Member of the Month

JalmarKalmar
April, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

What makes certain art special?

profile picture
theabortionator
Posts: 51274 - Karma: 157,663
What's makes some art better than others? It's just interesting how some art is special simply because of the artist where as if somebody else did the same thing, it would be dismissed as trash. I guess you can say the same thing about many aspects of life but I just notice it a lot in the art world.


Jan 6 2013 10:45PM
3 1
profile picture
the-honeypossum
Posts: 529 - Karma: 130
pretty much based on how popular the artist is.
Jan 6 2013 10:47PM
0 0
profile picture
tds103
Posts: 679 - Karma: 74
Exactly, when I walk around a gallery with a friend and sometimes they say the classic line, "I could have done that". And you can say they are right, but they didn't do it. But you can look at that piece and love it for how simple it is or say why would anyone like that.

I think some art is appreciated solely because of the artist who created it. But sometimes it is not.

I think is it also dependent on the viewer because some people hate abstract art where others as myself absolutely love it and cant really explain why.

Taking this all back to the beginning, what makes art special is dependent on what the viewer thinks of it.
Jan 6 2013 10:53PM
0 0
profile picture
artfullydodged
Posts: 8358 - Karma: 1,674
I think its about how a piece captures and holds your attention. The longer you're pondering how it was created or what it's meaning is the better.

Famous artists can do pretty much whatever they want after they've created some genuine stuff to obtain their fame. Once they're established People will try to look in to their new stuff to find some meaning that might not even be there. Just look at Damien Hirst, the dude doesn't do his own work anymore and he makes bank on every piece.
Jan 6 2013 10:56PM
0 0
profile picture
Caspaaa
Posts: 4830 - Karma: 1,465
people do this with books and poetry all the time as well. while the underlying meaning is still there, 90 percent of the time i doubt the author meant to put it there.


as my old english teacher used to say, "It doesn't matter if the author meant for there to be an underlying message, what matters is that it is there."
Jan 6 2013 11:00PM
0 0
profile picture
theabortionator
Posts: 51274 - Karma: 157,663
I meant more of how you can have a piece in a gallery worth a ton of money, and then have the same looking thing drawn on a desk in a middle school. One is insanely captivating, and has everyone talking, one is just something some kid scribbled on a desk.


It's a hard thing to judge. There's a lot more subjective grey area
Jan 6 2013 11:00PM
0 0
profile picture
tds103
Posts: 679 - Karma: 74
Or some artist started out like that. i.e. Jackson Pollock only did drip painting and people loved it.
Jan 6 2013 11:01PM
0 0
profile picture
TheClap.
Posts: 21649 - Karma: 4,013
knock knock
Jan 6 2013 11:02PM
0 0
profile picture
james6345789
Posts: 4763 - Karma: 465
What makes some music better than some others? What makes some books better than others?
Jan 6 2013 11:03PM
0 0
profile picture
panojibber.
Posts: 1041 - Karma: 683
Some people actually have reasons for doing things, and some just "do it because it looks cool".

Take Burial; he has concepts and ideas that drive his music, he's put out what is arguably one of the best pieces of electronic music in the last 10 years, but now Skrillex is copying him. Skrillex has no reason for attempting to enter the post-dub/future-garage world, aside from copying burial and following the trends. "Leaving" will never be recognized by anyone, but Archangel (and all of Untrue), is well-reviewed, recognized, and will be remembered for a long time.

What makes certain art particularly good is the conceptual leap; someone who has an idea thats so novel and interesting that it challenges the way people are currently doing things. Obviously it also has to be well executed; its a combination of someone who is very good at their craft and also very creative. Burial is one of those people, skrillex is not.




(weird example maybe, but it was the first comparison that came to mind)
Jan 6 2013 11:04PM
0 0
profile picture
artfullydodged
Posts: 8358 - Karma: 1,674
Yea then you're getting more towards the question of "what is art?" which is incredibly hard to find a satisfying answer for.

Maybe its simply that its in a gallery? Anything presented in a gallery is subject to analysis.
Jan 6 2013 11:10PM
0 0
profile picture
panojibber.
Posts: 1041 - Karma: 683
Copy pasta from a thread I made a while ago:

Here's a quote from "Art and Fear" by David Bayles and Ted Orland:

"In essence, art lies embedded in the conceptual leap between pieces, not in the pieces themselves. And simply put, there's a greater conceptual jump from one work of art to the next than from one work of craft to the next. The net result is that art is less polished - but more innovative - than craft. The differences between five Steinway grand pianos - demonstrably works of consummate craftsmanship - are small compared to the differences between the five Beethoven Piano concerti you might perform on those instruments.
A work of craft is typically made to fit a specific template, sometimes a painstakingly difficult template requiring years of hands-on apprenticeship to master. Its staggering to realize that nearly all the truly great violins ever produced were made in the course of a few years by a few artisans living within a few blocks of each other. All this in a remote Italian village, three centuries ago. The accomplishments of Antonio Stradivari and his fellow craftsmen point up one real difference between art and craft: with craft, perfection IS possible."
Jan 6 2013 11:12PM
0 0
profile picture
james6345789
Posts: 4763 - Karma: 465
^the similarity of those songs is outrageous
Jan 6 2013 11:12PM
0 0
profile picture
theabortionator
Posts: 51274 - Karma: 157,663
"I guess you can say the same thing about many aspects of life but I just notice it a lot in the art world."

^
Jan 6 2013 11:13PM
0 0
profile picture
PJS.
Posts: 11943 - Karma: 895
I think that at that point it becomes less about the art itself and more how the art reflects the artist, and whatever purpose he is trying to convey. A preschooler might draw something similar to an abstract artist, but he won't do it for any purpose other than shits and giggles.

I don't know, just my take as someone who doesn't know jack shit about fine art.
Jan 6 2013 11:14PM
0 0
profile picture
theabortionator
Posts: 51274 - Karma: 157,663
Great I guess that's what I deserve for making too many threads. I get shitty "music" for an example.

Hopefully music makes a comeback in the future.
Jan 6 2013 11:19PM
0 0
profile picture
E__
Posts: 5751 - Karma: 4,633
I think what makes certain art special or captivating is what the art relays to the person viewing it. I mean sure people love big name artists and will buy the pieces solely on the fact of bragging rights if the painting isn't very good. But for me I find art fascinating from the meaning it has to the me and other viewers.

Take this for example:

Sometimes when I head into town on weekends I walk around on the inner harbour with some friends and hang out with a really interesting artist named Ian Cooper, here's some of his stuff:

Click for larger image

Click for larger image

Anyways one time he was telling me that people always find connections from is art to things relevant in their own life and this one guy bought this piece for his dad:

Click for larger image

because his dad was a trucker and had to travel everywhere but always wanted to stay on the coast, he loved the coast. So the son saw that perfectly in this picture showing the split between the road and the coasts. It was a perfect match-up almost as if made custom for him.

I'm buying the first picture and this one next time I'm down there:

Click for larger image

Here's his website if you're interested:

Jan 6 2013 11:29PM
0 0
profile picture
panojibber.
Posts: 1041 - Karma: 683
Just trying to keep things current : )
Jan 6 2013 11:30PM
0 0
profile picture
spliff.Life
Posts: 7847 - Karma: 1,549
like most things this is an opinion but i think a lot has to do with the context of it, the artists background, and how/why the piece came to be. Ive pondered this threads question very much, i mean most say oil painters now are a lot better technically then they were 200 years ago, but though they might have a "finer" touch with the paint brush they do not perceive the world with the same eye as someone whom i personally think is artistic

idk if you might have heard of this, its an essay called cezannes doubt that takes a phenomenological approach to art
http://faculty.uml.edu/rinnis/cezannedoubt.pdf

completely related and unrelated to this thread but for anyone looking to further their thoughts on art this is a good read

-my 2 cents




Jan 6 2013 11:32PM
0 0
profile picture
panojibber.
Posts: 1041 - Karma: 683
Yeah, perhaps they're better at their craft now but its just derivative of people that were actually creating art.

Its like a lot of books; Dashiell Hammett is more or less father of the modern detective novel, but if one of his books was published today, it would be nothing special (incredibly well written though). Why? Because lots of people write detective novels. In that particular example its not only the text thats important but the context; ie the fact that he wrote a style of novel that nobody else was writing at the time.
Jan 6 2013 11:37PM
0 0
profile picture
accualyisdolan
Posts: 3295 - Karma: -192
Art is the biggest crock of shit ever
Jan 6 2013 11:38PM
0 0
profile picture
accualyisdolan
Posts: 3295 - Karma: -192
Real photographs of real things will always be prettier
Jan 6 2013 11:39PM
0 0
profile picture
volvotom
Posts: 2045 - Karma: 712
I was thinking the exact same thing.

My belief is that it's up to the viewer's interpretation.

This is a really awesome article about the inside of the art world from a woman who worked at Sotheby's auction house in New York: http://nplusonemag.com/on-the-market
Jan 6 2013 11:42PM
0 0
profile picture
Furrer92
Posts: 784 - Karma: 341
You should check out Exit Through the Gift Shop on Netflix, pretty funny stuff
Jan 6 2013 11:46PM
0 0
profile picture
*simba*
Posts: 9125 - Karma: 511
Abstract art is bullshit.
Jan 6 2013 11:48PM
0 0
profile picture
thedawg
Posts: 730 - Karma: 452
ha great thread should be in 4/20 forum, the best part about this question is that its totally subjective and any answer will be correct in every way..art is special to each individual because each peice of art, whether it be music, paintings, literature, or fuck even dance, is able to be examined completely internally by each person who's life is experiencing the "art" at any moment..art and music is an amazing even beautiful thing because each person can individually examine and define themselves through any number of different "art" forms...fuck everything about that question is up for debate, like what is "art"? is skiing a form of art? what does "special" mean? and is it as completely self interpretive as the art we try and define it as? two answer the question what makes music and other forms of "art" amazing and "special" in my eyes is how they effect your emotions, both positively and introspectively, and contribute to the building of an individual in the crazy ass ride that is life...

i know personally id be fucking lost in this whole "life" thing without skiing and live music to act as my support systems and "chill pill" to get through the stressful and annoying parts that come with the ride. im sure many people on here agree that music and skiing are huge parts of who they define themselves as and music and skiing are both forms of "art" in their own ways imo...
Jan 6 2013 11:50PM
0 0
profile picture
panojibber.
Posts: 1041 - Karma: 683
Relativism is just giving up hahaha. You just have no way of being objective about it.

If you can make a statement that a piece of music is bad then obviously you know what makes music good and bad. So please, explain what that determining factor is. Enlighten me!
Jan 6 2013 11:50PM
0 0
profile picture
volvotom
Posts: 2045 - Karma: 712
Quoting from the n+1 article:
"The art collector both appraises and is appraised by the same two facts: his taste and how much of it he can afford to indulge. Appreciation of genius becomes good taste, which all too quickly circles back around and masquerades as genius once again. Art collecting, like high school popularity, does not encourage much risk-taking. Be certain that what you’re purchasing is familiar and well liked. But as in high school, danger and depravity go a long way. Maurizio Cattelan sculpts effigies of popes only to macerate them later with meteors. The breasts that John Currin paints are nothing if not pneumatic. Blasphemy, pornography, hubris—these themes are par for the course in contemporary art. But while tastes might run more toward vice than virtue, economically the secondary market is still a parochial place. “Contemporary art has become a kind of alternative religion for atheists,” writes Sarah Thornton in Seven Days in the Art World. There certainly is a lot of zealotry. And a lot of blind faith, too. Despite art’s reputation for distinctiveness and originality, its value is established not by the narcissism of small differences but by the megalomania of sameness."
Jan 6 2013 11:59PM
0 0
profile picture
theabortionator
Posts: 51274 - Karma: 157,663
Those black and whites remind me of a guy I see at most of the festivals ans some of phish/other tours. I have 5 or 6 of his full size black and whites.

I mean obviously both black and whites but I mean the style on a couple of those reminded me of his stuff. I have no idea what his name is. I've probably talked to him 10 or so times but my brain is worthless these days.
Jan 7 2013 12:05AM
0 0
profile picture
panojibber.
Posts: 1041 - Karma: 683
This is talking about collectors of contemporary art; give me a pre-21st century example that you didn't copy-pasta, and maybe I'll listen. Art is never appreciated fully at the time its made, a prime example being Beethoven, or Pink Floyd (both of whom were heavily criticized by art critics at the onset of their creative output, but went on to get the recognition they deserved).
Jan 7 2013 12:06AM
0 0
profile picture
J_Walk
Posts: 1076 - Karma: 28
In philosophy this is the study of aesthetics, people have been trying to figure this out for thousands of years.
Jan 7 2013 12:10AM
0 0
profile picture
thedawg
Posts: 730 - Karma: 452
just a quick interjection what a so called "art critic" considers good or special to them has just as much relevance and worth to what you or I think about the same piece...art is completely subjective, you can work on becoming an artist and practicing whatever skills you need to accomplish the goal that you had set for yourself and the vision that you had for the painting/song/whatever...sorry for the raint but being a professional art critic, and giving their opinion anymore credit to yours or mine is pure bullshit in my eyes
Jan 7 2013 12:11AM
0 0
profile picture
Hammyslapwagon
Posts: 1261 - Karma: 1,409
LSD makes art special
Click for larger image
Jan 7 2013 12:13AM
0 0
profile picture
act.resist
Posts: 8875 - Karma: 513
art is completely subjective, some people might like modern art while others hate it and so on.
Jan 7 2013 12:13AM
0 0
profile picture
thedawg
Posts: 730 - Karma: 452
ha if it can do that to a piece of paper I wonder what it can do to 4-8 dudes playing music together creating and improvising different riffs, valleys, and peaks in the music that relate to both an lsd trip and life in general......
Jan 7 2013 12:21AM
0 0
profile picture
panojibber.
Posts: 1041 - Karma: 683
You're missing the part about context; art is not subjective, you can like one thing more or less than another but art is about conceptual leaps, why people do things, how pieces of work are situated in history compared to other pieces, etc. If it was actually subjective then nobody would agree on what makes good art, we wouldn't have schools that teach people to make visual art and music and books and films. The reason NS doesn't agree is because most of the people here haven't studied art, and don't know enough to back up their statements effectively. I'm pulling musical examples and literary examples because I study literature and music.
Jan 7 2013 12:21AM
0 0
profile picture
NinetyFour
Posts: 8650 - Karma: 13,409
Who's there?
Jan 7 2013 12:27AM
0 0
profile picture
james6345789
Posts: 4763 - Karma: 465
Another great example is Shakespeare.

Jan 7 2013 12:29AM
0 0
profile picture
spliff.Life
Posts: 7847 - Karma: 1,549
someone knows what hes talking about






abortinator double posting this link even though irrelivant because i think its important
 http://faculty.uml.edu/rinnis/cezannedoubt.pdf

Jan 7 2013 12:42AM
0 0
profile picture
Peach.
Posts: 3879 - Karma: 933
Not gonna lie I didn't read a single post after the OP. Sorry if I'm rehashing something.

It's a bit sad that certain artists will never thrive because of who they are and not their art. I feel like if Eric Pollard wasn't "some guy who does ski graphics" he would be a bug name in the art game. I also feel like some mainstream artists wouldn't be shit if they didn't give that trendy vibe when they walk in.

This is one of the reasons I love graffiti so much. When I'm creeping through the freight yard at 6am I have no idea who painted the Check piece on my left or the Ichabod piece on my right. He could be black and could listen to tupac or he could be an angsty white teenager wearing a Ramones shirt. It doesn't even matter. All I know is that the piece is sick.
I just think it's funny that one of the last true art forms is, by most peoples standards, on the same level as bathroom penises.
Jan 7 2013 12:46AM
0 0
profile picture
panojibber.
Posts: 1041 - Karma: 683
Kind of sad considering none of it's going to survive. I mean, you can take pictures of it but the original piece will get sanded off or painted over and then its gone.
Jan 7 2013 12:50AM
0 0
profile picture
theabortionator
Posts: 51274 - Karma: 157,663
I think you understood what I was trying to say and I agree. As far as the ending I feel there's street art and mindless graffiti. The mindlessly scribbling your name on every surface just to say you were there and the people that make pretty fucking amazing art on a wall building etc.

And like you said, one of the nice things is you really have no idea who made it. You just like it if you like it.
Jan 7 2013 1:08AM
0 0
profile picture
Jeebus.
Posts: 4904 - Karma: 5,822
I would love to take some acid with this guy
Jan 7 2013 1:11AM
0 0
profile picture
E__
Posts: 5751 - Karma: 4,633
Haha, he's just an all around cool dude.
Jan 7 2013 1:13AM
0 0
profile picture
esotericjive
Posts: 1889 - Karma: 1,445
The emotions it evokes in the viewer. Good art makes you feel something, anything.
Jan 7 2013 1:34AM
0 0
profile picture
thedawg
Posts: 730 - Karma: 452
I understand what you're saying and in general I agree, I have to defend what you call "mindless" graffiti because while i disagree with damaging property that you do not own I strongly encourage expression, and even going out and tagging your name on same railroad is a form of the "artist" expressing whatever emotions they need to get out...when I see "mindless" graffiti I almost have one of those bittersweet moments because some of the shit I see is so dope, but its obviously done on property that they don't own, so while it does promote illegal activity in a way, i still fully support graffiti as a form of expressing oneself...as lame as that may sound id rather my younger brother or son be into graffiti to get whatever shit they have to deal with out then doing drugz and getting fucked up to deal with shit ya know?

fuckkkk i needa yose soon, lotus coming up yep yep yepppppppp
Jan 7 2013 2:58AM
0 0
profile picture
Poikenz
Posts: 1406 - Karma: 3,131
It's all perceived value, or at least that is all I see now a days. I find 99% of modern art to be complete BS but because some higher ups in the art community classify it as a work of art the value of said work is increased. This works because most people want to come off as having a rich background in the arts so they are going to agree with the higher ups (mmm, that social status) and BAM! $500,000 paintings with nothing but red on them are born. In terms of becoming an artist I find it all to be luck of the draw with a bit of who do you know in the art community. There are tons of amazing unknown artists and it sucks for them because I really like their shit but that is the way it goes and sometimes it sucks to see this shit run like some sort of business even though it is.
Jan 7 2013 9:37AM
0 0
profile picture
theabortionator
Posts: 51274 - Karma: 157,663
I don't consider somebody scribbling their name on everything art.


There's an art aspect whether people are for or against it. But the mindless scribbling your name on every surface is just kind of weaksauce IMO. It's no different than writing your name all over the cabin at summer camp, or carving it into the stall in a bathroom. People just wanna be notice.
Jan 7 2013 11:22AM
0 0
profile picture
Puns
Posts: 2052 - Karma: 429
the price, the skill, or how it makes you feel, or how innovative and creative it is
Jan 7 2013 11:24AM
0 0
profile picture
theabortionator
Posts: 51274 - Karma: 157,663
For sure. I would personally rather own a $5 painting or drawing that I loved than own an expensive painting that does nothing to me(Even if it was free).

It's just a weird realm of elitism to an extent. You could do something forever and be unnoticed, but somebody else does the same thing and it's a $10,000 piece with people sipping wine around it talking about how brilliant it is.
Jan 7 2013 11:28AM
0 0
profile picture
Peach.
Posts: 3879 - Karma: 933
Completely agree.
I'm all about freights. If you ever get bored google "Tower freights" he's my favorite fr8head that's still out and about. Then try "ichabod YME"
That man has more freights than Line has dick riders
Jan 15 2013 9:52AM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-4)