Good and bad art > ArtistsNetwork.com Fine Art Forum and Community

Unanswered

Active Topics

Forums

Forums > Join the Discussion > Artists' Lounge

Subject: Good and bad art

You are not authorized to post a reply.

Page 2 of 3

Author

Messages

kgfineart
Posts:3

11/03/2006 5:12 PM	Alert
Very interesting topic, and one that needs to be discussed! It makes me strive to be the best artist that I can be. I think it is absolutely acceptable for art to be judged as good or bad, though I believe that much of art is somewhere between. So, how does one judge good or bad? I think the best criteria for judging is to go pre-20th century and look at academic painting. Go back to the masters of the academic tradition and compare! So much of art in the last hundred years has been about self-expression, which is fine, but what about beauty, and what about skill? Draftsmanship? Training, years of rigorous training to acquire skill! Wow! When I was in art college, I was constantly frustrated by subjectivity, and self-expression, and where were those professors who would just teach me the academic skills of drawing, for crying out loud!! I happened on an excellent website of the art renewal center, which is on a mission to bring back the training and skills of the academic tradition. There are several good articles on there that do a far better job than I in discussing this subject. I think you all would find it quite compelling! I do believe that much of the current and last century's art is valid, and interesting, and fun! Who doesn't love the playfulness of a Klee? Art should be about many things. But, compare it to a Victorian master like Bougereau or a Michaelangelo and what do you think? Is it even in the same league? See, I struggle with this all the time. I believe that being an artist is a special "Calling" that requires rigorous training and skill, just like a physician or a scientist. To make art that "my 1st grader could do" and call it good art and to call the Sistine chapel paintings good art somehow seems ridiculous! It does seem insulting, too, to those who are highly gifted artists! If everyone can make good art, then nothing is truly good; the word has lost its meaning. People don't like to make those judgments because they believe in total equality: anyone can do anything and call it art, and it's all good! PREPOSTEROUS, no? Maybe there should be a distinction made, like calling one "decorative" art, and the other is "high" or "fine" art. Oh, I know! How about a license to call yourself an artist! HA! People have to pass a test!! Usually only the test of time, and the opinion of those highly skilled and / or knowledgeable reveals what is truly "good". It would be interesting to know how the art of our time is regarded a few centuries from now! So, that's my personal struggle: most of the art I make is okay, but I have so far to go in acquiring skill! I just want to make art that I love, and art that is "good" and meaningful to others. But, I ramble on......!

Flags!
Posts:13

11/03/2006 5:47 PM	Alert
Wow. That was a good thought -- or a lot of thoughts! But it all boils down to who is buying. One person might think a piece is exciting, magnifico, etc and another person might go HO-Hum. I have a friend who paints in wild acrylic colors and she had a painting in her studio of a girl in a field and I thought "Oh I could do that and probably better" -- but she has a certain style and is well known for her work -- she sells to Magazines for their covers. So who knows? One thing for sure is we have to satisfy ourselves. You can paint the pictures that sell -- but once in awhile you have to throw one in that makes your soul come alive while you are painting it.

sammy
Posts:691

11/03/2006 9:24 PM	Alert
Your insights into this topic are worthy of being printred in a book. Thank you both for contributing.

robert_bissett

Posts:1

11/15/2006 2:49 PM	Alert
"what determines good art from bad art?" Not sure I can answer that one. Is there such a thing as bad art? That could be an oxymoron. Maybe we should be asking: What makes it art? I think I know the answer to that.

http://www.buildart.com/blog.htm

sammy
Posts:691

11/15/2006 3:47 PM	Alert
Robert, Please give your answer. Thanks.

Bright
Posts:38

11/15/2006 6:57 PM	Alert
A question which I have pondered many times, and a good one, too. I tend to agree with much of what has been said here. Art is a product of many a soul trying to express the world and itself to itself and others. How much of the greatness of any work of art is a result of the materials used, whether it be a flute or violin, or the best oil colors available? And how much of the art really expresses the soul of the artist? And how much of the art comes through as channelled information? These questions might go on forever! Haha! In the end, if we permit ourselves to judge art, great art moves many souls, poor art moves very little. After seeing great art, you might remember it long after the sight. After seeing poor art, you will forget it as soon as you pass it. This is my first post here, and I am glad to meet you all. Bright

http://www.beautywood.com

sammy
Posts:691

11/15/2006 8:46 PM	Alert
Bright, This is a keen insight to this question. Somewhat related to your view is that I think great art endures the test of time and poor art doesn't. The great masters of the past have proven their worth over the centuries by the acceptance of most knowledgeable artists and critics. So, then would you say that it takes time to declare some art good and some not?

Bright
Posts:38

11/16/2006 6:36 AM	Alert
In response to your question, sammy, I'd say that the test of time is certainly a clincher. In my mind, however, I find that once I am intriqued by any music, art, book, or play, dance, poem or public person, I invariably see them later on accepting some award or important position in history. Great art is immediately known. One question that may arise from yours, is if great art would fail the test of time, given the major strides our civilizations now make into vastly different realms of thinking. As what was once great might turn sour over time? Thanks, sammy, you are really making us think! Asking the right questions is a great art in itself! Bright

http://www.beautywood.com

sammy
Posts:691

11/16/2006 11:07 AM	Alert
Bright, Thank you for the compliment. You know, sometimes Iwonder about the work of VanGough ,which I admire very much , if he is so respected not so much for his art but because he was like a pioneer in modern art and that his work is recognized because it is so different. I note that in his life time he was completely rejected.

Ltwiggs
Posts:11

11/16/2006 2:51 PM	Alert
Sammy, in respojnse to your: "How much of an annoyance is it, when these young people, who probably happens to either be a son or daughter of an art critique, museum curator, or university professor, get rave reviews and gallery shows for lining up a row of old beer cans or tampons and picking a trendy cause to back it up? What are the dedicated artists spending hours a day in their studios mixing, sculpting, painting, weaving, etc...supposed to believe? " I'm seeing more and more of this in the Seattle Galleries and I must admit I dont understand it. I dont consider it art and I'm offended that someone thinks I would. I often think they think they are getting away with something -which they are - by sticking outlandish pricetags on a 5 minute concoction and calling it art! And yet, the very elite, albiet eccentric rich fellow thinks he's buying something wonderful. I've seen these "rows of beer cans" and I call that bad art. I've seen paintings and sculptures that while not my style or palette I can appreciate for what the artist has (or tried) to accomplish. Effort, style and grace. I call that good art. Clearly, my own opinion- for what it's worth.

klippie

Posts:1866

11/19/2006 4:58 AM	Alert
Bright. You've said it as I couldn't, good art moves souls. thats it................ klippie

If at first you dont succeed.........don't ever give up!

Flags!
Posts:13

11/19/2006 10:13 AM	Alert
OK, I have to jump in here and tell a story! I went to the Museum of Modern Art in Dallas. Now that was an experience. There were some rooms that had original art by Masters worth millions -- but it was an interesting experience. In the lobby was an arrangement of rocks on the floor ($1Million), the artist flew in and arranged them. On the wall were 3 panels, 4X3' ($1M) each painted the same color of brown. Out in the "Art" Garden were weather resistant pieces -- like a railroad tie man ($1M) with the body, arms, legs of ties and nothing else. The list goes on --- who is this Curator? Is he buying his cousin's rejects? Why can't I get discovered by this guy? My work is as "progressive" as those ( translations: stinks). What do you think about this?

Flags!
Posts:13

11/19/2006 10:16 AM	Alert
PS I found the pieces to be interesting and fun to make fun of ---and maybe that was the point. It was the cost of the piece that blew me away. Oh discover me! Discover me!

richard

Posts:596

11/21/2006 5:56 PM	Alert
Bad art is gimmicky and tasteless like so called "art" by apes and the Maddona covered with crap. Why anyone would promote the stuff on a gullible public is unbelievable.

Bright
Posts:38

11/21/2006 6:46 PM	Alert
My imagination was stirred after a bit of prodding by my intellect to try to understand why anyone would arrange stones on the floor of a museum accompanied by three paintings of the same brown color. I began to think, pigment is made from minerals and minerals come from ground stone and humans are able to move large stones around and paint pictures to hang on the wall and that is one way we do things with materials given to us by mother earth and was that the best way to use those materials and how can brown be beautiful and does art show us how we treat our mother earth and then the phone rang. So, I didn't see the work that Flags! wrote about, and I don't know if it was good or bad art, but I got a little more understanding of what trains of thought I am apt to board...and that might be cuz I have experience and imagination, or maybe the writing about the installation was good art. Who knows? Bright

http://www.beautywood.com

vapearson1

Posts:39

01/05/2007 12:00 PM	Alert
Since i am just a beginner, i really don't belong in this group. al the paintings i have viewed are so good compared to mine.but would like to show every one just one that took me 40 hours on, it is a 2 man pull sa. and that is if i ever learn how to pot on this site. please tell me how. vivian

Studio-Alex
Posts:1

01/09/2007 6:19 PM	Alert
As one grows as a person we change our likes and dislikes, one hope’s that this is for the better. As artist this is also true. As far as what is good art or bad art I myself have kept some of my very first art. When I start to think oh look how good I am and how awful someone else’s art is, one look and I quickly remember what I thought was good art. Hopefully my art of today has made progressed. Just about everyone start with less ability and it in creases a they mature.

mikki
Posts:2

02/10/2007 3:53 PM	Alert
What a great conversation! My mind was flitting, agreeing, disagreeing, changing, angry, and loving. You all had something simply wonderful to add to the mix because it came from your artistic heart. In my humble opinion "good" art is simply something "someone" loves. If I look at a piece of art I am sure that technique, color, values and all those intellectual things come into play....however if I don't say "WOW" ...to me it has failed.

Lung Tom
Posts:159

03/10/2007 12:48 AM	Alert
Graffiti is considered bad art and by law in many places it must be removed. Riding the train from New York to Washington D.C. I saw some highly skilled art on the back of buildings and on railroad box cars. An eye sore?

Lung Tom

richard

Posts:596

03/12/2007 7:00 PM	Alert
heatherm, some years ago I took a trip down to see Grandma Mose's work and I was very intrigued. I would very much like to own and hang her work in my house.

You are not authorized to post a reply.

Page 2 of 3

Forums > Join the Discussion > Artists' Lounge > Good and bad art

ActiveForums 3.6