communism + modern art
Richard
I have a feeling that people who like modern art are also probably
leftists or leftist sympathizers. Both camps are full of foolish
pseudointellectuals who hate excellence and promote crappiness.
-----= Posted via Newsfeed.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeed.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== 100,000 Groups! - 19 Servers! - Unlimited Download! =-----
Heywood Jablowme
well know for being communist inspired. There are great people here, like
mani and richard but richard seems a little young ........mani can teach
him. Bougureau rules!
how can these twits even think that modern art is anthing but a scam. Foxes
stuff doesn't even look as good as my toilet paper after I ppp. maybe i
should frame it and be a famous artist to!!!
I tried art school and quit to, wasnt learning anything except maybe to be
grooped by fairy teachers as you said Richard. Homos suck (joke joke).
Heywood
not my real name
"Richard" <cool_a...@z.com> wrote in message
news:lemfmuk7sglq2aaje...@4ax.com...
Fidel Faddle
says...
>I tried art school and quit to, wasnt learning anything
The obvious need not be written!
You probably never 'learned' that
it's wiser to be thought a fool than
to write to this newsgroup and prove it.
Same goes for Richard!
Todd Strickland
>
>
> I have a feeling that people who like modern art are also probably
> leftists or leftist sympathizers. Both camps are full of foolish
> pseudointellectuals who hate excellence and promote crappiness.
Just 'leftists or leftist sympathizers?' You left out kooks, cranks,
hucksters, con-men, retards, degenerates, corrupters of children's morals,
anarchists, satan-worshippers, cultists, ashram-ists, Zorg members, Jews
(well, Jews are Zorg members by definition, right?), infidels, heathens of
all non-white persuasions, tree-huggers, feminists, un-american activists,
foreigners, illegal immigrants, bi-lingual education advocates, welfare
recipients, drug users, drug smugglers, drug sellers, pimps, prostitutes,
gigolos, Californicators, wife-beaters, wife-swappers, trailer-park
ne'er-do-wells, tax evaders, Hollyweird producers, ACLU card-holders,
university professors, and homosexuals.
Come on! Get with the program, komrade!
Todd Strickland
Richard
On 25 Aug 2002 07:53:35 -0700, fid...@noemailever.com (Fidel Faddle)
wrote:
>
>You probably never 'learned' that
>it's wiser to be thought a fool than
>to write to this newsgroup and prove it.
>Same goes for Richard!
You're the fool
I'll just put another idiot on my kill filter
Richard
On Sun, 25 Aug 2002 01:15:50 GMT, "Heywood Jablowme"
<hey...@lifedeath.com> wrote:
>I tried art school and quit to, wasnt learning anything except maybe to be
>grooped by fairy teachers as you said Richard. Homos suck (joke joke).
Well So far I had a drawing class and a 2d design class. I learned a
lot in the drawing class, but not in the 2d design class. The same
person I learned drawing from also teaches life drawing. I think there
are some other good teachers in my school also. So I'm not going to
quit. I also intend to buy some of those bootleg reprints of the old
art instruction books that are 100-300 years old. I think my school
focuses mainly on realism and doesn't spend much time on modern art.
I'm VERY good friends with my drawing teacher, Mr. Goffredo. He's very
serious about drawing. We have another drawing teacher, Mr. Klein, who
seems to be very good, because a couple of his students have produced
some outstanding work. Maybe Mr. Goffredo will take me under his wing
and give me some extra instruction. He gave me big compliments and he
likes me a lot. Without art school, I don't think I will have the
focus and structure I need to keep my training going like it should.
Fidel Faddle
says...
>I don't think I will have the
>focus and structure I need to keep my training going like it should.
So far all I've seen of your posts here
indicate you have neither focus nor tenacity
nor will to learn. You're the quintessential
LOSER who thinks it all comes presented on
a silver platter - or should. And sadly,
you are in the vast majority of art students
of my acquaintance who think their shit
smells like roses, when in fact it stinks
worse than someone who bilged on frijoles
last night....
Lauri Levanto
> I have a feeling that people who like modern art are also probably
> leftists or leftist sympathizers. Both camps are full of foolish
> pseudointellectuals who hate excellence and promote crappiness.
>
>
I see, that's why it was promoted by CIA -through MoMa -during the cold
war.
-lauri
Mani Deli
Art should be judged on the basis of quality. I don't like Picasso
because I believe his artwork isn't particularly fine. The fact the he
claimed to be a communist doesn't enter into it. I like Dali and don't
dismiss his painting because he happened to like Franco.
To say that "people who like modern art are also probably leftists or
leftist sympathizers", is as ridiculous as saying that people who
don't like modern art are also probably fascist sympathizers.
Let this serve as a reminder to those artsy fartzies here who
periodically bring up Hitler because they don't happen to like my
opinions.
Tired of Modern Art? Check out my web page
artonio7
"Mani Deli" <mani...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:bohkmukvr9up4bfej...@4ax.com...
> To say that "people who like modern art are also probably leftists or
> leftist sympathizers", is as ridiculous as saying that people who
> don't like modern art are also probably fascist sympathizers.
Isn't it a hoot that as young artists we are fed the capitalist line of crap
that we will know success as an artist when it is marketed to death, highly
sought after by collectors and dealers, and that all of this would come to
pass after we are dead?
Someone once said "Money for mans sake and Art for Gods sake."
It's also interesting to me to see the influence of capitalism on the amount
and quality (or lack of) of work that's being produced today.
Tony
jcheall
Far from being a 'communist' artform abstract expressionism was promoted by
the CIA to counter the troublesome 'social realist' art of the USSR. It is
in fact the house style of the elite corporate right wing imposed from the
top down upon naive consumers.
AE was seen as 'free enterprise' painting, definitively western, and because
abtract art is devoid of political (or indeed any other) content it is ideal
for regimes which depend on preserving the status quo and avoiding awkward
questions.
read all about it in 'The cultural cold war' by frances stonor saunders .
Noumenon
> or I'm defecting to realism.
some people in this group tend to think that, within all your might,
you can hardly do anything resembling realism even if you crave for it
and do more than your best...
Weaving the Conundrum
-=| NOUMENON |=-
Helen A.
Postmodernism of today embraces both, sometimes in the one work. Those
who can't tolerate conceptual contemporary art (which may be either
abstract or realist) are usually called "stuckists". (whole big group
of them)
A note from Austrlalia: most indigenous (Aboriginal) art is quite
"abstract", such as shimmering dots, lines and plan view landscapes
(which are abstract); most of the realist indigenous artists are those
living in urban areas with a western style education. To denounce
abstract art as inferior would mean to miss out on appreciating some
of the most beautiful and spiritual works in the Australia and
probably the world.
Mani Deli
>Why does there need to be a war between Abstraction and Realism?
The war as you call it isn't between the forces you mention.
Abstraction is the oldest art form. My criticism is aimed at the
Modern Academic Abstraction which inhabits the modern sections of
museums and poses as great art. I believe that this version of
abstraction is on a decorative and artistic level ranging between
floor covering and bath towels.
At the other end of the Modern academic spectrum resides
no-skill-realism. The term explains itself.
However, I have no doubt that as much fine art has been produced
during the modern era as ever before. It just represented in the
modern sections of museums at the moment.
>The
>Postmodernism of today embraces both, sometimes in the one work. Those
>who can't tolerate conceptual contemporary art (which may be either
>abstract or realist) are usually called "stuckists". (whole big group
>of them)
Check their web pages.
>A note from Austrlalia: most indigenous (Aboriginal) art is quite
>"abstract", such as shimmering dots, lines and plan view landscapes
>(which are abstract); most of the realist indigenous artists are those
>living in urban areas with a western style education. To denounce
>abstract art as inferior would mean to miss out on appreciating some
>of the most beautiful and spiritual works in the Australia and
>probably the world.
...no skill no art!
Helen A.
> during the modern era as ever before. It just represented in the
> modern sections of museums at the moment.
Aren't you contradicting yourself here? (It just represented in the
> modern sections of museums at the moment)- What does this mean?
GODSTAR
Dont forget Domestic art, like the psychedelic poster art was
'Overlooked', Why not pump up other non abstract american art? That
would have worked just as well...
WILLIAM PALMER
> >> leftists or leftist sympathizers. Both camps are full of foolish
> >> pseudointellectuals who hate excellence and promote crappiness.
> >>
> >>
> >Lauri Levanto <laur...@netti.fi> wrote:
>
> >I see, that's why it was promoted by CIA -through MoMa -during the cold
> >war.
> >-lauri
>
> Art should be judged on the basis of quality. I don't like Picasso
> because I believe his artwork isn't particularly fine. The fact the he
> claimed to be a communist doesn't enter into it. I like Dali and don't
> dismiss his painting because he happened to like Franco.
I agree. And the same sort of thing is true and art and literature.
The best writers and poets of the Twentieth Century, for instance,
came from all over the political map. It doesn't matter at all.
Their work is either imaginative or it is not. The same is true
of art. But when politics influences art, the result is usually
bad. Commie art and Nazi art share one marked quality--
a strong tendency to bore the viewer. And of course,
when the champions of both of these movements were not
neglecting the finest artists in their respective countries, they
were persecuting or even murdering them. Among the many
evil doings of the Communsts in Russia was the fact that
they pushed Vrubel into an obscurity his work is only
beginning to emerge from today. His "crime": His work
did not "glorify the worker." That Vrubel's art was
lightyears beyond any such simplistic and questionable
goal was something that the commie art bosses could
never grasp.
>
> To say that "people who like modern art are also probably leftists or
> leftist sympathizers", is as ridiculous as saying that people who
> don't like modern art are also probably fascist sympathizers.
Good point. For instance, while it should be clear that I don't
hold any brief for communists, I happen to believe that Stuart
Davis--who was under the sway of socialism and perhaps
communism during one period of his life) is one of America's
greatest modern artists. The beliefs he may have held have
nothing to do with the way intelligent viewers should
perceive his art. Celine, for instance, is one of my
favorite writers. I abhor his support of Hitler, and Celine's
anti-semitic rants, but none of that changes the fact he
was a writer of true genius I have nothing but pity
for people who can only enjoy writers and artists
who have a "clean bill of health" regarding their beliefs
(which, as a matter of fact, are often nutty as hell).
> Let this serve as a reminder to those artsy fartzies here who
> periodically bring up Hitler because they don't happen to like my
> opinions.
It is a truism of the net that he who compares his newsgroup
opponent with Hitler has lost the argument or flame war.
alt.genius.bill-palmer
wil...@ix.netcom.com
WILLIAM PALMER
.
"Noumenon" <ArtE...@Concentric.Net> wrote in message
news:3D7AF7E8...@Concentric.Net...
> You do need to do some research, and
> to do some thinking as well.
>
> Don't compare incomparable things, and draw conclusions
> from things you have no idea of.
>
> Try to read some decent books [for a change] - it may help.
> And pick up information from reliable sources,
> not from biased and sklent & mendatious crap written by ignorant liars.
>
> One day (maybe) when you are ready - we will continue conversation.
> At present it would be a complete waste of time.
Ha! You are livid because I pointed out your feeble grasp of practical
math, among other things. You tried to awe readers with the fact
(assuming your numbers were factual, that is) that Communist
Russia sold or otherwise distributed 250,000 postcard and poster
images of Vrubel's art over a fifty year period. As I hinted,
all one has to do is pull out a calculator to see that you presented
a very modest, if not minute, quantity, considering the fifty year
time frame, as well as the population of Russia.
What you fail to grasp is the fact that, yes, the Russian Commies
were practical people. OF COURSE art scholars had informed
them of the immense value of Vrubel's work. When you look at the
Communist bosses of Russia, you are not looking at the Chinese
Red Guard or the crudely-vandalistic Taliban. The pragmatism
of the Russian rulers during the period in question forced them to
recognize the potential worth of Vrubel's art as something to be
exploited, something that might be leveraged (in the sense of art
exchanges and loans, etc.) in the international community for
prestige, etc..
Even so, my original complaint was correct, because it was
obvious that Vrubel's art was seen by the Communist rulers
as a suspicious aberration, something that did nothing to
glorfiy the worker or the ideals of "workers revolution."
There was nothing of the "heroic realist,"about Vrubel. His
art was, in fact, the quintessence of individualism.
Consequently, if you look at all the major Communist art
exhibitions right through the Fifties, you do not see anything
that accords Vrubel what should be his rightful place as the
pioneer of new art in Russia. In fact, he (I mean of course
his art and role in art history) was treated like an embarrassing
stepchild who could not be entirely swept under the carpet
because of his potential worth to the family.
Now, I hope I have helped you to grasp a few things.
Try not to be so arrogant and pedantic in the future,
and avoid trying to hide behind generalized, argumentum
ad hominem slurs against those who disagree with you.
Your doing that speaks poorly of your intellectual
capacity and your overall learning. Dismissed.
alt.genius.bill-palmer
wil...@ix.netcom.co