Modern Art and Decor

[BDC2823]

I don't get it. It looks like crap to me. Most modern art looks like somebody grabbed a canvas and a variety of paint and just threw the paint against the canvas. I can't draw or paint worth ****, but when I see this crap I think that I could do that. An Ikea catalogue is even worse. All the furniture is just so boring with no architectural style whatsoever. Take a square box and throw some square cushions on it and you have a sofa. Architecture just looks like someone went to the junkyard, grabbed some scrap metal, and welded it together. Am I missing something here? What is the appeal?

 

[v0rtex]

Originally Posted by BDC2823

I don't get it. It looks like crap to me. Most modern art looks like somebody grabbed a canvas and a variety of paint and just threw the paint against the canvas. I can't draw or paint worth ****, but when I see this crap I think that I could do that. An Ikea catalogue is even worse. All the furniture is just so boring with no architectural style whatsoever. Take a square box and throw some square cushions on it and you have a sofa. Architecture just looks like someone went to the junkyard, grabbed some scrap metal, and welded it together. Am I missing something here? What is the appeal?

Modernism (which includes both the art and the furniture) is more conceptual than representational, where the ideas behind the object are as (or more) important than the actual object itself.

Modern furniture was, in the 50s/60s, a radical departure from everything that had come before. It completely discarded any traditional ornamentation and focussed on reducing objects to their essential forms. The Eames lounge chair is a perfectly designed machine for sitting in, you cannot take any part of it away without it ceasing to become functional as a chair.

Ikea designs are based on this philosophy, the lack of ornamentation being useful to them as it makes the furniture dirt-cheap to manufacture. This is the same problem with modern art - there's a billion crappy "Your photo on a pop-art canvas" pieces out there, but Warhol came up with the premise and was expressing his ideas about consumerism and the nature of art through his pieces. Anyone after that is just ripping off Warhol, which is not the same thing (although it may look like it on the surface).

Just like with more traditional art, where there's a million awful oil paintings of flowers for one Van Gogh, modern art is a huge body of crap with a few diamonds in it. Give it a few hundred years and there will only be a few major modern art pieces anyone remembers and all the rubbish will have been thrown away/burned/rotted away, just like with any other art movement in history.

 

[hypersonic]

Interesting post v0rtex,

I think we are currently living in a very peculiar period of art/design/culture. It seems like Modernism has become a caricature of itself -- a kind of postmodern interpretation of Modernism -- seen though the pluralistic [and cynical] eyes of post-industrial western civilization.

Actually, Modernism has really become a sad and very commercial decorating style more than an idea. Furniture companies like B&B Italia have made 'minimalism' fashionable ...even if it has little substance or real importance to high culture -- it is a kind of middle class "cafÃ

minimalism" ....very slick, very commercial ....very *Wallpaper -- for the tragically image-obsessed to live their empty lives in.

I am assuming the Modern Art BDC2823 is referring to is the kind of meaningless rubbish that 2nd-rate 'Jackson Pollock wannabes' try to pass off as interesting. Pollock's work is terrific and relevant to its time -- this abstract expressionism is not exactly cutting edge today -- in fact painting in general is not really at the forefront of the art world right now .....sculpture, multi-Media/video art, and photography are much more in tune with the current times.

 

[johnapril]

The best work is rarely discovered.