Art

Sculptures by Ryan Kitson:

A painting by Raimonds Staprans, you can't see the texture and layers involved.

^^^ Me likey.

nothing better than Bacon.

What do people think of Banks Violette?

Originally Posted by Magician

Click to expand...

What do people think of Banks Violette?

i like some of his stuff a lot, but some of it's a little aggro for my taste. often looks like a Tool album cover.

just about everything has gotten better as time goes on, except fine art. i can count on one hand artists who have made lasting contributions in the last 25 years.

Originally Posted by thekunk07

Click to expand...

just about everything has gotten better as time goes on, except fine art. i can count on one hand artists who have made lasting contributions in the last 25 years.

I'd be curious to see that list.

Some artists of such as Hirst have certainly made lasting contributions but whether or not that's good is debatable.

And how do you define "fine art?" Would someone like Tobias Wong fit?

I don't think art is becoming worse so much as it is becoming commercially decentralized in clustered schools of influence. Inevitably, like in furniture design, there is only so much more room for genuine innovation and influence. The days of dominant figures looming over the industry and public's awareness with trademark "isms" may have subsided, but there is as much good work being made now as there has ever been. I think the post-Duchamp conceptual school that predominated the 70's and 90's (which bookended the 80's interest in the urban genius savants and commercial commentators) was the bottom of the barrel. Now that the phase of ***** stained crucifixes has crusted over with public indifference to shock, it seems there is a much more traditional emphasis on investment in technical skill and subtle figurative development which hasn't been seen since possibly proto-Cubism or Surrealism.

:artforum:

Originally Posted by StephenHero

Click to expand...

I don't think art is becoming worse so much as it is becoming commercially decentralized in clustered schools of influence. Inevitably, like in furniture design, there is only so much more room for genuine innovation and influence. The days of dominant figures looming over the industry and public's awareness with trademark "isms" may have subsided, but there is as much good work being made now as there has ever been. I think the post-Duchamp conceptual school that predominated the 70's and 90's (which bookended the 80's interest in the urban genius savants and commercial commentators) was the bottom of the barrel. Now that the phase of ***** stained crucifixes has crusted over with public indifference to shock, it seems there is a much more traditional emphasis on investment in technical skill and subtle figurative development which hasn't been seen since possibly proto-Cubism or Surrealism. :artforum:
this is kind of a funny statement coming from someone with a Gerhard Richter avatar. i think you nailed it with decentralization though. it isn't so much that good work isn't being made, but that a greater amount of art is being given a venue in which to be shown. within these works there are currents and trends, but as with fashion, these are more likely to be articulated by scholarly discourse than by the artists themselves. i know kunk was just trolling but i'm sure that within the programs of certain galleries or museums he would find contemporary artists that he likes.

Well I think Richter is a pretty good barometer for the direction of art as a whole. He's strictly non-dogmatic and he roams between mediums and method, but all of his work collectively undermines any stylistic or philosophical obligations of either figurative or abstract act which matches the general trend of stylistic liberation.

As opposed to the tendency of his contemporaries to embrace a unique personal style because this new liberation allowed them to (Basquiat, Schnabel, Koons), he uses a neoclassical logic and rationality which allows formal invention by itself, even though that was once considered paradoxical as a means to create an artistic identity.

I think that's why all of his paintings use boring photos. With a classical emphasis on technical skill, the process's refinement can elevate mundane imagery beyond the shallow heroics of epic "high art" photography if it's guided with some technical conviction or procedural logic that doesn't concern itself with outcome at the expense of creation, where the primacy of art lies anyway.

:artforum:

Yeah, he's pretty much awesome.

i wasn't troliing and there really are probably only 4-5 artists i have found worthwhile in the last 25 years. i also know a lot about the gallery world and know that the best artists who have a soul probably remain undiscovered.

Originally Posted by mharwitt

Click to expand...

this is kind of a funny statement coming from someone with a Gerhard Richter avatar. i think you nailed it with decentralization though. it isn't so much that good work isn't being made, but that a greater amount of art is being given a venue in which to be shown. within these works there are currents and trends, but as with fashion, these are more likely to be articulated by scholarly discourse than by the artists themselves.

i know kunk was just trolling but i'm sure that within the programs of certain galleries or museums he would find contemporary artists that he likes.

Who are the 4-5?

i'll go 30 years

chuck close, basquiat, I kind of like alex gray, Attila Bernath, Anselm Kiefer (pushing it time wise)