Okay Art experts, what makes this art??

[rivan]

"art"

 

[Ksyder]

it's supply and command!

very appropriate username 😛

 

[Geosurface]

This shit isn't art.

And the kind of cultures that convince themselves it is, are rotting from the inside and soon to collapse.

 

[Farmer]

opinions on these 2 sisters?

I know nothing about art. just find it interesting seeing the progression of their pieces as they grow older and how their styles differ greatly

12 year old Zoe Yin - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLzv8Ck5U_w

14 year old Victoria Yin, one of her pieces has gone for $30K - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_JBo98pErBg

I really don't see what is so special. There are street artist that practically give their work away for free that have the technical ability to create that stuff.

 

[Subyman]

The point of art is to cultivate emotion or thought within an individual, what that emotion or thought is will be different depending on the perspective of the individual viewing the art.

Instead of dismissing strange art I like to actually think about it and figure out what comes to mind first for me.

Such as the mannequin head. The head is sitting on a piece of billet aluminum, which is sitting on a MacBook Pro. The arrangement could be the reverse of how we view what is important. At the top we have a head half blinded by a symbolism of America. The head could be the people used to manufacture goods for Americans. The smoking portion could be a call back to the Foxconn suicides. The billet aluminum could be the manufacturing of the MacBook Pro, and of course the laptop is the culmination of everything above it. Yet as a society we put the most weight or importance on the MacBook Pro, where actually, in humanitarian terms, the people making it should get the most respect or praise.

Do I think that's what the art intended? I don't know. But it made me stop and think for a few minutes, which is more than what most media/commercials can muster. So, yup it had its purpose.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

The ability to accept that there is no right answer and still express your engagement with it is the essential difference between those that are innovative and people that are incapable of dealing with the complexities of the world and thus must generalize to the point of nonsense.

I'll bet anything that there's a strong correlation between one's ability to engage a work of art, like the one below, and all sorts of negative life outcomes:

 

[Geosurface]

The ability to accept that there is no right answer and still express your engagement with it is the essential difference between those that are innovative and people that are incapable of dealing with the complexities of the world and thus must generalize to the point of nonsense.

I'll bet anything that there's a strong correlation between one's ability to engage a work of art, like the one below, and all sorts of negative life outcomes:

That is a fantastic piece of art and shows great skill.

The head with underwear on the macbook? Not so much.

Some modern, abstract art has great merit. Other modern, abstract art is utter shit and a blatant attempt to cash in on peoples' gullibility. Or just refusal by someone with no artistic skill to accept this about themselves and pursue other interests.

Just because someone can bullshit a bunch of deep meaning about something doesn't make it profound.

Just because something is declared art, doesn't make it GOOD art.

Otherwise what point would there be to having art critics or regarding anything as a masterpiece?

There has to be some way of passing judgement on art, it can't all just be regarded as fantastic, deep, meaningful art no matter what.

There will naturally end up being people who try to scam the trends in art which have made distinctions less clear and get massive cash through producing shit. If nobody is allowed to call them on this, then where would we be?