70
I love modern art
(external-content.duckduckgo.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 31 Jul 2024
70 points (97.3% liked)
art
22373 readers
22 users here now
A community for sharing and discussing art, aesthetics, and music relating to '80s, '90s, and '00s retro microgenres and also art in general now!
Some cool genres and aesthetics include:
- outrun
- vaporwave
- mallsoft
- future funk
- city pop
- synthwave
- laborwave
If you are unsure if a piece of media is on theme for this community, you can make a post asking if it fits. Discussion posts are encouraged, and particularly interesting topics will get pinned periodically.
No links to a store page or advertising. Links to bandcamps, soundclouds, playlists, etc are fine.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
The "art world" is elitist gatekeepers for the most part and always has been. My wife is an artist so I've heard her analysis on it plenty.
95% of getting art into the "art world" is connections, and the other 5% is making up absolute bullshit about the piece. The "art world" doesn't actually like new things, for the most part, unless it comes from someone who's already in "the art world." (Famous example: huge backlash to R. Mutt's La Fontaine, frequently attributed to Marcel Duchamp but actually created by Elsa von Freytag-Loringhoven)
The overwhelming majority of people who go to art school and enter the "art world" are trust fund kids whose trust fund had a stipulation that they needed to go to college.
The problem is capitalism, but we shouldn't pretend like the "art world" isn't the same big bourgeois club as you see in other institutions. Of course it's pretentious. And of course their taste is reactionary.
Edit: sorry if you're doing a bit and I missed it, that soup-cans comment makes me think this is a copypasta I'm not familiar with
I am not doing a bit. But I do think perhaps we're talking across purposes with the term 'art world', as I don't disagree with most of what you say either. By "art world" I just mean all of art and the culture around it, rather than the very small subset that gets put on a pedestal or primarily caters to the bourgeois. My partner is also an artist so I've also heard her analysis on it plenty.
I'm not sure what came across as ungenuine about ye ol' soup cans, I was just trying to share a genuine experience.
Ohhh gotcha, totally agree then. "World of art" vs "Art World(tm)" I guess lol. Yeah, definitely agree that there's a lot of great stuff out in the world of art if you're looking beyond the highly curated fancy galleries and museums and stuff. One of my favorites was a gallery that was set up in an old warehouse in New Orleans far from the touristy areas, iirc it was curated by some local graffiti artists and had a bunch of really cool pieces in it — a lot of it dealt with the Katrina aftermath, acab, and racial justice and the pieces were rad as hell. Lots of bright colors and cartoony styles with heavy street art influence. There was an installation piece that was someone's living room displaying the water level that it got to when the levees broke, that one really stuck with me even though this was a decade ago. Like, is a living room art? Yeah, it definitely can be.
I missed an operative word in your comment and thought you were talking about Warhol's soup cans instead of, yknow, literally any other pop art. Sorry comrade!
Heck yeah, once again I mostly agree, and I'm already envious of you getting to see those things. No worries!