Hate to break the chain of jokes but I want to say that I really agree and I really hope we all learn to think like this. Just in general about all things, learning to accept that somethings we may not like but that doesn't mean it's worthless or that we should deride the people who do like it and sometimes it can matter to learn about why they do like it.
Viwers: "Art is pretentious and art is only expensive because it's made by famous artists and it's a scam by the rich to make money." The Art Assignment: "Yes."
id say its expensive because its usually a one of one, or its not easy to think up and create. however some art is not difficult to make, or creative. but as an artist/painter its extremely time consuming and to be good, you need to find you're own unique direction to go in. so if someone wants to pay 5000$ for one of my paintings, im ok with that. plus the gallery takes 50% so ..... tbh im working to make my painting go for 10,000$ so a months work can pay for my rent, materials, canvases, food and alcohol money
There is much contemporary art that is in museums or galleries that deliberately takes no skill or time or originality to create, and which deliberately avoids any aesthetic or conceptual value. There isn't any artistic justification for why much of contemporary "art" gets any recognition at all. If you're trying to make money, you're better off trying to make friends with a famous art critic or gallery owner and selling white canvases as "art", or upending trash bins in museums and calling it an "installation". Or kill an animal and sell the carcass as "sculpture". All of these things have actually been done repeatedly by different people, so even the "originality" justification is bullshit.
@@devourerofbabies the art world is so much bigger because of artists like ayako rokkaku and takashi murakami. American artists from the "Lowbrow" movement absolutely showed how contemporary art it can change. Artists like Jeremy Fish and Greg "Craola" Simkins, are prime examples of artists excelling with actual skill and newer concepts.
Oscar Evans how is art pretentious though? Art is a luxury and for me, music on a canvas. It’s the reason why it’s at the height of importance because it combines the intelligent minds with creative will. Everything on earth is created. Art is an addition to creation and gives people an insight into the mind of the creator.
i love that quote ‘the art market is not synonymous with art’ modern contemporary art has so many other avenues and is not limited to the ‘art market’ anymore
erik idiot, absolutely memes are pop art. and john appleseed, that depends on the source. But once it is drawn from whatever its native context is and made into a meme, it becomes absolutely pop art. that's a cool notion y'all. I haven't looked at that til now. thanks!
This video’s attempt to be self-aware about art being pretentious is so pretentious.......wait, this comment I just made about this video being pretentious came off as pretentious, didn’t it?.....dammit. OH SHIT! I just realized that my attempt to be witty on a UA-cam comment section by saying that I’m self-aware about my pretentiousness is sooooooo pretentious. Sorry everyone. I’ll show myself out. Forget I was here.
The reason I appreciate these videos, I now can have an intelligent, meaningful conversation with my amazing 90 year old artist grandmother, who has more than 70 years of her artistic career behind her. I’ve always marveled at the beautiful impressionist works she has created over the years, but as far as interest in others artworks go, I really could have cared less. My artistic tastes lean more towards the music world. That being said, I have really come to enjoy these videos, and being able to talk with my grandmother about these topics has been priceless to me.
@@maggyfrog all talent is is an advantage to the craft. Craftmanship is painting and drawing what you see around you, but art is putting meaning into something. For example, I love portrait of nick wilder by David hockey, even though skill needed to paint it isn't much. But it's the fact that he painted this man who was well known in hollywood, on all the guests lists and living a rich and lavish life, alone in a pool pulled so far back you can't see he's features. He could've just made a regular portrait, it would've showed off his talent, but instead he made a comment about society in he's time, and that's what makes it art.
Look at it from the perspective of the average working class joe. I think the anger stems from a feeling that you are being looked down upon for not understanding it. Anger is an automatic defensive response to the embarrassment of not being able to get an artwork, they feel that because they don't understand it people will think they're "uncultured" and "ignorant" or too dumb to interpret its meaning. Most people want to see skill, they want to clearly see talent and effort on display. It feels unfair that a white square hung on the wall slightly askew can be sold for millions when you have to work your ass off living from paycheck to paycheck. Can you blame people for being a little angry?
Not at all, I agree. But really, if your response was anything but ambivalent, the artwork was successful. Maybe the artist was trying to snub the working class.
Most art that you can't understand has no meaning at all the artist just likes to say a ton of nonsense of what it means and how they were inspired :/ ..pretentious
Why would you get angry at what other people have accomplished??? It's not like those artists made their first painting and suddenly sold it for millions, they have to work hard and make a name for themselves in order to sell those pieces. Also, everyone experiences art differently. I don't care if someone says I'm dumb for not liking abstract art, I just don't fucking like/understand it.
Maybe you should focus your energy getting pissed at those paying the artist so much and you so little. And getting angry for being ignorant and remaining ignorant is just being a shit human - if you don't understand something, the means are available for you to gain an understanding.
To me the most pretentious part of the art world is the alleged experts trying to tell people what's good and what's not what you should like or shouldn't. Any expert should know that it's all in the perspective of the viewer.
no, any expert should be knowledgeable about real talent. preference is personal, but talent is not based on something arbitrary like fame or audacity.
@@maggyfrog But the alleged artists are not pushing talented artists, they're pushing vapid post modern randomness, there is no clear hierarchy of "good" in this system. The market is self aware about this. So if a market is transparently arbitrary then there is no point in listening to experts because the word "expertise" implies a hierarchy of values.
We, as humans, have been studying the philosophy of aesthetics since the Scholastics in the 1100s; such towering theorists as Averroes, Addison, Kant, Nietzsche, Hume, Barthes, Dutton and Adorno have all chimed in, and written an incredible collective oeuvre analysing every aspect of art, aesthetics, and how we should think about art. This is to say that any expert would be able to look beyond such un-nuanced universals as 'it's all in the perspective of the viewer,' and to think about art with a more mature philosophy.
I have had my enjoyment and appreciation of art widened by the comments of people who have studied art and also clearly love art and seek to give fellow art lovers their perspectives. A very important part of experiencing art is the intention of the viewer (in the case of visual art, but it applies to all art) the more informed the intention the greater the power of art to elevate our existence. A viewer who's mind is closed to abstraction is missing the very beautiful, enriching experience of a DeKooning, or Pollack, and thus has a smaller intellectual space to exist in.
@@ubbdaubermensch1528 Too true -- that should be on a bloody billboard somewhere. I just don't know why people think their opinion on art is going to be as informed, as developed, and as insightful as art historians who've spent between six and eight years intensely studying and researching their field, or art critics, who've likely had a similar education, and have an extensive background in and knowledge of art. It's a baffling arrogance.
The most memorable thing I read in my art history textbook was that art historians agree that whenever a human manipulates something physical with the intention to change it, it is art. I like that a lot.
I don't understand what kind of joyless world you would have to live in to violently hate most contemporary art. Same with modern music, I don't know how you can refuse to explore a medium to the extent that all you hear is the oily top layer of commercialized pop. Not knocking top 40 by the way, most people just react to how much of a product it's become.
To use music as an analogy... There's a lot to be said for modern music. By eschewing beauty in favor of drama, emotion, expression, modern composers have created incredible music that wonderfully describe the thoughts and feelings that lurk in our minds and hearts. It might not be "beautiful" but I absolutely love: Bartok: ua-cam.com/video/C68SkzGb6Ww/v-deo.html Stravinsky: ua-cam.com/video/5UJOaGIhG7A/v-deo.html Prokofiev: ua-cam.com/video/q4TyQ97Jcr0/v-deo.html I could go on, you get the point. Even if this music isn't palatable to everyone, and has a smaller audience, for those with the patience to learn it, it's rewarding. In the world of pop music, there's something good in every genre, a range or lyrics and themes, and a wealth of knowledge and sentiment to learn from. Some of it's fluff, but it can still put you in a good mood, and sometimes you just need a loud ACDC jam to help relax. But... What do you do when you're faced with this? ua-cam.com/video/sOUsbtUrXHk/v-deo.html This is the kind of artwork I have to protest. And I can't stand when anyone puts it on equal footing with the greats.
Adding to the music analogy, I'm 54 years old, and continue to seek out music that excites me, by reading, listening, and most of all, being open-minded. To say that the music of today sucks is a cop-out. I dedicate time to this; so many of my peers don't because it's not important to them. They are happy accepting what Top 40 offers. Just like contemporary art, there is great music being created every day in every genre. Two recent great bands, IMHO: Parquet Courts, and Protomartyr.
A lot of the issue is that some people are making art that is sometimes objectively bad but because they are famous, they are making hundreds of thousands of dollars on the work.
I love contemporary art, especially when it's looked at in different ways. The medium is so deep and the attempts at understanding can be unending. There's actually a ovie that attempts to portray the struggles of a modern artist: ua-cam.com/video/V74sHdm76WU/v-deo.html It's called: The Square (2017)
Art isn't pretentious. "Art" is pretentious. Both are self-indulgent, but the difference is that the nobler of the two isn't made for others. The artist can be content _without_ sharing his craft. Compulsion to create drives the artist. Compulsion to convince others that you create drives the pretentious. So, how is one considered nobler? Because one is genuine, and for the sake of discovery and improvement, while the other is as fake as a car salesman's smile. Each of us is a consumer of both types of art. As such, it is left to our discretion to determine the boundary between these two varieties. We certainly would not want to find ourselves in the embarrassed position of having supported some contrived attempt at the obscure, arcane, or esoteric, and to then be revealed as the ill-informed and limited creature that we truly are! Similarly, to deliberately consume "art" in an effort to impress others is as detestable an act as the intention to create it. Lucky for us all, our private motives belong only to us. Personally, I find those tacky black velvet paintings to be aesthetically pleasing (as long as it's not an Elvis). I also enjoy the fluid, brush-stroked grasses of a Van Gogh, despite its state of cliché. Escher continues to impress me with his geometric brilliance, even though the school of modern "art" would doubtless consider his skill to have been marginal at best. I guess what we consider 'subjective interpretation' is just a catch-all explanation for the fact that we have very complex reasons for why we feel so passionately about our unique causes. So while the presenter here may seem to be evading the issue in a _can't we all just get along_ sort of way, I think her position is both well-developed and mature. It's art's role to cause these visceral reactions. We *can't* know the motives or experiences of others: art makes us face this fact directly, and it drives us crazy. Good!
I'm incredibly pleased these videos exist: ua-cam.com/video/ANA8SI_KvqI/v-deo.html ua-cam.com/video/Esvn7NgTq4Q/v-deo.html ua-cam.com/video/PRWJcrRO0GM/v-deo.html Seriously, how many of those who commented here would pay to listen to music if singers and musicians were singing and playing discordant and noisy sounds? Would you buy pop, jazz or chill out music if musicians were too lazy to practise and master their instruments but instead played 'crap'? Would you rush to listen to singers who couldn't sing in America's Got Talent'? Like these wonderful artists, ua-cam.com/video/7_Ybl0Qvves/v-deo.html. Why not? And if you 'like' hearing Yoko Ono screaming her head off, does not mean it is 'good' art. It just means you like 'crap'. Liking somethng does not mean it is 'good'. If you 'like' beating up old women in the street, does not mean it is 'good'. If you 'liked' helping an old lady cross a busy street, then that is 'good'. Would you consider figure skaters great artists if they would fall down on the ice in a crumbled heap? No! 'Conceptual art is based on the notion that the essence of art is an idea, or concept, and may exist distinct from and in the absence of an object as its representation.' In that case, would you pay to see 'conceptual artistic figure skating' where a pair of figure skaters just stand there doing no skating at all but explain that their figure skating is in their 'idea' of skating.
it's sad to think that because you haven't attained a certain level of fame or experience or notability, your work cannot be monetarily valued at a high price even if it is exquisite
i mean that's pretty much how all artistic mediums work though, it's just that painters or visual artists have less hoops to jump through. a well-known, established director is going to get paid a lot more to make a movie then someone who is just starting out, even if their work is vastly inferior. a small, relatively unknown singer-songwriter isnt going to get the same kind of record deal a famous top 40 pop artist will. the only difference is that film and music are generally more accessible mediums for the public (most people are a lot more like to hit up a theatre or a concert on a free day then a museum)
@Wenceslao Futanaki No one has proven that money determines what gets created. Artists create what they want regardless of whether they think it will sell. Besides, it isn't possible to "take away" money from art. Art has sold without a break throughout it's entire history.
Thank you for your optimistic attitude. I may not agree with a lot of what you say but I feel no artist should ever be discouraged. Everyone should be inspired to create art because it helps to understand your inner self and the world around us.
This isn’t an explicitly emotional video, but I had an incredibly rough day today in my creative life and I started to cry at the end after hearing someone validate that money isn’t the totality of Art
this content is so valuable for people who are considering making art or even people who have been doing it for a while but are not Ai Weiwei-famous (yet). thank you!
I appreciate that you admit that there is pretentiousness in the art world, but when people say art is pretentious, I don't think that they mean how a bunch of pigment smeared on a canvas is pretending to be an image. I generally think that they are referring to when art that is not visually interesting is bestowed with an arbitrary meaning that then carries the value of the work. Like how if I brought a pile of trash in to a critique, many of my professors would probably love it if I justified it conceptually.
the concept of the thing is the point though, look at duchamp for example, you have a urinal, it is placed on its side, out of use, out of the cycle that it becomes a part of. There was a group of artists who decided to pee on a version of the urinal one time, and you can't usually say that piss into a urinal is art. So it adopts the concepts as an event, the funniness, the fact that they were kicked out for interacting with a piece of art as its basic function, is itself the cycle that art can avoid, doesn't avoid, or perceives unto itself. Look at something new and see its point, capabilities, what it signifies and where the signifiers are. Contemporary art is just pocketed life, but how the hell do you put that in your pocket you know.
Most professors would not honestly. I remember one time when my professor told us about a time he helped this bright girl with some professional critiques and she brought like 7 coke can that got progressively more destroyed. The first critic came in and asked her what it was, and she said her art spoke for herself. So the critic threw it away as without context it's what ever you see, so at that point the cans were just that; beat up cans that need to be thrown away. She took them out again and the second critic asked the same question and she answered the same way which led to the cans being dismissed again. My prof. told her to explain the concept and when she told the third that it's supposed to be a representation on how society drains and discards women after they've served their purpose, the critic nods and said it made sense. Tl;dr: it's not what you do it's why you did it, that makes it art.
@@AEtherArts so art is recontextualised as long as the artist responds, shouldn't there already be numerous possible responses, constrained to signifiers but not present trace
It is important to think about the art we view. It is also important to experience it and respect the different experiences of others. I like your videos and continue to learn and develop from them.
I am so glad this channel is benefiting the world for four years now. My sister is opening an art and art supply store soon. I always pester her to watch this show, but she is too busy. Yet here I am a non-artist who just enjoys it so much. It succeeds in impressing me with its pretentiousness. ;)
is your sister perhaps a character in an indie romcom? that's such a lovely fictional scenario, someone owning an art supply shop. but in all seriousness, same, as a non artist i enjoy it very much too :)
She'd love the thought of that! Her store is called the Curious Cat. She'd already found her love though and has adopted four kids. Her family is featured in much of her art. One day, I hope she'll do the art assignment Meet in the Middle with me. This channel is so educational and endearing. Plus there are cool people to chat with in the comments. :)
I've never had a good rebuttal when people say they don't like art/looking at art because it's pretentious. This is a great way of handling that comment.
"The Case for Kanye West" made me rethink everything I thought about the guy. I still think he's sometimes obnoxious, but at least now I view him as being obnoxious with artistic intent.
Art is so subjective that almost anything one says about it can be true under a certain light. I personally enjoy artworks most when I can recognize the validity of people’s criticisms and still decide that I like it. I know there are much more educated people out there with the credentials to make more authoritative decisions about the qualitative value of a piece, but at the end of the day, art is a line of communication between the artist and the viewer. Factors such as technical proficiency, tastes, and trends aside, the only value that matters to the individual is whether they were able to communicate with the artist through the piece or not. Thank you for making these videos! I’m mostly a film and music kind of guy when it comes to art, but I love watching the art assignment and learning about other art forms and how to appreciate them more!
I have never delved deeply into art or art history or individual artists. I believe every great society needs art at all levels to broaden our minds and provide enjoyment. So thank you for these videos I find them educational and informative.
I love this video because it gets at two vital truths. First, that all significant fields of human endeavor have dark sides and legitimate criticisms that can be made about them. Second, that having flaws does NOT make something irredeemable or even a net bad thing. Art has been a part of every human society that is known about. It clearly drives both practitioner and viewer to find new ways of considering the world, or it entertains, or it just breeds controversy. When I was younger I mostly dismissed art and especially modern art, but experiencing more and more art has made me appreciate the way it facilitates different kinds of communication. So at this point, I'm fine with people disagreeing with my art tastes, but truly not caring just makes me a bit sad at what is being missed. Thanks for the videos, they're spectacular!
To me, *art* is *any* *physical* *thing* or *performance* that took *effort* and *creativity* to produce, and it stimulates an intellectual and or emotional effect in viewers. Art should also have intellectual or emotional value greater than the sum of its parts or material value. Great video, by my definition, it is art!
I disagree on the premise that artists are inherently pretentious. Simply releasing your art isn't pretentious, if anything it's a way to extract yourself from the piece, to share, to let go. What makes conceptual art unically pretentious is that the author's intentions are precedent over the piece itself. Communicating this intent is literally to "attempt to impress by affecting greater importance than is actually possessed".
Also I like the mentality some commenters are having with appreciating sorts of art that they don't like. I'm a follower of David Hume's view of aesthetics, that taste is immediate and cannot be disputed, unlike truth. Broadly speaking, you can think something is good while not liking it.
I love this video precisely because it empathises with the common man. How often do we get the feeling that the art world looks down on the layman, sneering at the fact that he doesn't take seriously their holy collection of scribbly lines? The self-reflection in this video is charming and sympathetic.
The Art Assignment videos bring me so much joy. I love their focus on contemporary art since I feel like it so often poorly represented and viewed by the majority of the population who consume it. This series/channel gives me hope that people do care about art more than they are willing to convey. As an art historian in the making, it gives joy to see so much care about a subject I want to dedicate my life to, albeit not focusing on contemporary art. While my interests as a scholar don't lie in contemporary art, I love how Sarah and these videos show me the complexity and the passion that others do have for this period of art we are currently living in. Thank you for all of your hard work!
I can't believe it's been almost four years! Back then I was about to go to high school and had no idea what to do with my life. Now, nearly four years later, I'm majoring in art history and art education - I started just this fall. The Art Assignment is one of the things that led me here.
1:21 - 1:55 This basically applies to the entertainment industry as well. And academia, of course. Imposter syndrome mixed with bouts of megalomania is just how it goes.
It’s baffling to see what people write, but impressive to know you guys can take comments like those and not have it deter the creative expressions you arduously provide to this audience. Thanks, and thank you for the work and time you put into theses videos. I really appreciate it.
Started painting 2016 with no artistic background whatsoever-like a hobby. And this was just kind of floating out there and I know ive subscribed to it but never bothered to check it out. And now I'm glad that I did.
I wish there was a channel like this specifically for cinema, making the case for certain classics and art house films that the general public don't "get".
I think everyframe a painting and nerdwriter1 sometimes give credit to more unknown or more unknown aspects of a movie, as well as analysing popular stuff through a new lens which gives it some sort of deeper credit, as with the episode on Jackie Chang.
stanleycoleman Have you watched Welcome to the Basement on the Blame Society channel? They watch a movie that Matt hasn't seen before ("might be good, might be bad") and talk about it. Even if it is a "bad" movie they offer it just as much time, and try to understand it. It's one of my favorite shows on UA-cam. (Please note that they are 2 guys who are improv actors and perhaps not so much experts on cinema, aside from creating Chad Vader lol, as Mrs. Sarah Green is on art). Give them a watch! 😃
People are so quick at dismissing other people's honest motivations in doing something like art, often against what the mainstream common sense considers valuable. Thank you for being so patient and calm trying to argue in favor for those artists!
These PBS art videos with this woman are still some of the best art videos on UA-cam! I love them and wish you guys and her would make more content again! Thanks for all of your hard work to make all of this! I love sharing them with me students and thinking about them and all of the knowledge imbued within them!
Sarah, I'm writing this from Marfa, Texas after a full day at the Chinati Foundation, and I'm only here because you made a video about it. My wife and I had an amazing time; thank you so, so much for letting your audience know about it.
Hi, your channel is a blessing. You give a clear concise and well educated explanation about art in all it's periods. You help me stay updated and well informed about the art market. Being an artist that live in - what you call - the outside world. Your channel keeps me well connected and inspired. Thank you
These videos are so so important to me, they gave me a way better overview over the artworld and introduced me to artists I have never heard before, but which I would now consider my favorites!
Just watched this again, and tried to “like” it again, after getting angry at someone on Facebook for posting derisively about that damn banana with a general statement that all modern art is terrible. Thank you for being excellent.
Once an Art is born, the Work likes to be : discoverd, appreciated & talked about. Art / Aritist - by any means -, is : High achievements of Mankind for a Mankind in its own level. Keep the Art free of charge for anybody & more important keep it going by supporting the Artists all over the World. Thank you😊
A delightful embrace of the difficult truths of the pretentious in art. You have given me the words that I have needed for some time. How to confidently acknowledge the truth that everyone can see but few on the inside ever have the courage to discuss. Thank you. Thanks too for finding a way to comfortably allow for perspectives that on the surface appear to be an affront to the direction that art has taken in the last 100 years or so. The greatest art is to find a way to live in the world with no enemies.
Here's the thing. We'd all love to be artists and filmmakers. What a life! Artists are not those who "dare" to feel deep things, but rather those who have the time to do it because of trust funds or Theos or parents paying the rent for a flat in the Village, etc. Once in a while a true genius comes along, but a lot of spoiled brats get lionized in the meantime. Hence much of the disillusionment/frustration expressed in the comments. That said, I thank you for this wonderful series, which gives those of us in the non-trust fund, a.k.a. real, world a window on some real gems that we'd otherwise never have access too.
In Adam Ruins Everything they always do a takeaway. In that episode, he makes the argument that art is great and important. Real artist embraces lots of different art. Also, to make money as an artist you can make work for all kinds of fields, from book illustrations to movie concept art.
Art is chasing the uncatchable... It's entertaining the space between. As beings we have found constant patterns, and this isn't to undermine what we've noticed, but those patterns are only constant with the very rules they've made for themselves. If reality is a randomness flowing, we are only tapping into a portion of whatever that is, and even to understand that is to only understand it in the way that we know. In other words, we only see what we see. Artists are the blips that we take for being insane, and I don't necessarily believe that measuring it at all or being self aware of it gets you any closer to whatever "The artistic process" is... Or if it even really matters enough to consider it from the outside. Because the artist sees the universe in his own way, from the inside, just as rigidly as we do... It's just aligned to a different length. That will speak for itself if it speaks for itself.
I find most modern art styles uninteresting but I'm not self-centered enough to think that my aesthetic is universal. Love what you love and surround yourself with it. I've bought from amazing contemporary artists in my community, filled my house with art I love, and I've never spent more than $250 on a piece. Usually considerably less.
As a writer, I loved what you had to say about the creative process, the lonely striving against anonymity. The music I loved growing up, Sting and U2 particularly, was often described as pretentious. This always frustrated me. I felt these songs weren't pretending to be great. They really were great! It was the critic who was pretending to be important. I should watch your Yoko Ono video now. You've piqued my interest.
For me "art is pretentious" comes directly in response to feeling like I'm not allowed to appreciate the art I do appreciate. I mean, yes, I do love Vermeer and Sargent and Thomas Cole. I like classical composition. I like pretty landscapes and people. And I am kind of like, I just watched 12 minutes of a woman folding laundry, and it was cool, so I guess I can get behind that being art. But anime? That's not art? That's commercial dreck? That's when I'm saying, you're pretentious if you can't let people love a beautiful, moving Kazuo Oga background, just because it comes from My Neighbor Totorro. It's pretentious when you imply that your favorite chewing gum collage has more meaning and emotion in it than my favorite Norman Rockwell. Art doesn't have to be about exclusion: this is art because that isn't art. Art is by definition a pursuit of subjective experience. My life experience leads me to love the order and beauty of a canvas because the real world is messy and painful. And your experience in a messy and painful world leads you to love messy, painful art. Neither is wrong. And really, neither is right. It just is. We like what we like.
@@Watkinsstudio but it's literally fūcķing trash and if you can see some of the shįt they make you'll say the same thing but your pretentious and pretend there's a higher meaning of garbage
I'm an artist and I think a lot of it is pretentious garbage. The same folks in the art world will praise some hack for smearing his feces on a canvas and then turn around and trash the work of a skillful artist all because he/she makes art for a medium they consider beneath them.
This is all the reasons why I love this channel... (aside: 4 years already?! Wow!) Engaging with and pulling in everyone, continuing the conversation, and honouring the art, artist, and art viewer. Great job, and I especially like how you expanded my view of how, in many ways, artists and art are indeed pretentious. Or, said another way, artists and art are courageous, meaningful, and engage with us in such powerful ways. Thank you. :)
Rlly hadn't thought about the distinction between artists being pretentious and art being pretentious. That was rlly interesting and even a little humbling. As long as I've been involved with art, I seemed to be in constant struggle with pretentious art. In the same vein as some of the polite disagreements, I still don't think I completely get/am open to all art. I have a lot of provocative opinions about art that I think should get attention and art that I think deserves none (let alone the monetary aspects of it). But this video is a great start for me to think more complexly about it. Thanks.
I can understand you if you're making art to get validation from others, but, if you're making art because you dig a certain style, or are on a deeper journey which your express through your artwork then its personal and no opinion of others should shape your view. It's like liking a TV show you enjoy watching - it doesn't matter if anyone else likes it if you get something from it. Not to say you are, but living to impress others is a road that leads to massive anxiety and is never ending. Love and light to you 🙏🏾
YOU are ART, baby! This video should be run in a loop at the entrance to every Art Venue in the country. Now, if you can get another video with a man criticizing this video and calling it pretentious, played simultaneous at the same volume so that the voices compete with the listeners attention. THEN you got ART! Because art is a conversation of pretense where nobody is right and everybody is anxious about looking stupid. To make this dual video interactive ART, simply add a microphone and a simple sign saying "please comment loudly and often." BOOM!
This is very validating as an artist for all the times that I've tried too hard, but I feel like you can still make good art without being pretentious. You don't always have to act like it's anything more than it is, or try to impress someone with it.
the most important thing people always forget is that NOBODY forces you to spend your money and attention on art that you don't like. and those who want to buy it themselves will figure out how to spend of their own money, believe me.
I don't think art itself is pretentious. It's the people who comment & critique art who are pretentious. Instead of saying "I like this piece or artist & here's why" they promote themselves as if only they understand art. That's where the elitism comes in. Their comments are contrived, fake. Like people who taste wine & say it's whimsical & contains hints of rhubarb & dill. Art is supposed to be for everyone to enjoy & reflect on. But when critics & historians use pointless babble jargon it shuts people out. And that isn't just pretentious it's rude & hurtful.
I'm an unknown artist. And I am rapidly losing my eyesight. I've had to shift my style from realism to expressionistic and abstract. Never liked Modern Art before, but I'm finding a great and valuable use for it now. things don't deter me, thank you for making these videos.
Interesting take on this subject, however when my art professors speak about pretentious art they usually refer to instagram artist who only follow trends (what is popular and most likable now) with the soul purpose of appealing to the masses without expressing any authenticity.
a logical human being would have defined "pretencious art" as an "object that is created to disguise itself as something with a deeper meaning where, in fact, it has none". But, hey, that's just me.
Beatypatrockks : who is anyone to say just what art is? I think it is a very dead topic. She wastes way too many words here to explain something so simple.
Because your definition is categorically nonsensical. Deeper meaning is created, further cultivated over time, and isn't exclusive to any one kind of 'thing'.
I like to compare art to literature(seeing that literature is a form of art). Sometimes when writers write fiction the readers tend to find different themes in the story. Sometimes different than what the writers themselves intended or even thought of. That still doesn't change the theme that the reader has come to find, that is if the reader can back it up with proof. Meanings can be found and change over time. Same thing goes for interpretations. My issue with this is that you can't really classify the art itself as pretentious only the artist. To classify the artist as pretentious is a debate in and of itself. I don't believe that everything and anything is art, but with a little tweeking it can be.
@@EulogyfortheAngels Yes I agree with your statement on deeper meaning but art is supposed to express this meaning to other people more or less well. We take for example the condom wrapper a girl friend of mine kept after her first time. This thing had tremendous and deep meaning to her, that meaning changed as she grew older and her perspective and what had happend changed. If you put the condom wrapper in a museum it's still just a condom wrapper to other people bc it fails to communicate the story behind it although one could learn a lot from it. (And of course she didn't create anything actively but that's no the point) You could of course put the story next to the wrapper but doesn't that defy the purpose of putting a condom wrapper in an art museum in the first place If it has to be explained through language? There is of course nothing wrong with having additional information to understand a piece (or literature) better but one should at least get a vague idea when looking at it. If we just have condom wrapper we know nothing. Is it about sexuality, rape and the patriarchy, broken hearts, a happy relationship or a one night stand, AIDS or HIV? A political, social or personal issue? Positive or negative associations? We can't tell without context and there aren't any clues either. For us it's just a condom wrapper. The condom might as well never have been used. Just blown up by 14 year old's into a balloon.
I love the way you narrate the videos on artists. I like the open and curious tone you take, it makes me want to listen even when I disagree. Also loved that you pointed out that art is more than a stuffy market. It means I can access more artwork from my own place in the world, and I can also share my own stuff with people who are like me and can't afford to pay all that money. Thank you for these videos!
I don't think you are using the word "pretentious" in the same way that modern art critics use it. They (and I) are not complaining about artists with self doubt who attempt to be great but in fact feel less than great. Our problem is when "artists" put together something with no semblance of skill and no semblance of beauty and pretend to be a master.
much of the artistic merit in "modern", "conceptual", and pretty much most forms of contemporary art, is in the Context of the art. Not it's independent merits, like technical skill. Most people who don't like contemporary art in general just aren't looking at the pieces within the continuum of ideas, or "The Conversation", that the pieces are created as responses to. Which is totally fine! That "Conversation" is really only there and only of interest to those who are interested in it. It is not intending to, like some conspiracy sorts have alleged, "Tell You What Is Good" in art. Only "what is meaningful", and that only within the context of this "Conversation". Most of the "pretentious" label I have seen, has been applied to celebrated artists, to pieces hanging in galleries for years after the artist's death, by people who are applying Their idea of what Art is onto the piece, without considering the piece in it's relationship to the progress of artistic ideation. Like I don't see art critics calling things "pretentious", only getting called pretentious, ha ha!
How can you measure skill, or beauty in art? What makes you think there's no semblance? What if you just can't see it? Since when is there supposed to be a requirement that each artist has to follow? Even if the artist does believe they are a genius, how are you so certain they are not just because it doesn't meet your standards. Plenty of genius artists that we have seen, that have been praised, were regarded as crazy loons in their lifetime. Half the time whenever I see the word pretentious, it's usually being used by people who aren't as smart as the person they're criticising. Do you think Shakespeare felt less than great and constantly had self doubt. Historically speaking he knew his work was great and would be celebrated by generations to come. Is he pretentious now? The word pretentious has got to be one of the most ironic words out there. It really shouldn't be used anyway, anyhow. It's almost as bad as classifying someone as a narcissist, which is another loose term.
I'm an artist and I went to art school, so I understand and appreciate pretty much every form of art, which is great for me, I guess. The problem with most contemporary art is that it is an elitist society, which perpetuates itself. It is good for business from an artist's and gallery's perspective, because it is possible to make good money. But, it has mostly closed itself off from the "common man," or those who are outside of the inner circle. This is how contemporary art has failed. This is why most perceive it to be pretentious.
To be a master is to be able to effectively communicate their own ideas, and not be hindered by the problems of technique or medium. The technique can be simple, yet the artist still a master.
The observation about walking through a museum and hardly taking note of the art on the walls is true. My take on it is the following: It's all so overwhelming. My eyes are amazed. There is too much too see. Each work has a lot of meaning. I recall the time I saw the Monet exhibit at The Art Institute of Chicago. It was a very popular show and people pushed you along like you were on an assembly line in a factory. You got a few brief seconds to look at a canvas. I like how Rothko treated art. It was spiritual to him. I feel that way too. I think a lot of people feel that way too.
This video made me unhappy. Pretentious is a word that indicates a lack of care and a belief that the person a work is being shared with isn’t smart enough to understand what’s going on. The reality is that most of us care very deeply about the process of thought and craft that goes into our work. Often it is about things that are hard to put directly into words, and is a collection of references, skills, and experiences that we’ve collected in our lives. It’s an invitation into something not a wall to keep people out. I get what you are trying to do with this video but it didn’t land well for me. I feel like you played into the stereotype rather than taking the time to shift the conversation.
Gina Furnari to be human is to create art, and to create art is to be human, right? I agree with what you said. Art isn’t a luxury or an exclusive resource, it’s everywhere-and an artist is anyone who turns an idea from thought to reality. Your comment about art being an invitation is spot on, really. It’s a facilitator for interpersonal connection, and a crucial means of communication.
If you think the type of art that you say is keeping people out is doing just that, that’s ultimately your connection with it; and that is actually doing the opposite of what you say it’s doing! Because with any artwork like this, the interpretation is extremely subjective, any evocation means that the artwork is serving its purpose
Yup almost everything she said is wrong. Art is not pretentious. Pretentious people are pretentious, and they can also create art. To say that the reason Leonardo da Vinci created the vetruvian man was to impress people, or that he overvalued its importance is just pure stupidity. The best art was created by people who didn’t leave a signature or care to impress people. And that is why it is soo impressive. Because they weren’t trying to impress. How many times have you drawn something because you were bored and didn’t show anyone. I’ve done that countless times. That’s like me saying the reason she is wearing nice clothes instead of a burlap sack is to impress people. Or that not wearing a burlap sack instead of actual clothes is pretentious. And the price of art today is dependent on demand and supply, branding and tax evasion. And whether or not the artist is still alive. Also saying that a lifelike sculpture is just something made of of random materials is just a silly thing to say. It’s almost as if you need very specific materials and skills to make a stone sculpture. Or to make a pattern on stone that a person can identify as a sculpture of a person. How can you now go on to say that the materials were random, they are extremely specific materials, using precise skills to create a pattern.
If not everyone can impress by art, then that is not art. That's already Passion The thing is back to the classical times, art is used for knowledge, power and communication. There is no huge difference on how it is used today but the thing is, every artist has their own unique style and interest so as people themselves has their own taste.
I always refer people to the Kanye as Artist video. It totally changed my opinion on him and has convinced several of my friends to give him a shot as well. Now he's one of my favorite modern musicians.
Say what you will about his public image, but I have yet to meet one person who has explored his work as a pop figure and not become enamored with him to some degree.
@Wenceslao Futanaki a contemporary artist is one that's alive. You literally called what I make a cheap cash grab yet I'm legally homeless and can't even afford good food.
@Wenceslao Futanaki obviously you don't understand percentages, also didn't van gogh die from a gun shot to the stomach? Also not all art has to be some significant piece that takes months to complete. What people label to be modern art is usually worse than a piss painting! Then problem with making something that takes years to finish is no one will buy it and you'll die poor like the other. Andy Warhol understood the Art of business and he wanted lots people to buy his art which is why he mass produced his and made sure they're different in many ways even though they're basically all the same. Cause you can never own a van gogh painting and that's what even I hate about art but it doesn't mean rich people should by uninspired trash. I can link some of the stuff I made if you want but I wouldn't guarantee it's any good.
"Conclude it with night sweats as you wonder immediately after, and then forever after, whether you are a fraud and your work is terrible no matter how many people say they like it" THOSE SOUND LIKE FIGHTING WORDS lol, relatable
Nope. This is a mere twisting of words that art critics and marketers are notorious for. This video didn't really posit that art is pretentious, but rather reiterated the fact that an art object is functionless in the sense that it isn't part of infrastructure that maintains our daliy activities, and its use actually lies in eliciting wonder in the eyes/ears/mind of the beholder. It's actually when it fails to inspire that it is labelled 'pretentious' by onlookers/ listeners/ audience.
but her carefully sub-texted point stands in this view as well, that many spurious condemnations of a piece as "pretentious" by people who are unmoved by it, is related to their inability or unwillingness to understand the Context of the piece or artist. I mean, you aren't wrong. I just agree that a random joe saying "this is shit" is less of a reflection of the "value" of the art, Objectively, than it is a reflection of the individual's Subjective idea of "what is art".
You literally stated the video's perspective and don't realize that it supports the term pretentious as described? You probably just came to hear "lol contemporary art is shit, let's laugh and agree."
Hey, what about functional objects that have rally great design? Like teapots and cool buildings. So many people take their environment for granted, so don't notice what probably took someone a lot of time to design. Yet these objects are part of our daily infrastructure. Does that status elevate it to being functional, or denigrate it for not being full of wonder?.
Then the indirect point of this video is meant to say "if you want to criticise something, criticise with thought put to it", instead of using a word that clearly does not, in essence, represent what you want to posit. Think for yourself instead of jumping onto a bandwagon of people clearly attacking different aspects of art with one anchor word.
I needed this video (typing teary eyed). Fifty years ago, I traced a gorilla so my parents would praise my (five year old) artistic ability. To this day, I struggle with the guilt. Now I paint, and my elderly parents still love my work. Never under-estimate the encouragement of parents. Thanks for your videos. They lift me up... too. :)
Honestly, I am in an 'arts' degree of sorts, I am doing 3d animation, now this is either for video games, movies, tv shows, adverts or art house films. The course is kinda 'artistic' at times, but I will be flat out honest, I just care about how well the CRAFTSMANSHIP is. Yes film narrative I think is very important when generating an emotion. But when I see animation comps and Art house works....I really tune out, because a lot seems like shoddy work and people 'faked it till they made it'. I remember doing a fine arts course as well, I have dyspraxia, so my hand writing and drawing is TERRIBLE and may never really improve, but this arts degree felt like a course in story telling and manipulation as while I worked hard on my piece, it was not very good...But I talked my way into a A*...Then when I heard about how the art market is just an investment and sometimes a money laundering scheme...It really made me scoff at art with little to no skill. If anything it made me really enjoy concept art for film and video games because I knew that the artist was worked ragged to make that piece of art and they had a lot of drawing and painting talent to make it look as good as it did. Also there is one part of the fine arts scene which I....am not fond of at all, and it is the scene in general is....a melting pot of idealism when it comes to social class. From top to bottom I have seen artists talk and act in similar tones, no matter what their art style or their background...Once in a while I would like to hear a sharp, direct, blunt, curse filled artist who says things how they are, rather then using flowy language to explain what their art 'means'...I guess it is just a frustration from having a peek into the fine arts world, then going into a world such as animation where results are the only thing that matters.
There are many artists out there that will fill they void for that relatability. Conceptual and contemporary art is about exploring new concepts, mainly within the viewers themselves, and if you’re having any emotive conversation with yourself about that kind of art; then it’s serving it’s purpose, because it doesn’t have to mean the same to you as it does the artist, no one will object to your interpretation because it’s your own connection to it, which you’ve already displayed! It doesn’t matter whether you connect to the artist themselves. The reason why they don’t focus on skill is because within the art is their own concept that, again, you’re free to interpret for yourself. And if it’s not for you then that’s fine, there’s plenty of other artworks that will be! Same with music and games and movies etc! But to scoff at a particular type of art is ultimately unfair because that would be like someone else scoffing at you for taking 3D animation (which I would never I find that kind of craft incredible!)
I just found out this UA-cam channel, but I’ve learnt new things and changed my perspective over modern art in a positive way, so that instead of criticizing (even if I don’t like the art work at all and never will), I begin wondering what was in the artist’s mind when he/she was making the piece, as well as I think on the history and emotions involved in its production, and continue living my life without being aggressive anymore. So, thanks for that positive change 👍🏼
I feel that people (including me) think that art, especially paintings and statues, are pretentious not because of the pieces themselves or even the artists, but because of the people that discuss those pieces. A lot of them describe what are often times just simple geometric shapes with very pompous words which may rub some people off the wrong way. As a contrast, when people discuss video games, they often use more pragmatical words and people almost never think they are pretentious, but when a certain video game is really trying to be "artistic" people become really pissed off (again, including me :D)
It's hard to come up with words to describe why an artwork intrigues you, much the same as it's hard to put into words why you prefer a particular beer, or why you love this particular person. Words are used, because we don't have much else, but may not be terrible convincing. So don't expect to be convinced, just hear the passion underlying it.
I think art seems pretentious to you because you're seeing all these stuffy rich people holding the main conversation surrounding art. That can be offputting, but there are many regular people, including normal art students, who are also talking about it in a perfectly understandable way. This channel is a stellar example of a discussion on the impact of art, and the artist themselves in which regular people can join in too.
+Mahlen Morris I get that it's hard to describe, but I don't think that pompous words help to get your point across better than just a simple sentence. My problem with people who use them is that they often do it to sound more sophisticated and to feel smarter than they are and it's pretty hard to hear the passion for art past their ego :) +bee I don't think it has to do with how rich or poor someone is, but rather how smart they want to look in front of other people and they see these words as a shortcut to get there... I think that someone who knows a lot about art can say why it is meaningful without sounding smug or full of them self.
What counts as a "pretentious word" though? How does vocabulary become "pretentious?" This seems like an argument about people's intentions, rather than their words. What makes it so offensive to people when someone uses words they don't know, or elevated language to discuss something like art? I think people often assume that when someone uses "pretentious language" that they are trying to impress someone, or make other people feel inferior. I'm sure that's happened before. But it's pretty presumptuous just to immediately assume what another person's intentions are from your own reactions... What if it's also possible to pretend to be working class? Pretend to be less intelligent or "cultured" than you are? I see this often too.
I really respect you for praising people who politely disagree with you.
I respect the sentiment but I have to disagree
I'm pleased with your polite way of disagreeing with me but I am wholeheartedly against your opinion
Your perspective is valuable to me but I must discard it in favour of mine
Hate to break the chain of jokes but I want to say that I really agree and I really hope we all learn to think like this. Just in general about all things, learning to accept that somethings we may not like but that doesn't mean it's worthless or that we should deride the people who do like it and sometimes it can matter to learn about why they do like it.
no disagree entirely not even a joke when she responds theirs a clear pretentious attitude
Viwers: "Art is pretentious and art is only expensive because it's made by famous artists and it's a scam by the rich to make money."
The Art Assignment: "Yes."
id say its expensive because its usually a one of one, or its not easy to think up and create. however some art is not difficult to make, or creative. but as an artist/painter its extremely time consuming and to be good, you need to find you're own unique direction to go in. so if someone wants to pay 5000$ for one of my paintings, im ok with that. plus the gallery takes 50% so ..... tbh im working to make my painting go for 10,000$ so a months work can pay for my rent, materials, canvases, food and alcohol money
There is much contemporary art that is in museums or galleries that deliberately takes no skill or time or originality to create, and which deliberately avoids any aesthetic or conceptual value. There isn't any artistic justification for why much of contemporary "art" gets any recognition at all. If you're trying to make money, you're better off trying to make friends with a famous art critic or gallery owner and selling white canvases as "art", or upending trash bins in museums and calling it an "installation". Or kill an animal and sell the carcass as "sculpture". All of these things have actually been done repeatedly by different people, so even the "originality" justification is bullshit.
@@devourerofbabies the art world is so much bigger because of artists like ayako rokkaku and takashi murakami. American artists from the "Lowbrow" movement absolutely showed how contemporary art it can change. Artists like Jeremy Fish and Greg "Craola" Simkins, are prime examples of artists excelling with actual skill and newer concepts.
Oscar Evans how is art pretentious though? Art is a luxury and for me, music on a canvas. It’s the reason why it’s at the height of importance because it combines the intelligent minds with creative will. Everything on earth is created. Art is an addition to creation and gives people an insight into the mind of the creator.
PBS is also a scam.
i love that quote ‘the art market is not synonymous with art’ modern contemporary art has so many other avenues and is not limited to the ‘art market’ anymore
Dude(tte), I wish more people realize that. It freaks the shit out of me. They can only equate the value of art to its pricetag. Is sad :/
Warhol would be all over the meme game
Here's an idea: Are memes pop-art?
erik idiot More of a realistic question would be "Are the things that memes steal from out of context, pop-art?"
erik idiot, absolutely memes are pop art.
and john appleseed, that depends on the source. But once it is drawn from whatever its native context is and made into a meme, it becomes absolutely pop art.
that's a cool notion y'all. I haven't looked at that til now. thanks!
This video’s attempt to be self-aware about art being pretentious is so pretentious.......wait, this comment I just made about this video being pretentious came off as pretentious, didn’t it?.....dammit. OH SHIT! I just realized that my attempt to be witty on a UA-cam comment section by saying that I’m self-aware about my pretentiousness is sooooooo pretentious. Sorry everyone. I’ll show myself out. Forget I was here.
that’s amazing 💀
Reminds me of myself.
Bwahahahahah
This is pretentious
Feedback loops. I hate those.
"Art is whatever you can get away with" -Marshall Mcluhan
@Wenceslao Futanaki mans didnt even watch the video
@Wenceslao Futanaki "Pretentious" is a fancy word for something created without the speaker's approval.
@@Watkinsstudio apparently someone didn't understand what pretentious means.
@@RomeoDeJuliette You're right, Wenceslao Futanaki doesn't.
Andy Warhol said that actually
The reason I appreciate these videos, I now can have an intelligent, meaningful conversation with my amazing 90 year old artist grandmother, who has more than 70 years of her artistic career behind her. I’ve always marveled at the beautiful impressionist works she has created over the years, but as far as interest in others artworks go, I really could have cared less. My artistic tastes lean more towards the music world. That being said, I have really come to enjoy these videos, and being able to talk with my grandmother about these topics has been priceless to me.
Venn Diagram: First circle, "Absolute Narcissism"; Second circle, "Crippling Self Doubt"; overlap area, "ART".
this is BS. art requires actual talent, not just mere feelings.
@@maggyfrog all talent is is an advantage to the craft. Craftmanship is painting and drawing what you see around you, but art is putting meaning into something.
For example, I love portrait of nick wilder by David hockey, even though skill needed to paint it isn't much. But it's the fact that he painted this man who was well known in hollywood, on all the guests lists and living a rich and lavish life, alone in a pool pulled so far back you can't see he's features. He could've just made a regular portrait, it would've showed off his talent, but instead he made a comment about society in he's time, and that's what makes it art.
@@AEtherArts
it doesn't refute my statement that ART requires talent.
@@maggyfrog art requires nothing
@@cadenglass1387
to someone with no standard or taste, i'm sure
Look at it from the perspective of the average working class joe. I think the anger stems from a feeling that you are being looked down upon for not understanding it. Anger is an automatic defensive response to the embarrassment of not being able to get an artwork, they feel that because they don't understand it people will think they're "uncultured" and "ignorant" or too dumb to interpret its meaning. Most people want to see skill, they want to clearly see talent and effort on display. It feels unfair that a white square hung on the wall slightly askew can be sold for millions when you have to work your ass off living from paycheck to paycheck. Can you blame people for being a little angry?
😂
Not at all, I agree. But really, if your response was anything but ambivalent, the artwork was successful. Maybe the artist was trying to snub the working class.
Most art that you can't understand has no meaning at all the artist just likes to say a ton of nonsense of what it means and how they were inspired :/ ..pretentious
Why would you get angry at what other people have accomplished??? It's not like those artists made their first painting and suddenly sold it for millions, they have to work hard and make a name for themselves in order to sell those pieces. Also, everyone experiences art differently. I don't care if someone says I'm dumb for not liking abstract art, I just don't fucking like/understand it.
Maybe you should focus your energy getting pissed at those paying the artist so much and you so little. And getting angry for being ignorant and remaining ignorant is just being a shit human - if you don't understand something, the means are available for you to gain an understanding.
The honesty and self reflection is refreshing
To me the most pretentious part of the art world is the alleged experts trying to tell people what's good and what's not what you should like or shouldn't. Any expert should know that it's all in the perspective of the viewer.
no, any expert should be knowledgeable about real talent. preference is personal, but talent is not based on something arbitrary like fame or audacity.
@@maggyfrog But the alleged artists are not pushing talented artists, they're pushing vapid post modern randomness, there is no clear hierarchy of "good" in this system. The market is self aware about this. So if a market is transparently arbitrary then there is no point in listening to experts because the word "expertise" implies a hierarchy of values.
We, as humans, have been studying the philosophy of aesthetics since the Scholastics in the 1100s; such towering theorists as Averroes, Addison, Kant, Nietzsche, Hume, Barthes, Dutton and Adorno have all chimed in, and written an incredible collective oeuvre analysing every aspect of art, aesthetics, and how we should think about art.
This is to say that any expert would be able to look beyond such un-nuanced universals as 'it's all in the perspective of the viewer,' and to think about art with a more mature philosophy.
I have had my enjoyment and appreciation of art widened by the comments of people who have studied art and also clearly love art and seek to give fellow art lovers their perspectives. A very important part of experiencing art is the intention of the viewer (in the case of visual art, but it applies to all art) the more informed the intention the greater the power of art to elevate our existence. A viewer who's mind is closed to abstraction is missing the very beautiful, enriching experience of a DeKooning, or Pollack, and thus has a smaller intellectual space to exist in.
@@ubbdaubermensch1528 Too true -- that should be on a bloody billboard somewhere.
I just don't know why people think their opinion on art is going to be as informed, as developed, and as insightful as art historians who've spent between six and eight years intensely studying and researching their field, or art critics, who've likely had a similar education, and have an extensive background in and knowledge of art. It's a baffling arrogance.
This made me doubt art (and myself), and then the last few minutes reassured me that art can be the truest conversation we'll ever have as humans
The most memorable thing I read in my art history textbook was that art historians agree that whenever a human manipulates something physical with the intention to change it, it is art. I like that a lot.
So eating is art?
what about physical assault?.. ;P
@@willybe6427 ...seriously?
@@missnoneofyourbusiness no it was a joke, take your feelings out your puckered up balloon knot
I don't understand what kind of joyless world you would have to live in to violently hate most contemporary art. Same with modern music, I don't know how you can refuse to explore a medium to the extent that all you hear is the oily top layer of commercialized pop. Not knocking top 40 by the way, most people just react to how much of a product it's become.
To use music as an analogy... There's a lot to be said for modern music. By eschewing beauty in favor of drama, emotion, expression, modern composers have created incredible music that wonderfully describe the thoughts and feelings that lurk in our minds and hearts. It might not be "beautiful" but I absolutely love:
Bartok: ua-cam.com/video/C68SkzGb6Ww/v-deo.html
Stravinsky: ua-cam.com/video/5UJOaGIhG7A/v-deo.html
Prokofiev: ua-cam.com/video/q4TyQ97Jcr0/v-deo.html
I could go on, you get the point. Even if this music isn't palatable to everyone, and has a smaller audience, for those with the patience to learn it, it's rewarding. In the world of pop music, there's something good in every genre, a range or lyrics and themes, and a wealth of knowledge and sentiment to learn from. Some of it's fluff, but it can still put you in a good mood, and sometimes you just need a loud ACDC jam to help relax.
But... What do you do when you're faced with this?
ua-cam.com/video/sOUsbtUrXHk/v-deo.html
This is the kind of artwork I have to protest. And I can't stand when anyone puts it on equal footing with the greats.
Adding to the music analogy, I'm 54 years old, and continue to seek out music that excites me, by reading, listening, and most of all, being open-minded. To say that the music of today sucks is a cop-out. I dedicate time to this; so many of my peers don't because it's not important to them. They are happy accepting what Top 40 offers. Just like contemporary art, there is great music being created every day in every genre. Two recent great bands, IMHO: Parquet Courts, and Protomartyr.
more on the footing with the grates (on the ear)
A lot of the issue is that some people are making art that is sometimes objectively bad but because they are famous, they are making hundreds of thousands of dollars on the work.
I love contemporary art, especially when it's looked at in different ways. The medium is so deep and the attempts at understanding can be unending. There's actually a ovie that attempts to portray the struggles of a modern artist: ua-cam.com/video/V74sHdm76WU/v-deo.html
It's called: The Square (2017)
Art isn't pretentious. "Art" is pretentious. Both are self-indulgent, but the difference is that the nobler of the two isn't made for others. The artist can be content _without_ sharing his craft.
Compulsion to create drives the artist. Compulsion to convince others that you create drives the pretentious. So, how is one considered nobler? Because one is genuine, and for the sake of discovery and improvement, while the other is as fake as a car salesman's smile.
Each of us is a consumer of both types of art. As such, it is left to our discretion to determine the boundary between these two varieties. We certainly would not want to find ourselves in the embarrassed position of having supported some contrived attempt at the obscure, arcane, or esoteric, and to then be revealed as the ill-informed and limited creature that we truly are! Similarly, to deliberately consume "art" in an effort to impress others is as detestable an act as the intention to create it. Lucky for us all, our private motives belong only to us.
Personally, I find those tacky black velvet paintings to be aesthetically pleasing (as long as it's not an Elvis). I also enjoy the fluid, brush-stroked grasses of a Van Gogh, despite its state of cliché. Escher continues to impress me with his geometric brilliance, even though the school of modern "art" would doubtless consider his skill to have been marginal at best. I guess what we consider 'subjective interpretation' is just a catch-all explanation for the fact that we have very complex reasons for why we feel so passionately about our unique causes.
So while the presenter here may seem to be evading the issue in a _can't we all just get along_ sort of way, I think her position is both well-developed and mature. It's art's role to cause these visceral reactions. We *can't* know the motives or experiences of others: art makes us face this fact directly, and it drives us crazy. Good!
Now this is a well thought out comment I completely agree with!
Awesome!
Dang, that is hands down one of the most eloquent comments I have seen on UA-cam.👏
God I whish I could treasure this comment in a chest
so incredibly pleased that this video exists.
Absolutely +++
Please watch this movie: ua-cam.com/video/V74sHdm76WU/v-deo.html
It's about the wonders and struggles of modern art in our Western society.
I'm incredibly pleased these videos exist:
ua-cam.com/video/ANA8SI_KvqI/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/Esvn7NgTq4Q/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/PRWJcrRO0GM/v-deo.html
Seriously, how many of those who commented here would pay to listen to music if singers and musicians were singing and playing discordant and noisy sounds? Would you buy pop, jazz or chill out music if musicians were too lazy to practise and master their instruments but instead played 'crap'?
Would you rush to listen to singers who couldn't sing in America's Got Talent'? Like these wonderful artists, ua-cam.com/video/7_Ybl0Qvves/v-deo.html. Why not?
And if you 'like' hearing Yoko Ono screaming her head off, does not mean it is 'good' art. It just means you like 'crap'. Liking somethng does not mean it is 'good'. If you 'like' beating up old women in the street, does not mean it is 'good'. If you 'liked' helping an old lady cross a busy street, then that is 'good'.
Would you consider figure skaters great artists if they would fall down on the ice in a crumbled heap? No!
'Conceptual art is based on the notion that the essence of art is an idea, or concept, and may exist distinct from and in the absence of an object as its representation.' In that case, would you pay to see 'conceptual artistic figure skating' where a pair of figure skaters just stand there doing no skating at all but explain that their figure skating is in their 'idea' of skating.
exists, more like... doesn't... exists... am i right.
Paul Joseph Watson makes a very weak argument. He comes at it with literally no educated stance on the topic.
Channels like this are making people care more about art. The more we know, the more we care. Thank you for helping us understand art.
it's sad to think that because you haven't attained a certain level of fame or experience or notability, your work cannot be monetarily valued at a high price even if it is exquisite
Truly.
i mean that's pretty much how all artistic mediums work though, it's just that painters or visual artists have less hoops to jump through. a well-known, established director is going to get paid a lot more to make a movie then someone who is just starting out, even if their work is vastly inferior. a small, relatively unknown singer-songwriter isnt going to get the same kind of record deal a famous top 40 pop artist will. the only difference is that film and music are generally more accessible mediums for the public (most people are a lot more like to hit up a theatre or a concert on a free day then a museum)
@Wenceslao Futanaki No one has proven that money determines what gets created. Artists create what they want regardless of whether they think it will sell. Besides, it isn't possible to "take away" money from art. Art has sold without a break throughout it's entire history.
Thank you for your optimistic attitude. I may not agree with a lot of what you say but I feel no artist should ever be discouraged. Everyone should be inspired to create art because it helps to understand your inner self and the world around us.
This isn’t an explicitly emotional video, but I had an incredibly rough day today in my creative life and I started to cry at the end after hearing someone validate that money isn’t the totality of Art
this content is so valuable for people who are considering making art or even people who have been doing it for a while but are not Ai Weiwei-famous (yet). thank you!
I appreciate that you admit that there is pretentiousness in the art world, but when people say art is pretentious, I don't think that they mean how a bunch of pigment smeared on a canvas is pretending to be an image. I generally think that they are referring to when art that is not visually interesting is bestowed with an arbitrary meaning that then carries the value of the work. Like how if I brought a pile of trash in to a critique, many of my professors would probably love it if I justified it conceptually.
the concept of the thing is the point though, look at duchamp for example, you have a urinal, it is placed on its side, out of use, out of the cycle that it becomes a part of. There was a group of artists who decided to pee on a version of the urinal one time, and you can't usually say that piss into a urinal is art. So it adopts the concepts as an event, the funniness, the fact that they were kicked out for interacting with a piece of art as its basic function, is itself the cycle that art can avoid, doesn't avoid, or perceives unto itself. Look at something new and see its point, capabilities, what it signifies and where the signifiers are. Contemporary art is just pocketed life, but how the hell do you put that in your pocket you know.
Well, we artists _are_ a buncha liars, so.
Most professors would not honestly. I remember one time when my professor told us about a time he helped this bright girl with some professional critiques and she brought like 7 coke can that got progressively more destroyed. The first critic came in and asked her what it was, and she said her art spoke for herself. So the critic threw it away as without context it's what ever you see, so at that point the cans were just that; beat up cans that need to be thrown away. She took them out again and the second critic asked the same question and she answered the same way which led to the cans being dismissed again. My prof. told her to explain the concept and when she told the third that it's supposed to be a representation on how society drains and discards women after they've served their purpose, the critic nods and said it made sense.
Tl;dr: it's not what you do it's why you did it, that makes it art.
@@AEtherArts so art is recontextualised as long as the artist responds, shouldn't there already be numerous possible responses, constrained to signifiers but not present trace
The thing with the trash? That's been done. Brilliant.
It is important to think about the art we view. It is also important to experience it and respect the different experiences of others.
I like your videos and continue to learn and develop from them.
I am so glad this channel is benefiting the world for four years now. My sister is opening an art and art supply store soon. I always pester her to watch this show, but she is too busy. Yet here I am a non-artist who just enjoys it so much. It succeeds in impressing me with its pretentiousness. ;)
+
is your sister perhaps a character in an indie romcom? that's such a lovely fictional scenario, someone owning an art supply shop. but in all seriousness, same, as a non artist i enjoy it very much too :)
She'd love the thought of that! Her store is called the Curious Cat. She'd already found her love though and has adopted four kids. Her family is featured in much of her art. One day, I hope she'll do the art assignment Meet in the Middle with me. This channel is so educational and endearing. Plus there are cool people to chat with in the comments. :)
aaah that's cute. much luck to her :)
I've never had a good rebuttal when people say they don't like art/looking at art because it's pretentious. This is a great way of handling that comment.
"The Case for Kanye West" made me rethink everything I thought about the guy. I still think he's sometimes obnoxious, but at least now I view him as being obnoxious with artistic intent.
William Kallemeyn Kanye’s an artist?
I think cuz lot of young men envy him for marrying Kim kardashian, arguably one of the most sexist women in the world. Big nice butt n all.
Art is so subjective that almost anything one says about it can be true under a certain light. I personally enjoy artworks most when I can recognize the validity of people’s criticisms and still decide that I like it. I know there are much more educated people out there with the credentials to make more authoritative decisions about the qualitative value of a piece, but at the end of the day, art is a line of communication between the artist and the viewer. Factors such as technical proficiency, tastes, and trends aside, the only value that matters to the individual is whether they were able to communicate with the artist through the piece or not.
Thank you for making these videos! I’m mostly a film and music kind of guy when it comes to art, but I love watching the art assignment and learning about other art forms and how to appreciate them more!
Thank you for making these videos.
I have never delved deeply into art or art history or individual artists. I believe every great society needs art at all levels to broaden our minds and provide enjoyment. So thank you for these videos I find them educational and informative.
I love this video because it gets at two vital truths. First, that all significant fields of human endeavor have dark sides and legitimate criticisms that can be made about them. Second, that having flaws does NOT make something irredeemable or even a net bad thing.
Art has been a part of every human society that is known about. It clearly drives both practitioner and viewer to find new ways of considering the world, or it entertains, or it just breeds controversy. When I was younger I mostly dismissed art and especially modern art, but experiencing more and more art has made me appreciate the way it facilitates different kinds of communication. So at this point, I'm fine with people disagreeing with my art tastes, but truly not caring just makes me a bit sad at what is being missed. Thanks for the videos, they're spectacular!
To me, *art* is *any* *physical* *thing* or *performance* that took *effort* and *creativity* to produce, and it stimulates an intellectual and or emotional effect in viewers. Art should also have intellectual or emotional value greater than the sum of its parts or material value. Great video, by my definition, it is art!
I disagree on the premise that artists are inherently pretentious.
Simply releasing your art isn't pretentious, if anything it's a way to extract yourself from the piece, to share, to let go.
What makes conceptual art unically pretentious is that the author's intentions are precedent over the piece itself.
Communicating this intent is literally to "attempt to impress by affecting greater importance than is actually possessed".
When your art is such an abstract piece of overpriced shit, releasing it does make him pretentious.
I have a lot of respect for those who dedicate there lives to art despite what type of art they are creating
Also I like the mentality some commenters are having with appreciating sorts of art that they don't like. I'm a follower of David Hume's view of aesthetics, that taste is immediate and cannot be disputed, unlike truth. Broadly speaking, you can think something is good while not liking it.
I love this video precisely because it empathises with the common man. How often do we get the feeling that the art world looks down on the layman, sneering at the fact that he doesn't take seriously their holy collection of scribbly lines? The self-reflection in this video is charming and sympathetic.
You have stated in 8 minutes and 40seconds what takes me a whole evening ! So glad i found this channel, subscribed :)
The Art Assignment videos bring me so much joy. I love their focus on contemporary art since I feel like it so often poorly represented and viewed by the majority of the population who consume it. This series/channel gives me hope that people do care about art more than they are willing to convey. As an art historian in the making, it gives joy to see so much care about a subject I want to dedicate my life to, albeit not focusing on contemporary art. While my interests as a scholar don't lie in contemporary art, I love how Sarah and these videos show me the complexity and the passion that others do have for this period of art we are currently living in. Thank you for all of your hard work!
I love this channel so much... I feel it has the genuine inclusive and loving approach that made me fall in love with Art to begin with.
I can't believe it's been almost four years! Back then I was about to go to high school and had no idea what to do with my life. Now, nearly four years later, I'm majoring in art history and art education - I started just this fall. The Art Assignment is one of the things that led me here.
1:21 - 1:55
This basically applies to the entertainment industry as well.
And academia, of course. Imposter syndrome mixed with bouts of megalomania is just how it goes.
Thank you for making these videos. Honestly. You are mostly talking about art I already love. But it is so amazing that you convince people.
It’s baffling to see what people write, but impressive to know you guys can take comments like those and not have it deter the creative expressions you arduously provide to this audience. Thanks, and thank you for the work and time you put into theses videos. I really appreciate it.
Started painting 2016 with no artistic background whatsoever-like a hobby. And this was just kind of floating out there and I know ive subscribed to it but never bothered to check it out. And now I'm glad that I did.
I wish there was a channel like this specifically for cinema, making the case for certain classics and art house films that the general public don't "get".
I think everyframe a painting and nerdwriter1 sometimes give credit to more unknown or more unknown aspects of a movie, as well as analysing popular stuff through a new lens which gives it some sort of deeper credit, as with the episode on Jackie Chang.
stanleycoleman Have you watched Welcome to the Basement on the Blame Society channel? They watch a movie that Matt hasn't seen before ("might be good, might be bad") and talk about it. Even if it is a "bad" movie they offer it just as much time, and try to understand it. It's one of my favorite shows on UA-cam. (Please note that they are 2 guys who are improv actors and perhaps not so much experts on cinema, aside from creating Chad Vader lol, as Mrs. Sarah Green is on art). Give them a watch! 😃
Brows Held High is very good for this.
Brows held high is definitely my first stop for that sort of outsider critique.
Solomon Society is heaven for films! Check them out on youtube you'll love them
People are so quick at dismissing other people's honest motivations in doing something like art, often against what the mainstream common sense considers valuable. Thank you for being so patient and calm trying to argue in favor for those artists!
I really enjoy this video. I just don't understand how you don't have more subscribers. We need more of this kind of content on UA-cam
These PBS art videos with this woman are still some of the best art videos on UA-cam! I love them and wish you guys and her would make more content again! Thanks for all of your hard work to make all of this! I love sharing them with me students and thinking about them and all of the knowledge imbued within them!
Sarah, I'm writing this from Marfa, Texas after a full day at the Chinati Foundation, and I'm only here because you made a video about it. My wife and I had an amazing time; thank you so, so much for letting your audience know about it.
Woo hoo! So glad to hear it. I already want to go back.
Hi, your channel is a blessing. You give a clear concise and well educated explanation about art in all it's periods. You help me stay updated and well informed about the art market. Being an artist that live in - what you call - the outside world. Your channel keeps me well connected and inspired. Thank you
Love this video thank you sincerely a painter who needed this emotionally
With you!! My life and practice needed a jolt :)
Don’t worry about the naysayers :) your work deserves to be recognized alongside everyone else’s as an art in itself. I hope you continue painting!
These videos are so so important to me, they gave me a way better overview over the artworld and introduced me to artists I have never heard before, but which I would now consider my favorites!
Just watched this again, and tried to “like” it again, after getting angry at someone on Facebook for posting derisively about that damn banana with a general statement that all modern art is terrible. Thank you for being excellent.
Once an Art is born, the Work likes to be : discoverd, appreciated & talked about. Art / Aritist - by any means -, is : High achievements of Mankind for a Mankind in its own level. Keep the Art free of charge for anybody & more important keep it going by supporting the Artists all over the World. Thank you😊
finally. someone who explains this objectively.
A delightful embrace of the difficult truths of the pretentious in art. You have given me the words that I have needed for some time. How to confidently acknowledge the truth that everyone can see but few on the inside ever have the courage to discuss. Thank you. Thanks too for finding a way to comfortably allow for perspectives that on the surface appear to be an affront to the direction that art has taken in the last 100 years or so. The greatest art is to find a way to live in the world with no enemies.
Here's the thing. We'd all love to be artists and filmmakers. What a life! Artists are not those who "dare" to feel deep things, but rather those who have the time to do it because of trust funds or Theos or parents paying the rent for a flat in the Village, etc. Once in a while a true genius comes along, but a lot of spoiled brats get lionized in the meantime. Hence much of the disillusionment/frustration expressed in the comments. That said, I thank you for this wonderful series, which gives those of us in the non-trust fund, a.k.a. real, world a window on some real gems that we'd otherwise never have access too.
This is why I love murals: they're free for everyone to see, and often represent the culture of the neighborhood. Philly has the best murals!
In Adam Ruins Everything they always do a takeaway. In that episode, he makes the argument that art is great and important. Real artist embraces lots of different art. Also, to make money as an artist you can make work for all kinds of fields, from book illustrations to movie concept art.
The beauty comes at the point where one realises one is going to attempt ART and to attempt to make something where there was nothing, REGARDLESS!
Art is chasing the uncatchable... It's entertaining the space between. As beings we have found constant patterns, and this isn't to undermine what we've noticed, but those patterns are only constant with the very rules they've made for themselves. If reality is a randomness flowing, we are only tapping into a portion of whatever that is, and even to understand that is to only understand it in the way that we know. In other words, we only see what we see. Artists are the blips that we take for being insane, and I don't necessarily believe that measuring it at all or being self aware of it gets you any closer to whatever "The artistic process" is... Or if it even really matters enough to consider it from the outside. Because the artist sees the universe in his own way, from the inside, just as rigidly as we do... It's just aligned to a different length. That will speak for itself if it speaks for itself.
I find most modern art styles uninteresting but I'm not self-centered enough to think that my aesthetic is universal. Love what you love and surround yourself with it. I've bought from amazing contemporary artists in my community, filled my house with art I love, and I've never spent more than $250 on a piece. Usually considerably less.
As a writer, I loved what you had to say about the creative process, the lonely striving against anonymity. The music I loved growing up, Sting and U2 particularly, was often described as pretentious. This always frustrated me. I felt these songs weren't pretending to be great. They really were great! It was the critic who was pretending to be important. I should watch your Yoko Ono video now. You've piqued my interest.
As a printmaker with an arguably excessive level of education, this video made my day. Thank you Sarah. :D
For me "art is pretentious" comes directly in response to feeling like I'm not allowed to appreciate the art I do appreciate. I mean, yes, I do love Vermeer and Sargent and Thomas Cole. I like classical composition. I like pretty landscapes and people. And I am kind of like, I just watched 12 minutes of a woman folding laundry, and it was cool, so I guess I can get behind that being art. But anime? That's not art? That's commercial dreck? That's when I'm saying, you're pretentious if you can't let people love a beautiful, moving Kazuo Oga background, just because it comes from My Neighbor Totorro. It's pretentious when you imply that your favorite chewing gum collage has more meaning and emotion in it than my favorite Norman Rockwell. Art doesn't have to be about exclusion: this is art because that isn't art. Art is by definition a pursuit of subjective experience. My life experience leads me to love the order and beauty of a canvas because the real world is messy and painful. And your experience in a messy and painful world leads you to love messy, painful art. Neither is wrong. And really, neither is right. It just is. We like what we like.
This argument applies to virtually all creative fields. Well done.
Excellent point! I hate it when people base their opinions on art based on how much it is worth... specially if it wan't even created to be sold.
The world needs more people like you. Or the world needs people to be more like you.
I squeal with delight every time I see an Art Assignment video in my subscription box. Never fails to enlighten, educate, or move me in some way.
My wife squeals with delight every time I surprise her with a cuddle from behind :)
I'm soooo thankful this video exists! I wanted to download it so every day I could show it to someone else!
Non Artist - "I coulda done that!"
Artist - "But you didn't."
But that's not the point normal people don't go out of their way to make garbage like that our garbage goes to the dump (dirty 3th world countries)
@@starman7645 "Normal people". Lol! Artists are better if for no other reason than they dare to create and the "normal people" don't.
@@Watkinsstudio but it's literally fūcķing trash and if you can see some of the shįt they make you'll say the same thing but your pretentious and pretend there's a higher meaning of garbage
I'm an artist and I think a lot of it is pretentious garbage. The same folks in the art world will praise some hack for smearing his feces on a canvas and then turn around and trash the work of a skillful artist all because he/she makes art for a medium they consider beneath them.
...and you couldn't.
This is all the reasons why I love this channel... (aside: 4 years already?! Wow!) Engaging with and pulling in everyone, continuing the conversation, and honouring the art, artist, and art viewer. Great job, and I especially like how you expanded my view of how, in many ways, artists and art are indeed pretentious. Or, said another way, artists and art are courageous, meaningful, and engage with us in such powerful ways. Thank you. :)
Once again, you made me think! Thanks so much. I sincerely appreciate these videos.
Rlly hadn't thought about the distinction between artists being pretentious and art being pretentious. That was rlly interesting and even a little humbling. As long as I've been involved with art, I seemed to be in constant struggle with pretentious art.
In the same vein as some of the polite disagreements, I still don't think I completely get/am open to all art. I have a lot of provocative opinions about art that I think should get attention and art that I think deserves none (let alone the monetary aspects of it). But this video is a great start for me to think more complexly about it. Thanks.
I’m even more depressed about my artwork than ever after watching this.
I can understand you if you're making art to get validation from others, but, if you're making art because you dig a certain style, or are on a deeper journey which your express through your artwork then its personal and no opinion of others should shape your view. It's like liking a TV show you enjoy watching - it doesn't matter if anyone else likes it if you get something from it. Not to say you are, but living to impress others is a road that leads to massive anxiety and is never ending. Love and light to you 🙏🏾
YOU are ART, baby! This video should be run in a loop at the entrance to every Art Venue in the country. Now, if you can get another video with a man criticizing this video and calling it pretentious, played simultaneous at the same volume so that the voices compete with the listeners attention. THEN you got ART! Because art is a conversation of pretense where nobody is right and everybody is anxious about looking stupid. To make this dual video interactive ART, simply add a microphone and a simple sign saying "please comment loudly and often." BOOM!
This is very validating as an artist for all the times that I've tried too hard, but I feel like you can still make good art without being pretentious. You don't always have to act like it's anything more than it is, or try to impress someone with it.
the most important thing people always forget is that NOBODY forces you to spend your money and attention on art that you don't like. and those who want to buy it themselves will figure out how to spend of their own money, believe me.
I don't think art itself is pretentious. It's the people who comment & critique art who are pretentious. Instead of saying "I like this piece or artist & here's why" they promote themselves as if only they understand art. That's where the elitism comes in. Their comments are contrived, fake. Like people who taste wine & say it's whimsical & contains hints of rhubarb & dill. Art is supposed to be for everyone to enjoy & reflect on. But when critics & historians use pointless babble jargon it shuts people out. And that isn't just pretentious it's rude & hurtful.
Wine really does have complex and subtle flavor besides GRAPE, but I agree with you for the most part.
So they're basically like fandom elitists?
An important video not just about art, but also about taking a rational approach to life.
1:02 the definition of pretentious - “...than is actually actually possessed.”
I'm an unknown artist. And I am rapidly losing my eyesight. I've had to shift my style from realism to expressionistic and abstract. Never liked Modern Art before, but I'm finding a great and valuable use for it now. things don't deter me, thank you for making these videos.
If art is pretentious, then beauty is pretentious. Feelings are pretentious, and life is pretentious.
Perfect answer ( imo) 🪷
Interesting take on this subject, however when my art professors speak about pretentious art they usually refer to instagram artist who only follow trends (what is popular and most likable now) with the soul purpose of appealing to the masses without expressing any authenticity.
a logical human being would have defined "pretencious art" as an "object that is created to disguise itself as something with a deeper meaning where, in fact, it has none".
But, hey, that's just me.
Nah that's too rational
Beatypatrockks : who is anyone to say just what art is? I think it is a very dead topic. She wastes way too many words here to explain something so simple.
Because your definition is categorically nonsensical. Deeper meaning is created, further cultivated over time, and isn't exclusive to any one kind of 'thing'.
I like to compare art to literature(seeing that literature is a form of art). Sometimes when writers write fiction the readers tend to find different themes in the story. Sometimes different than what the writers themselves intended or even thought of. That still doesn't change the theme that the reader has come to find, that is if the reader can back it up with proof. Meanings can be found and change over time. Same thing goes for interpretations. My issue with this is that you can't really classify the art itself as pretentious only the artist. To classify the artist as pretentious is a debate in and of itself. I don't believe that everything and anything is art, but with a little tweeking it can be.
@@EulogyfortheAngels Yes I agree with your statement on deeper meaning but art is supposed to express this meaning to other people more or less well. We take for example the condom wrapper a girl friend of mine kept after her first time. This thing had tremendous and deep meaning to her, that meaning changed as she grew older and her perspective and what had happend changed.
If you put the condom wrapper in a museum it's still just a condom wrapper to other people bc it fails to communicate the story behind it although one could learn a lot from it. (And of course she didn't create anything actively but that's no the point) You could of course put the story next to the wrapper but doesn't that defy the purpose of putting a condom wrapper in an art museum in the first place If it has to be explained through language? There is of course nothing wrong with having additional information to understand a piece (or literature) better but one should at least get a vague idea when looking at it. If we just have condom wrapper we know nothing. Is it about sexuality, rape and the patriarchy, broken hearts, a happy relationship or a one night stand, AIDS or HIV? A political, social or personal issue? Positive or negative associations? We can't tell without context and there aren't any clues either. For us it's just a condom wrapper. The condom might as well never have been used. Just blown up by 14 year old's into a balloon.
I love the way you narrate the videos on artists. I like the open and curious tone you take, it makes me want to listen even when I disagree. Also loved that you pointed out that art is more than a stuffy market. It means I can access more artwork from my own place in the world, and I can also share my own stuff with people who are like me and can't afford to pay all that money. Thank you for these videos!
I don't think you are using the word "pretentious" in the same way that modern art critics use it. They (and I) are not complaining about artists with self doubt who attempt to be great but in fact feel less than great. Our problem is when "artists" put together something with no semblance of skill and no semblance of beauty and pretend to be a master.
much of the artistic merit in "modern", "conceptual", and pretty much most forms of contemporary art, is in the Context of the art. Not it's independent merits, like technical skill.
Most people who don't like contemporary art in general just aren't looking at the pieces within the continuum of ideas, or "The Conversation", that the pieces are created as responses to.
Which is totally fine! That "Conversation" is really only there and only of interest to those who are interested in it. It is not intending to, like some conspiracy sorts have alleged, "Tell You What Is Good" in art.
Only "what is meaningful", and that only within the context of this "Conversation".
Most of the "pretentious" label I have seen, has been applied to celebrated artists, to pieces hanging in galleries for years after the artist's death, by people who are applying Their idea of what Art is onto the piece, without considering the piece in it's relationship to the progress of artistic ideation.
Like I don't see art critics calling things "pretentious", only getting called pretentious, ha ha!
Ok, now define 'skill' and 'beauty'.
How can you measure skill, or beauty in art? What makes you think there's no semblance? What if you just can't see it? Since when is there supposed to be a requirement that each artist has to follow? Even if the artist does believe they are a genius, how are you so certain they are not just because it doesn't meet your standards. Plenty of genius artists that we have seen, that have been praised, were regarded as crazy loons in their lifetime. Half the time whenever I see the word pretentious, it's usually being used by people who aren't as smart as the person they're criticising. Do you think Shakespeare felt less than great and constantly had self doubt. Historically speaking he knew his work was great and would be celebrated by generations to come. Is he pretentious now? The word pretentious has got to be one of the most ironic words out there. It really shouldn't be used anyway, anyhow. It's almost as bad as classifying someone as a narcissist, which is another loose term.
I'm an artist and I went to art school, so I understand and appreciate pretty much every form of art, which is great for me, I guess. The problem with most contemporary art is that it is an elitist society, which perpetuates itself. It is good for business from an artist's and gallery's perspective, because it is possible to make good money. But, it has mostly closed itself off from the "common man," or those who are outside of the inner circle. This is how contemporary art has failed. This is why most perceive it to be pretentious.
To be a master is to be able to effectively communicate their own ideas, and not be hindered by the problems of technique or medium. The technique can be simple, yet the artist still a master.
The observation about walking through a museum and hardly taking note of the art on the walls is true.
My take on it is the following: It's all so overwhelming. My eyes are amazed. There is too much too see.
Each work has a lot of meaning. I recall the time I saw the Monet exhibit at The Art Institute of Chicago. It was a very popular show and people pushed you along like you were on an assembly line in a factory. You got a few brief seconds to look at a canvas.
I like how Rothko treated art. It was spiritual to him. I feel that way too. I think a lot of people feel that way too.
This video made me unhappy. Pretentious is a word that indicates a lack of care and a belief that the person a work is being shared with isn’t smart enough to understand what’s going on.
The reality is that most of us care very deeply about the process of thought and craft that goes into our work. Often it is about things that are hard to put directly into words, and is a collection of references, skills, and experiences that we’ve collected in our lives. It’s an invitation into something not a wall to keep people out.
I get what you are trying to do with this video but it didn’t land well for me. I feel like you played into the stereotype rather than taking the time to shift the conversation.
Gina Furnari to be human is to create art, and to create art is to be human, right? I agree with what you said. Art isn’t a luxury or an exclusive resource, it’s everywhere-and an artist is anyone who turns an idea from thought to reality. Your comment about art being an invitation is spot on, really. It’s a facilitator for interpersonal connection, and a crucial means of communication.
If you think the type of art that you say is keeping people out is doing just that, that’s ultimately your connection with it; and that is actually doing the opposite of what you say it’s doing! Because with any artwork like this, the interpretation is extremely subjective, any evocation means that the artwork is serving its purpose
Yup almost everything she said is wrong. Art is not pretentious. Pretentious people are pretentious, and they can also create art. To say that the reason Leonardo da Vinci created the vetruvian man was to impress people, or that he overvalued its importance is just pure stupidity.
The best art was created by people who didn’t leave a signature or care to impress people. And that is why it is soo impressive. Because they weren’t trying to impress. How many times have you drawn something because you were bored and didn’t show anyone. I’ve done that countless times. That’s like me saying the reason she is wearing nice clothes instead of a burlap sack is to impress people. Or that not wearing a burlap sack instead of actual clothes is pretentious. And the price of art today is dependent on demand and supply, branding and tax evasion. And whether or not the artist is still alive.
Also saying that a lifelike sculpture is just something made of of random materials is just a silly thing to say. It’s almost as if you need very specific materials and skills to make a stone sculpture. Or to make a pattern on stone that a person can identify as a sculpture of a person. How can you now go on to say that the materials were random, they are extremely specific materials, using precise skills to create a pattern.
If not everyone can impress by art, then that is not art. That's already Passion
The thing is back to the classical times, art is used for knowledge, power and communication. There is no huge difference on how it is used today but the thing is, every artist has their own unique style and interest so as people themselves has their own taste.
I always refer people to the Kanye as Artist video. It totally changed my opinion on him and has convinced several of my friends to give him a shot as well. Now he's one of my favorite modern musicians.
+
same
Say what you will about his public image, but I have yet to meet one person who has explored his work as a pop figure and not become enamored with him to some degree.
So much love for what's being said in this video.Especially about the users' comments. Your words are Art
The irony is this video attempts to defend critique, yet unintentionally reinforces the critique.
There is nothing ironic here, my friend. She agrees with the criticism on a certain level.
@@oof-rr5nf That's ironically pretentious.
@Wenceslao Futanaki modern art and contemporary art is different.
@Wenceslao Futanaki a contemporary artist is one that's alive. You literally called what I make a cheap cash grab yet I'm legally homeless and can't even afford good food.
@Wenceslao Futanaki obviously you don't understand percentages, also didn't van gogh die from a gun shot to the stomach? Also not all art has to be some significant piece that takes months to complete. What people label to be modern art is usually worse than a piss painting!
Then problem with making something that takes years to finish is no one will buy it and you'll die poor like the other. Andy Warhol understood the Art of business and he wanted lots people to buy his art which is why he mass produced his and made sure they're different in many ways even though they're basically all the same.
Cause you can never own a van gogh painting and that's what even I hate about art but it doesn't mean rich people should by uninspired trash. I can link some of the stuff I made if you want but I wouldn't guarantee it's any good.
"Conclude it with night sweats as you wonder immediately after, and then forever after, whether you are a fraud and your work is terrible no matter how many people say they like it" THOSE SOUND LIKE FIGHTING WORDS lol, relatable
Nope. This is a mere twisting of words that art critics and marketers are notorious for. This video didn't really posit that art is pretentious, but rather reiterated the fact that an art object is functionless in the sense that it isn't part of infrastructure that maintains our daliy activities, and its use actually lies in eliciting wonder in the eyes/ears/mind of the beholder. It's actually when it fails to inspire that it is labelled 'pretentious' by onlookers/ listeners/ audience.
but her carefully sub-texted point stands in this view as well, that many spurious condemnations of a piece as "pretentious" by people who are unmoved by it, is related to their inability or unwillingness to understand the Context of the piece or artist.
I mean, you aren't wrong. I just agree that a random joe saying "this is shit" is less of a reflection of the "value" of the art, Objectively, than it is a reflection of the individual's Subjective idea of "what is art".
You literally stated the video's perspective and don't realize that it supports the term pretentious as described? You probably just came to hear "lol contemporary art is shit, let's laugh and agree."
Why does art need to inspire?
Hey, what about functional objects that have rally great design? Like teapots and cool buildings. So many people take their environment for granted, so don't notice what probably took someone a lot of time to design. Yet these objects are part of our daily infrastructure. Does that status elevate it to being functional, or denigrate it for not being full of wonder?.
Then the indirect point of this video is meant to say "if you want to criticise something, criticise with thought put to it", instead of using a word that clearly does not, in essence, represent what you want to posit. Think for yourself instead of jumping onto a bandwagon of people clearly attacking different aspects of art with one anchor word.
Gotta say - it was very brave of y’all to delve into the UA-cam comments
I needed this video (typing teary eyed). Fifty years ago, I traced a gorilla so my parents would praise my (five year old) artistic ability. To this day, I struggle with the guilt. Now I paint, and my elderly parents still love my work. Never under-estimate the encouragement of parents. Thanks for your videos. They lift me up... too. :)
Art transports you to another dimension.
Honestly, I am in an 'arts' degree of sorts, I am doing 3d animation, now this is either for video games, movies, tv shows, adverts or art house films. The course is kinda 'artistic' at times, but I will be flat out honest, I just care about how well the CRAFTSMANSHIP is. Yes film narrative I think is very important when generating an emotion. But when I see animation comps and Art house works....I really tune out, because a lot seems like shoddy work and people 'faked it till they made it'.
I remember doing a fine arts course as well, I have dyspraxia, so my hand writing and drawing is TERRIBLE and may never really improve, but this arts degree felt like a course in story telling and manipulation as while I worked hard on my piece, it was not very good...But I talked my way into a A*...Then when I heard about how the art market is just an investment and sometimes a money laundering scheme...It really made me scoff at art with little to no skill. If anything it made me really enjoy concept art for film and video games because I knew that the artist was worked ragged to make that piece of art and they had a lot of drawing and painting talent to make it look as good as it did.
Also there is one part of the fine arts scene which I....am not fond of at all, and it is the scene in general is....a melting pot of idealism when it comes to social class. From top to bottom I have seen artists talk and act in similar tones, no matter what their art style or their background...Once in a while I would like to hear a sharp, direct, blunt, curse filled artist who says things how they are, rather then using flowy language to explain what their art 'means'...I guess it is just a frustration from having a peek into the fine arts world, then going into a world such as animation where results are the only thing that matters.
There are many artists out there that will fill they void for that relatability. Conceptual and contemporary art is about exploring new concepts, mainly within the viewers themselves, and if you’re having any emotive conversation with yourself about that kind of art; then it’s serving it’s purpose, because it doesn’t have to mean the same to you as it does the artist, no one will object to your interpretation because it’s your own connection to it, which you’ve already displayed! It doesn’t matter whether you connect to the artist themselves. The reason why they don’t focus on skill is because within the art is their own concept that, again, you’re free to interpret for yourself. And if it’s not for you then that’s fine, there’s plenty of other artworks that will be! Same with music and games and movies etc! But to scoff at a particular type of art is ultimately unfair because that would be like someone else scoffing at you for taking 3D animation (which I would never I find that kind of craft incredible!)
I just found out this UA-cam channel, but I’ve learnt new things and changed my perspective over modern art in a positive way, so that instead of criticizing (even if I don’t like the art work at all and never will), I begin wondering what was in the artist’s mind when he/she was making the piece, as well as I think on the history and emotions involved in its production, and continue living my life without being aggressive anymore. So, thanks for that positive change 👍🏼
I feel that people (including me) think that art, especially paintings and statues, are pretentious not because of the pieces themselves or even the artists, but because of the people that discuss those pieces. A lot of them describe what are often times just simple geometric shapes with very pompous words which may rub some people off the wrong way.
As a contrast, when people discuss video games, they often use more pragmatical words and people almost never think they are pretentious, but when a certain video game is really trying to be "artistic" people become really pissed off (again, including me :D)
Agreed.
I think understatement can be a very valuable tool to create more power in a piece
It's hard to come up with words to describe why an artwork intrigues you, much the same as it's hard to put into words why you prefer a particular beer, or why you love this particular person. Words are used, because we don't have much else, but may not be terrible convincing. So don't expect to be convinced, just hear the passion underlying it.
I think art seems pretentious to you because you're seeing all these stuffy rich people holding the main conversation surrounding art. That can be offputting, but there are many regular people, including normal art students, who are also talking about it in a perfectly understandable way. This channel is a stellar example of a discussion on the impact of art, and the artist themselves in which regular people can join in too.
+Mahlen Morris I get that it's hard to describe, but I don't think that pompous words help to get your point across better than just a simple sentence. My problem with people who use them is that they often do it to sound more sophisticated and to feel smarter than they are and it's pretty hard to hear the passion for art past their ego :)
+bee I don't think it has to do with how rich or poor someone is, but rather how smart they want to look in front of other people and they see these words as a shortcut to get there...
I think that someone who knows a lot about art can say why it is meaningful without sounding smug or full of them self.
What counts as a "pretentious word" though? How does vocabulary become "pretentious?"
This seems like an argument about people's intentions, rather than their words.
What makes it so offensive to people when someone uses words they don't know, or elevated language to discuss something like art?
I think people often assume that when someone uses "pretentious language" that they are trying to impress someone, or make other people feel inferior.
I'm sure that's happened before. But it's pretty presumptuous just to immediately assume what another person's intentions are from your own reactions...
What if it's also possible to pretend to be working class? Pretend to be less intelligent or "cultured" than you are? I see this often too.
What a great and unpretentious defense of pretentious work. This is the first video I’ve seen from this channel and I can’t wait to see more!