Bad Art - Page 4

Alex · 12-02-2008, 05:11 PM

Didn't mean for this to turn into a Talk Alex Through His Insecurities thread.

The short of it is that I don't want to paint badly, I want to paint well. That means I don't want to go through the "learn to paint well" part. Similarly, I'd love to be a great dancer, but not enough that I'm willing to go through the being a sucky dancer part.

Yes, it is essentially that childish sentiment of "if I can't do it well, I won't do it at all" carried into adulthood. And that is the irrationality I speak of. Also, it is laziness; it would suck to put in the work and then find out that I didn't like it even if I did get good at it.

alphabassettgrrl · 12-02-2008, 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bewitched

Psychologically, we all tend to shy away from things which don't reinforce a positive opinion of ourselves.
...
Me, I tend to be more of an "I don't give a ****" person. But I don't tend to trumpet my success on a subject which I suck at. For instance, I do some magic tricks...spectacularly poorly.
...
Anyway, when you get a chance, look at the sight...it really is all in good fun (a lot of the amusement is in the newsletters and commentary where they so blatently pretend to be very cultured and pretentious about their "museum").

Yeah, I'm with you- I do what I want and I try to make a joke out of when it goes badly.

I'll have to look at the newsletters- that kind of humor I can get behind.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex

Yes, it is essentially that childish sentiment of "if I can't do it well, I won't do it at all" carried into adulthood. And that is the irrationality I speak of. Also, it is laziness; it would suck to put in the work and then find out that I didn't like it even if I did get good at it.

Wouldn't you figure out in the middle of it that you don't like it? Wouldn't be that much "work" put into it at that point.

I don't paint well either, but a couple of assignments for a painting class turned out to actually be reasonably nice. I need to get frames for them and hang them on a wall. You might be surprised.

Kevy Baby · 12-02-2008, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex

Didn't mean for this to turn into a Talk Alex Through His Insecurities thread.

Ooh... that could be a fun thread!

Ghoulish Delight · 12-02-2008, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex

Didn't mean for this to turn into a Talk Alex Through His Insecurities thread.

Find a mirror, look yourself in the eye and repeat after me...

CoasterMatt · 12-02-2008, 05:55 PM

I wonder how much of my stuff belongs in the MOBA?

alphabassettgrrl · 12-02-2008, 05:57 PM

Most of mine would belong!

Not Afraid · 12-02-2008, 08:34 PM

This thread is a GOLDMINE!

Princess Dala · 12-03-2008, 05:35 PM

i don't know. the mary todd lincoln portrait is actually pretty inspired; the composition is pretty good and the colors work. the poinsettias are a little weird, but then again, i've seen less harmonious mixed media stuff exhibited in what appeared to be complete seriousness and pomposity.

the alternate-perspective boob is a little jarring, but otherwise, the gilded nude piece is kinda Duchampesque. with a big ol' fauvist boob stuck on it. if that doesn't invite some deep metaphorical analysis, i don't know what does.

lol. at least the mobites are ecumenical. bizarre/humorous subject matter and weirdo color schemes get equal billing with complete technical ineptitutde.

goes to show that "subjective aesthetics" doesn't adequately describes the 'wtf makes art good/bad?' conundrum, though. i think that a successful piece of art isn't necessarily pretty or harmonious, but proof of circumstantial mastery. some of the ‘bad’ paintings on the site are actually incredibly good, and not because the artist knew body proportions or how to shade right (though some of them obviously did).

You can take that in several different directions. sometimes elegant design and technical proficiency are the aims; in these cases, a cigar really is a cigar. or a big metallic balloon dog. other times, your artist is trying to make you think, make you laugh, or otherwise manipulate your emotions or whatever, which is a lot harder to manage without sacrificing subtlety and/or economy of meaning and going straight into obviousnessland on one hand, or meaninglessnessland on the other.

this is where the 'paint splotches are not art!' indignance comes into play, because i suppose it is possible for someone who's really good at headgames and really terrible with a paintbrush to meet their 'artistic' goals by trolling your dropcloths. the piss christ springs to mind here, but like most shock art, that was too literal to pass my minimum art complexity standards. or maybe it was really ****ing deep and i missed the point, but whatever.

Alberti was pretty big on how the best painters were able to transcend limited space, time, and dimension to convey a world of ideas in a fragment of wall or canvas. even though our modern (postmodern, whatever) views of what constitutes valid artistic expression have changed since then, it's still pretty clear that you have to know the visual rules very well in order to break or manipulate them in original, meaningful, and audience-effective ways. you can, after all, have a piece that perfectly fulfills the aims of the artist in terms of appearance and viewer response, yet is an absolute horror to look at. often, these pieces are also technically brilliant, though it may not be readily apparent at first.

you can also have an amateurish mashup that is not only tolerable, but kinda easy on the eyes. i think the difference lies in the intent of the artist and his or her ability to follow through on those aims. Self-awareness enters into it, too, as it's a lot more difficult to ridicule an artist who knows where they ****ed up and why. xD

12-02-2008, 05:11 PM	#1
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	Didn't mean for this to turn into a Talk Alex Through His Insecurities thread. The short of it is that I don't want to paint badly, I want to paint well. That means I don't want to go through the "learn to paint well" part. Similarly, I'd love to be a great dancer, but not enough that I'm willing to go through the being a sucky dancer part. Yes, it is essentially that childish sentiment of "if I can't do it well, I won't do it at all" carried into adulthood. And that is the irrationality I speak of. Also, it is laziness; it would suck to put in the work and then find out that I didn't like it even if I did get good at it.
	Submit to Quotes

12-02-2008, 05:55 PM	#5
CoasterMatt BRAAAAAAAINS! Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: One Step Beyond... Posts: 8,802	I wonder how much of my stuff belongs in the MOBA? __________________ Do you like my photography? Visit photosbymatt.tumblr.com to purchase prints!
	Submit to Quotes

12-02-2008, 05:57 PM	#6
alphabassettgrrl Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 4,978	Most of mine would belong! __________________ Why cycling? Anything [sport] that had to do with a ball, I wasn't very good at. -Lance Armstrong
	Submit to Quotes

12-02-2008, 08:34 PM	#7
Not Afraid HI! Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 17,108	This thread is a GOLDMINE!
	Submit to Quotes

12-03-2008, 05:35 PM	#8
Princess Dala Perpetually Pink Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: The World of Henry Orient Posts: 40	i don't know. the mary todd lincoln portrait is actually pretty inspired; the composition is pretty good and the colors work. the poinsettias are a little weird, but then again, i've seen less harmonious mixed media stuff exhibited in what appeared to be complete seriousness and pomposity. the alternate-perspective boob is a little jarring, but otherwise, the gilded nude piece is kinda Duchampesque. with a big ol' fauvist boob stuck on it. if that doesn't invite some deep metaphorical analysis, i don't know what does. lol. at least the mobites are ecumenical. bizarre/humorous subject matter and weirdo color schemes get equal billing with complete technical ineptitutde. goes to show that "subjective aesthetics" doesn't adequately describes the 'wtf makes art good/bad?' conundrum, though. i think that a successful piece of art isn't necessarily pretty or harmonious, but proof of circumstantial mastery. some of the ‘bad’ paintings on the site are actually incredibly good, and not because the artist knew body proportions or how to shade right (though some of them obviously did). You can take that in several different directions. sometimes elegant design and technical proficiency are the aims; in these cases, a cigar really is a cigar. or a big metallic balloon dog. other times, your artist is trying to make you think, make you laugh, or otherwise manipulate your emotions or whatever, which is a lot harder to manage without sacrificing subtlety and/or economy of meaning and going straight into obviousnessland on one hand, or meaninglessnessland on the other. this is where the 'paint splotches are not art!' indignance comes into play, because i suppose it is possible for someone who's really good at headgames and really terrible with a paintbrush to meet their 'artistic' goals by trolling your dropcloths. the piss christ springs to mind here, but like most shock art, that was too literal to pass my minimum art complexity standards. or maybe it was really **ing deep and i missed the point, but whatever. Alberti was pretty big on how the best painters were able to transcend limited space, time, and dimension to convey a world of ideas in a fragment of wall or canvas. even though our modern (postmodern, whatever) views of what constitutes valid artistic expression have changed since then, it's still pretty clear that you have to know the visual rules very well in order to break or manipulate them in original, meaningful, and audience-effective ways. you can, after all, have a piece that perfectly fulfills the aims of the artist in terms of appearance and viewer response, yet is an absolute horror to look at. often, these pieces are also technically brilliant, though it may not be readily apparent at first. you can also have an amateurish mashup that is not only tolerable, but kinda easy on the eyes. i think the difference lies in the intent of the artist and his or her ability to follow through on those aims. Self-awareness enters into it, too, as it's a lot more difficult to ridicule an artist who knows where they **ed up and why. xD __________________ ~ Kali
	Submit to Quotes