look for impact on a macro level, don't underestimate the role of the arts. Major political and social shifts always reach the critical mass necessary for changes to happen because of ideas, and nothing spread ideas faster and stronger than arts.
Without the French literature of the 18th century, there would have been no French Revolution. No crusades without Gothic architecture and so on...

 

[Mxylplyx]

Go study it in school, and you'll get an excellent first hand opportunity to study the contemporary design of your local unemployment office.

 

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: Tango

Originally posted by: TravisT
art, in my opinion has little impact if any. Primarily because art can be interpreted many ways. Granted, i'm not very good at the whole interpreting thing, most abstract stuff is simply annoying in my opinion.

Well, I guess it depends a lot on what you want art to have an impact on. If we are talking about having an impact on people's life my personal experience is that nothing shaped my life more than encounters with some works of arts.

Art is immortal, and the feeling you get from encountering the same questions, desires, ambitions and passions in art created 600 years ago (or 2000 years ago) can be exhilarating. Men haven't changed that much after all. Personally, while I enjoy contemporary art and try to keep up with the current art production, I love more than anything else the 14th to 17th century art. I feel never men have been so highly refined in their thoughts. Illuminism gave us a completely new mindset and now most of the renaissance approach to life and knowledge is lost forever. Every single Da Vinci painting is literally an encyclopedia of allegories, a whole architecture about the political, religious, scientific and metaphysic world of his time.

Today it's literally an archeology-type of experience, as we try to retrieve the symbolism in his work, but at the time (when many couldn't read) those paintings were a major medium for ideas and knowledge to be preserved or spread.

Back on topic.

If you instead look for impact on a macro level, don't underestimate the role of the arts. Major political and social shifts always reach the critical mass necessary for changes to happen because of ideas, and nothing spread ideas faster and stronger than arts.
Without the French literature of the 18th century, there would have been no French Revolution. No crusades without Gothic architecture and so on...

At what point would you cut off actual art with heavy marketing? I can imagine that many contemporary art pieces are sensationalized more through proper connections and marketing than through actual artistic depth and/or skill.