I had a painting professor who HATED him. During one class she went on a rant about him and she was vicious! I mean, I understand that his style is considered generic but to have such hate for him is something I couldn't, and still don't, understand. He inspired people, who would never think twice about picking up a brush, to make their own oil paintings. I have no idea how many people in this country actually go to museums, galleries or take art classes regularly but he at least got people to want to create. I don't think he was talking to formally trained artists, he was talking to regular folk. When artists start talking crap about him and his style it makes it seem like they're just obnoxious. People understand what he's making.
@@johnadams2063lmao when people can’t dislike something without someone calling them jealous. I don’t like his art. It’s boring. There’s no character and that’s my opinion
I think the summary of the discussion would be the question: what is art? While professor Lieu was talking about elite art... Bob Ross was teaching mass art. Yes, the ordinary folks he was teaching to create, might never see their works in a museum, however, this form of craft/art has the right to exist.
IMO, Bob Ross' work is definitely "art," I think the difference is the delivery and presentation of his artwork is a major departure from what is more typical in terms of a professional artist. I think it's not quite as black and white as "art for the masses" and "elite art," as every artist carves their own unique niche and engagement with the world. If I only look at his paintings, I find them kitschy and poorly painted, but I recognize and appreciate the reach and affect he has on the layman. There are few artists who have that level of visibility with the general public.
@@darthkek1953 most artists wouldn't make a full painting in 27 minutes because the process of making a detailed landscape is far more labor intensive than what bob Ross is making. An artist might make plein air paintings in that time working from landscapes before them. A studio artist might take those paintings back to their studio and study them, make a drawing, transfer it to the canvas, do an under painting, a grisaille, block in color, first layer of details, second layer of fine detail, glazing, and so on. These steps could take a few days as the oil dries. It's a little more complicated than how you're framing it. And who knows... that plein air paining might be better to some than something Ross makes in that time, all in the eye of the beholder
First of all, dentists need paintings. Hospitals need paintings. You can make a living doing landscape paintings for no other purpose than to dress up an office. I don't see anything wrong with that. Not all art needs to be created with the intent to hang in a museum. Second, I see what Bob Ross did as a starting off point for students. Let's say you have someone who feels they have no artist ability and no interest in creating art. They see a Bob Ross video and say "I'll give that a try." Now, they know how to blend colors and paint in perspective. What if, after they learn that, they start expanding on it and then go on to actually paint things that CAN hang in a museum? Whatever inspires people to start painting is a good thing. If all a person ever did was copy directly from a Bob Ross tutorial, then yes, that's not great. But just getting someone to pick up a brush for the first time could lead to something great.
I have tremendous respect for art museums and their role in the world, but that said, I do think how artworks are deemed "museum worthy" is inherently flawed. So in real life, I actually disagree with the argument I presented in this video. (in case you didn't know, in these Crit Clash videos, we assign a point of view, so frequently, a lot of what we say in the video isn't what we actually believe in real life) I also credit Bob Ross with why I started Art Prof; he made art accessible and fun to a large population of the world, and that in itself is very meaningful. -Prof Lieu
Yes, that is very true. Its like using a reference to draw. You don't really use a reference to copy it entirely, but use its techniques and perspectives to heighten your own artwork. You could always add your own personality in them. They work as a sense of direction for artists. Also, for non artists, its totally fine for someone to just paint an exact replica of Bob Ross paintings. Its not just the narrative that you NEED to put in your pieces, somethings, relaxation helps too. I mean like drawing also have many other skills such as having a creative mind and hand eye coordination as well. Its pretty beneficial for the target audience of bob ross... Whom the majority isnt an artist.
LOL at the 1st sentence... I didn't see that defense coming... dentists need paintings. But your points are good... offerings by pbs to help people know where to start painting... a nice service to people, as a start with art
@@artprof Snobbery and fashion are a problem in all creative fields, imho. Personally I’m not keen on his visual aesthetic but he’s no more formulaic/stylised than say Claude Lorraine or Canaletto, and museums are full of those. 🤔 I think he could be judged a conceptual performance artist- the concept is art therapy for the terrified and traumatised. The calming encouragement performance is the actual artwork, the painting itself is incidental.
Great point! I used to work for an interior designer who’s main business was selecting artwork specifically for healthcare. The colors, subjects and themes selected for hospitals and doctor’s offices is not an accident. It is chosen with the patient’s comfort in mind and landscapes are soothing. ☺️
Bob Ross Paintings were never attended to be "real art". They were therapy. Quote: "Having held military positions that required him to be, in his own words, "tough" and "mean", "the guy who makes you scrub the latrine, the guy who makes you make your bed, the guy who screams at you for being late to work." Ross decided that if he ever left the military, he would never yell or raise his voice again." When you watch him, it's like he overcompensates. Anyways, most people watched him to relaxe. And I think, that's exactly what he wanted them to do. He didn't care, whether his pieces were considered art or made anyone think. He just wanted peace and to be a nice person.
Thanks for sharing this background on Bob Ross, know this now makes his work even more special and heartfelt. We have more Crit Clash videos in this playlist: ua-cam.com/play/PLvt8_pMl6ywmErraSADL1K2FNt9XMl9sN.html -Marc Stier, Art Prof Staff
JIKitty I think this is the most important comment. What is art if not an exploration of the self, the other, perception, and experience? That’s a distillation of the therapeutic process. Bob Ross did it on TV and taught generations how to use that process for themselves. Maybe he didn’t paint masterpieces, but he was a master of of peace.
Seeing Bob Ross was like therapy. I became calm and relaxed everytime i watched this wonderful guy on TV. Also how he talked about his love for painting and seeing him really happy while painting was a wonderful experience.
Art doesn't have to be super deep to be art. It could just be your own interpretation of reality in a way that you enjoy or you think is beautiful. Bob Ross wasn't trying to communicate deep meanings through his art like the art you'd see fine artists doing, he was simply painting an interpretation of life in a way he enjoyed. That is perfectly valid, even if it's not in the same category as fine art.
Great points! I think most art can only be deemed unsuccessful or successful based on its intent. As in, does the audience view the piece in the way that you want them to? Especially in terms of emotion. Bob wasn't much of a fine artist, he just wanted to make happy little paintngs :) Jordan, Art Prof Teaching Artist
The Ross paintings you are showing are some I've never seen. There is a photographic realness with depth you can't achieve with a great camera!! Bob teaches technique, including how to mix your paints so that they will stick to the canvas...not to your brush and actually draw paint off the canvas onto your brush. He invites you to experiment with various brushes and the knife tool that gives such amazing results! If someone prefers to copy Bob's scene, that is not. Jorden (sp) wins this, Clara. Look again at the unique and beautiful paintings you've shown and all your arguments fall apart. I enjoyed both of you. Thanks!
@@frshprncejf I hope this is Jordan! I really enjoyed the debate you had with Clara(?) about Bob Ross paintings. We went to the Detroit Institute of Art to see a Van Gogh exhibit. Fascinating!..but I didn't care for some of the portraits. (I doubt he'd mind my thoughts on them!!) Every artist gets ragged on, I'll bet. Many Monets are similar...Picassos, too. Right? So Bob is in good company. I'm a yr late with comments, but here's one more. Glad I discovered your debates.
My daughter and I watch Bob Ross all the time (it's by far her favorite show and she's only 5). When we paint together, she quotes him all the time saying stuff like, "We don't know where this little tree lives so let's just put him here," or "This is my world and I can make it however I want so I'm going to make a happy sky." I think this is what makes Ross a true master - not that his skill was perfect or his paintings were worth millions, but that he created a world with his show than empowered people to pick up a brush, look at a canvas, and say to themselves, "What kind of world do I want to create?" That question transposes to daily life so easily and encourages us all to create the world we want to live in through our actions. That, in my mind, is worth far more than any painting could ever be worth regardless of which gallery or museum displays it.
That's such a good way of looking at it! Your daughter sounds so creative and the fact that Bob Ross allows her to express that creativity is amazing. He really is a great inspiration, no matter how you look at it. If you liked this video, you might also enjoy this one about David Bowie's work: ua-cam.com/video/C_MoeSn4MTk/v-deo.html - Mia Rozear, Art Prof Staff
That's a good point, networking is definitely a big factor when it comes to being a fine artist. Thank you so much for watching :) - Mia Rozear, Art Prof Staff
I do not have any art studies, I did not hold a brush since 7th grade and 2 years ago my sister showed me Bob Ross on UA-cam and I was mesmerized. I said: I could do that... and I did at 40 years old. I do not consider myself artist, but I am painting ever since. Btw I subscribed to this channel, because I want to expand. So basically you have to thank Bob Ross for that.
I feel that Bob Ross really reminds me of many photographers today. They all follow a very specific style to cater an audience. If they diverge from their style, people would very quickly leave them.
Thanks for sharing your point of view! I think this is common in a lot of different fields, musicians struggle with this when they release a new album, if the album is too much of a departure from what they were initially known for, people often times complain about it. On the other hand, musicians can get flack for doing the same thing over and over again. It's a tricky balance! -Prof Lieu
I enjoyed this way too much lol! This is basically my internal dialogue with myself from the first day I learned about Bob Ross, his videos are so relaxing and pretty much iconic, but let's be honest, those paintings are frankly beyond boring and pretty much the definition of kitsch lol. In some weird way I kind of love this cultural dissonance and seriously enjoy exploring these gray borderline areas of art. Fantastic content, thank you:)
Thanks for your thoughtful comment! IRL, (as opposed to in what I argue in this video) I'm similar in that parts of me do deeply appreciate the way he made painting accessible to so many people, but then I look at the technique in his paintings and the painting nerd in me just can't find much to sink my teeth into. -Prof Lieu
Thats very true. Everyone have their own tastes. For me personally, i love world building and i like writing books. Looking at Bob Ross magical "perfect" nature scenes just makes me imagine that I'm in them. I would love to have one of his pieces in my house.
About Bob Ross, his paintings may seem incomplete or boring, but I view his endearing narrations, "happy little accidents," ability to be super quick at painting (which could be why his paintings are so simplistic), etc as a completion of his artwork...like a chill performance art.
Just to clarify. I do not have the expertise or appropriate skills to evaluate Bob Ross's professional style. Not yet. And, on a personal level, I do not know about museums, but I would not put his paintings above my sofa, just not my style. However, regardless of the fact, was his technique poor or not, or brand created by the media or not, what he did, IMHO, revolutionary. Indeed, Bob Ross did not explain what brushes, paint, canvases he used or demonstrated a great technique for 30 min given (simply not realistic, and Public TV is not RISD). But he definitely inspired people to go to Michaels, figure out what they need and create. I would absolutely agree: "On the other hand, I do appreciate his engagement with the general public. He brought art into everyone's lives, made it accessible and fun, and I think that alone is commendable. -Prof Lieu
Accessibility to art is one of the main reasons why I started Art Prof, and Bob Ross was really the first artist who achieved that on a global scale which is quite simply, amazing. You're right, it all starts with the simple action of picking up the brush. So many people would not have picked up a brush if it had not been for Bob Ross. -Prof Lieu
Prof Lieu you are wrong. He was a true inspiration to generations. There is a lot of 🗑 at museums. He painted in 20 minutes. He was not trying to be in a museum. He was trying to teach us to explore our creativity as kids.
I'm not sure if you know this, but in case you didn't know, in these Crit Clash videos, we assign a point of view, so frequently, a lot of what we say in the video isn't what we actually believe in real life. In this case, I made a lot of arguments that are a complete contradiction to what I actually think. While I'm not a big fan of his paintings in terms of his painting technique and presentation of his subject matter, I do believe that he contributed tremendously to the way art is perceived by the public. So many people I have spoken to are intimidated or turned off by how elitist art/artists can be and Bob Ross completely changed that, IMO, for the better. -Prof Lieu
@@artprof I understand and enjoy the videos. I am not an artist, but Bob Ross has inspired me in my creative field. My oldest son graduates from high school this year and has chosen to pursue an art degree. Your portfolio critique videos have help tremendously in him getting admitted into some great Art programs so far. So you are an inspiration as well. Thanks.
Agreed! You don't have to be a visual artist to have Bob Ross influence you. So glad to hear that our resources have helped your son, best wishes to him! -Prof Lieu
I always let the TAs pick, so I often times have to take the more obviously difficult position! 😂 I felt like I was arguing against the Easter Bunny in this Crit Clash! -Prof Lieu
My first experience with the amazing Bob Ross was that my Grandpa loved watching him on the PBS channel on his black and white box TV. I got hooked and actually got closer to my grandpa that way. He wasn't an artist but was an art enthusiast so to speak.
Oh that is such a wonderful memory-- even if your grandpa wasn't really an "artist", it must have been incredible to bond that way! - Mia Rozear, Art Prof Staff
I think him being a household name this many years after his death really says something about the staying power of his art. That said I don't think he needs to be in museums necessarily since he is already immortalized in his videos.
Many of her arguments demonstrate her complete lack of understanding and appreciation for the time constraints and the medium constraints (tv in the 80’s and early 90’s) that Ross had to contend with. Ross never claimed his work was fine art, and he commented many times that he wasn’t proficient in portraiture. Lastly, if you actually watch his videos he spoke many times about alla prima as only one way to use oil paint, and that he specifically chose to teach alla prima so that students could feel as tough they accomplished something sooner than later and that more traditional painting was much more labor intensive and required a deeper knowledge of the medium itself. He never tried to pass of alla prima as his invention and encouraged people to use the technique as a way to enjoy oil paints while suggesting more detailed study for those with more time or interest.
This is such an underrated comment. The Prof is so ill informed on Ross that she doesn't have any concrete points to make. All her arguments world fall flat only if she watched any of his shows where he himself debunks them.
Yeah it's really sad. He died back in 1995, but it's amazing how much his art/public image still lives on. The fact he's making such a comeback shows the impact he's made on the art world. - Jordan, Art Prof Teaching Artist
Also, I just want to point out, that he mentions in a couple of videos that he used to do portraiture when he was studying under another artist, and he hated it. He had the range and the ability. He just found something that was very sellable and never veered off the 'company line'.
As an intermediate level traditional artist (color pencils be my weapon of choice) I say that Clara has some really good points that I agree with. I'm not too sure about the museum arguments because... come on ppl take up painting as a hobby and don't wanna become professionals. What's wrong with never getting recognized by museums anyway? But the idea that workshops are created expressly to copy Bob Ross' technique reminds me of a story in which a creative kid had his creativity stomped out of him by his education system. I FELT that argument.
I love Bob Ross. As a kid, I loved watching him paint on pbs. His voice was so soothing and he was so kind and encouraging. He made it look so easy. I never tried his paintings cuz obviously I was kid and had zero access to such kinds of paints. But I enjoyed watching him create art and to this day, I’m 40 now, I still enjoy watching people create. There’s something soothing about it.
Back in the early 1990's took lessons in Bob Ross painting, was working two jobs and it was a way to spend quality time with each of my sons. I would take one son at a time and spend the day taking a class and doing lunch and my sons are all in their 40's now and they still talk about the time spend together. So yes his style of painting is time well spend thank Mr. Ross.
The main thing is that it taught a good foundation to refine and more importantly: the Joy of Painting. Even if you don't want to make a career of it the techniques are excellent for painting as a hobby. Painting just for the sake of painting.
I discovered Bob Ross when I was bedridden with a difficult pregnancy. He was about 5 years older than I. Ross was a quirky character but the art was Motel 6. On par with Thomas Kinkade and those big-eyed Keane paintings or painted plates. The visual arts world equivalent of elevator music. Too sweet. Too idealized. Nothing to grab onto. Eye-candy. Kitschy. Did you ever look at one of his paintings and come away with questions and new thoughts? If he inspired people ... hey, don't pop their bubble. Loving bad art is better than not loving art at all.
A lot of illusions happen in the art world. When I consider it, is Jeff Koons balloon dog, deep? I can see the criticism of Thomas Kinkade, yet something in it resonated with people, in a difficult world... a longing for community, peace, a positive life. Just because art people think they are 'in' does not mean it is all true...
I wachted most of his PBS programs and thanks to him I learned to paint mountains and trees etc, back them I was like 19 or 20 years old, so my respects to the late Bob Ross.
I remember watching BR when I was little and I remember thinking I don't care for trees, mountains or snow. I like flowers, beaches, front doors, and old forgotten things. I learned more about him later and felt bad that he was pigeonholed into what he was allowed to do which included keeping his Afro when he felt like making a change. I'm glad his show existed because it gave those of us who liked to keep their minds and hands busy something to explore individually. ❤
I didn't know that about his hair & the pigeonholing, that's so sad.... I wish I could give him a big hug and tell him how influential he was in the lives of so many artists! - Mia, Art Prof Staff
When I grew up, there were only 4 channels. This was one of the best choices as a kid, but after a while, his personality grew on you. He had a pet squirrel. OMG. 😅🤠
come on lets be honest everyone watched Bob Ross just for him bashing his washed paint brush against something lol. I have nothing against Bob Ross and ok it's not "techniquely" correct esp Alla Prima, however I'm facsinated by his style - tried it and failed not for me I like taking time with my Oil Paintings lol. But what he did was show painting wasn't something to be afraid off and anyone can paint. This is a positive as it got people to try it out, ok its very formulaic and if you stray out of his technique your in serious difficulty lol. It does create ten a penny painters who do identically the same thing which is the downside - but those who used it as a foundation and then expanded into their own style but gave them the kickstart they needed - then thats a good thing. The same argument of that he paints only the same subjects over and over again, Portrait artists only do one style of painting the portrait. Also a lot of "art" in galleries have a difficult time of being call art as long as it has a pretensious title or called "Untitled #45" lol. Also Live anatomy paintings or still life groups everyone is painting the same thing? you could argue it depends where your sat but there will be those with the same view or focus on the same point.
This was a wonderful discussion/argument/Crit Clash. I really enjoyed it. You both made good points. I’ve seen a few Bob Ross shows and still find them entertaining. I love all things “art”. I think all creativity deserves a look. There’s room in this world for everyone’s creative expression. But you guys did a great job and you made me laugh so much! I needed that. Thank you.
So glad you enjoyed this Crit Clash! ❤️ I too watch Bob Ross episodes late at night, they're so soothing and make me feel good about painting. 😊 -Lauryn, Art Prof Teaching Artist
In our "Crit Clash" videos, we assign a point of view to each artist for the purposes of this debate. Our intent with these debates is to provide a broader look at how artists and artworks are perceived. The arguments that you hear our staff artists present within this video are not necessarily what their true opinions are on the artist/artworks in real life. In many cases our staff artists may well be presenting arguments that are the opposite of their true opinion. After the live stream ends, we meet in the #crit-clash-reveals channel in the Art Prof Discord server (invite link: discord.gg/g5XQRpT) so that our staff can reveal what their true opinions are, so please join us there! Watch more Crit Clash videos in this playlist: ua-cam.com/video/sHhuSCt_cac/v-deo.html
Too many art channels trying to capture the asmr aspect that makes Bob Ross internet famous at the moment. I dont want to fall asleep, I want to learn something... Stop whispering while you paint, show some excitement, make me want to paint and not fall asleep.
@@artprof I think Bob Ross gets full points for nostalgia, likeability and ease of access. As Jordan says, he absolutely bridges the gap for complete novices. But in terms of critical art review, it's not daring, he never really stretches himself beyond maybe changing up the canvas type. In terms of tutorial there is A LOT that he's leaving out (and never alludes to either, which I think also hurts novices). I have no problem with specializing in landscapes but there is such scope for drama and expression in landscapes that he never even attempts. And so they all look like boring, serene, overly saturated, cookie cutter versions of the same 10 mile stretch of Alaskan land somewhere.
After I moved to US in 1996 and git my first job as housekeeper at hotel, I have discovered Bob Ross by accident when I enter room to clean. It was on PBS and I was amazed by Bob Ross, his persona and as an artist. He motivated me to start painting and he was my first mentor. I still love to watch his videos and listen to him all day long but I moved on as an artist. I'm appreciative to Bob Ross, he helped me greatly but he is starting point in art career as an artist then yo move on to more complex style and media. Any way ,that's my opinion
Loved this! I remember watching his show as reruns as a kid in the 90s. I was so fascinated by art. He was positive and gave art a low stakes, stress free feel which is what I really needed as a teen trying to make art. It was less about his actual paintings and more about his painting philosphy. I just sold my first painting at my first art showing at a gallery and I have Bob to thank for inspiring me to pick up a brush and make something. But would I ever hang a painting like his in my house? Hell no. I love you Bob but your painting style sucks.
You misunderstand Bob Ross. His job was to encourage a first-timer to pick up the brush and get something going. Indeed in just a few paintings you can achieve quite a reasonable level of success. Bob never developed beyond his technique, but he did perfect it (you give yourself 27 minutes, no more, and see what you can achieve). But his master (Bill Alexander) was a MASTERFUL artists and some of their students have done very well for themselves.
You're right, sometimes the real geniuses behind techniques aren't given the credit they deserve. Thanks for bringing him up though, I'll do some research about him! - Mia Rozear, Art Prof Staff
the life story of Bill Alexander could easily be made into a movie . Everything from his father being murdered by German mafia , his mother raised him in a cabin with dirt floors . She passed away when he was 15 years old . Bill worked for the park system in Germany which was a Government job so when ww2 broke out , he was sent off to war . He was shot and hospitalized and when he recovered he chose to be sent to the western front because he felt he could surrender to the Americans unlike the Russians who probably would have killed him . Bill did surrender and was a prisoner of war where he spent his time cutting Gi’s hair and painting their girlfriends portraits . When the war ended , Bill left Europe and moved to Canada. From there he began looking for ways to paint faster for his almighty , happy , dollar .
Thank you very much for the video, it was very interesting to see. As a random person in the internet I, of course, have my own random opinion on everything in the world :) 1. Sure, Bob Ross did not teach how to do some elite art or “paint for real”. He did not teach to draw from observations. He also did not teach perspective, construction, composition, and many many other things. Yes his courses do not replace an art university. Well, they don’t have to. These are courses for complete beginners. The main thing his courses give - motivation. People are easily frustrated, not everyone has enough self-motivation, not everyone has time (or willingness) to spend on art, etc, etc. Not everyone can or want to draw cubes in perspective and spend some years studying art before they are able to produce something nice. It is like teaching math by throwing a bunch of formulas to students for a whole year and after that starting using them on some examples. Bob gives a boost right now. Having produced something nice gives self-confidence, it gives nice results right now, however good they are. It is “I can create an actual painting like a real artist” feeling. It is a demo-version of being an artist. This is what he sells. Those, who want, can build up on this motivational boost and dig deeper. Other may decide that this is not what they want, some may decide that this is the level where they want to stop. Being able to do what Bob offers is good enough for maaaany people, as not everyone wants to be exhibited in museums. Some people just want to make nice painting for themselves or their loved ones. Who cares. 2. I don’t know whether it was for the purposes of the debate or not, but this mindset “art outside of museums is not proper art”, etc can be a little bit too elitist. Yes, sure, you are an art professor, it is your job to judge art. The problem is, when you judge Bob Ross’ tutorials applying the same judgment, it is like when you are coming to a kindergarten and start tearing apart children’ drawings because they are not good enough. Yes, paintings by Bob and people who repeat after him are not masterpieces. But nobody ever claimed so and there is no intention to produce a masterpiece. I do not know whether there is an established definition of art, but I believe there should be something about producing something which looks beautiful. And from the point of view of Bob’s students, what they do is beautiful, which makes it art. Yes, I don’t think that top museums would put works of Bob’s students on their walls, but these works take their honorable place on the walls of their houses. 3. I just realized that some of his catchy phrases like “beating devil out of brush” are actually quite smart. They emphasize and make fun of routine activities. Anyone can forget or be lazy to beat the brush, no one forgets to beat the devil out. Everyone wants to draw little happy clouds. Etc, etc.
I really appreciate hearing your opinion on this debate! In case you didn't know this before, we assign a point of view to each of us in these Crit Clash videos, so a lot of what we say in the debate is not necessarily what we actually believe in real life. I have definitely said a lot of stuff in these Crit Clash videos that is the opposite of what I truly believe! -Prof Lieu
I think the real value of what Bob Ross did was make art feel accessible to a lot of people for whom it might not have otherwise. Something you were allowed to try, allowed to enjoy. The use of landscapes are part of that - very relatable. People who watched may or may not have ever tried their hand at his technique, but I bet they all went on to look at art as something that could be part of their lives.
I think so too, he truly brought art into homes of thousands of people!! Lots of people might not have realized how accessible art could be for them until watching Bob Ross :) - Mia, Art Prof Staff
Two of Bobs paintings are in the smithsonians permanent collection not all of them. And they are in the American history section. His paintings are in a warehouse in Virginia owned by the former producers family
A friend of mine got her grade 5 in piano and played a good bit of classical music. She said her favorite composer to play was Mozart because he only wrote 1 piece but he wrote it 3000 times. Bob Ross is a bit like this. He seems to only paint around 4 or 5 paintings but he has painted them thousands of times. Having said this, Love his way of doing mountains and large rocks and his trees at times are indeed magical but most are thrift store standard. Kevin HIll however has taken the mantle of Ross and shows how or what his method could be.
I think that's true about a lot of artists. Many artists talk about how they'll see the same object or landscape or person every day, but while painting or drawing, it's as if they are looking at said object/landscape/person for the first time each time. I think Bob Ross must feel that way too while painting. -Lauryn, Art Prof Teaching Artist
I found Bob Ross through the internet. For me he is a true artist. His passion comes through the screen. Sure the landscapes he makes look "generic", but the skill is undeniable. People tend to think creativity is always about making something nobody imagined. But there's creativity in execution of well known subjects. Bob Ross excels in creative execution. His paintings are uniquely identifiable as his.
I think Bob Ross brought the idea that art is accessible to everyone, not just because a few tips and tricks can make pretty paintings, but kept it light hearted and low stress. Plus that art can be therapeutic, with his calm gentle demeanor. Also while yes it’s not very creative, but for many, people think because they are not creative they can’t do art. Some people learned to walk by figuring it out on their own, some because someone held their hand. I think for a lot of people it got them to start. I think his contribution wasn’t his art itself or his techniques, I think his contribution was more about that art or to be an artist is more accessible than people thought
Coming here three years late because I finally caught the bob ross bug :) I think it's interesting that Bob Ross' paintings have never been sold, and while he was living, they never hung in a gallery. This signifies his intent: his art was never about the paintings. The art which he disseminated to his audience, was his videos. So, discussing bob Ross' paintings is only discussing half the art. His true artistry, and his enduring art, is his performance: His conversation with the viewer, as they watch him paint. With a gentle and quirky manner, he invites the viewer to join him in imagining the creation of a painting. On first encountering Ross, the viewer marvels at the magic trick of such a fantastic painting emerging from nothing, in a matter of minutes, with marvellously uncomplicated technique, the illusion of a fantastic landscape appears. Then, the viewer attends to the technique and imagination at play - with the scrape of a knife or the stroke of a brush, a "happy" tree, which lives next to it's "neighbours" in a "family" emerges. Somewhere in the painted forest there's a "happy little squirrel". After viewing many videos, the viewer responds with recognition, mentally participating with Ross, recognising and anticipating new techniques, and deliberating as Ross introduces new ones. And that's not getting in to the innovation of techniques which Ross developed in order to support his fast and effortless painting style - his dry on wet oil technique, black canvas techniques, jesso paintings and other stylistic tricks undermine the narrative that art must be difficult, painful, and deliberated over. Part of me wonders if some of the elitism that critics approach Ross with is actually fear of exposure - if Ross can create the illusion of such detail in the matter of twenty minutes, and if it can be so easily replicated by the public, what does it mean for the process and technique of traditionally taught art?
I completely agree with you, this is very well said! I think the performance and act of teaching-- making artwork accessible to everyone-- is the true heart of his artistry. Love him! - Mia, Art Prof Staff
Okay, just two cents of my opinion. For me, I think that Bob Ross was a great art educator. He spent his art career in teaching the fundamentals to people with short attention span, and he had built confidence in those who are struggling with confidence issues. So despite the fact, that he may not be an innovative giant as an artist, his contribution in terms of getting more people into art is both helpful as well as useful. As for the point on "copying his works" as a curriculum guide, well this is a common practice among many prestige academies, the French academy taught Bargue's drawing templets. Over the centuries, they produced great artists too. Thus, from an educator point of view, I can see where Mr Ross' approach is coming from. Next, will be the issue on his paintings of imaginary landscapes primarily and nothing else. As for this, I think that perhaps he was a specialist rather than a "multipotentialite" in the field of his art career. I find that that is alright, as there are pros and cons in being a specialist or a multipotentialite. So my position is neutral on this. As for this debate, well, both Jordan and Clara did a wonderful job in defending their position. Well done, and hope to see more of these debates in the future.
Thank you for your discussion, I think these are all valid points. The fact that Bob Ross was not just making artworks that went in a museum - that these were made to be interfacing with the public through TV is a really important part to consider in any critique of his work. All of our past crit clash debates are here: ua-cam.com/play/PLvt8_pMl6ywmErraSADL1K2FNt9XMl9sN.html 😉 Thanks for watching! -Lauryn, Art Prof Teaching Artist
I think the debate can open up people's eyes to the reality of kitsch and of high art. Both have their place in our lives. I think it's entirely possible for something that's mass produced to be beautiful and have thought and intention put into it. I would hesitate to call it "art".
I agree, there is plenty of room in the middle, and lots of "high art" is still influenced by kitsch, and vice versa. -Lauryn, Art Prof Teaching Artist
I think this is a great point, it's wild how many different scenarios & circumstances can change how we view mass produced artworks, like fame/artist/context... truly a lot to think about! - Mia, Art Prof Staff
every artist has something to give to the world and Bob Ross gave to all an opportunity and experience to learn to paint and to not fear it. His platform was a 30 minute painting each show or day but that is what gave hundreds or thousands, maybe even millions the opportunity to explore art and who really knows the true impact of the gift he gave all?
Really interesting points of view that speak to Western thinking about art. When I learnt Chinese brush painting techniques from a Chinese teacher Western methodology was dismissed and a Chinese viewpoint was taught : which emphasises copying masters until you can surpass the master.
Back in the 60s, when there were few options to learn to paint for people living in farm country, Bob Ross taught my grandmother to paint. So, I'm on Team Jordan.
I love Bob Ross but his paintings are one of the reasons I initially hated oil paintings. Now I know the different artistry in oils but you saw just those landscapes everywhere. I appreciated his entire demeanor and confidence building. But in the 70’s paint by numbers was in everyone’s homes. I love them now for their kitschy look. But it didn’t feel like art.
That's completely understandable-- personally, I don't connect with those types of landscape paintings that much either. It all comes down to someone's taste, I guess! Undeniably, he's a very talented painter :) - Mia Rozear, Art Prof Staff
When I watch his videos, many times I wish he just stopped at some point which would be enough for a good painting, but he’ll overwork it and make it so real looking, that will not give you space for your own imagination... which is also a good way of learning I guess. But I love his videos. I watched him as a kid and still watch it and laugh at things he does repetitively. We even bet with my gf how many trees he’ll paint at the end of the session. 😀 The guy’s a legend!
Haha, that's a great game to play! Bob Ross is so comforting-- I totally get what you mean about leaving room for imagination though, that would've been amazing. Thanks for watching :D - Mia Rozear, Art Prof Staff
A couple from Maryland bought the rights to Bob Ross and are making big profits off of his legacy. A lot of people feel that Bob's family was ripped off. I have read reviews saying that they have lowered the quality of his oil paints and that you should buy other brands of student grade paints if you are going to take his classes.
That's so interesting-- so much history there to dive into! You've never think Bob Ross would be such a character from his videos, just a happy guy who paints... - Mia, Art Prof Staff
I dont hate u guys, but i dont understand what is being debated in this debate, it feels like the subject are all over place, and there are no one subject being debated, jordan was talking about the impact Bob has on tv and the general public, while claire is talking about the quality of Bob's painting. Jordan was talking about the value of Bob's art in the eye of the average viewers and aspiring artist, while claire was talking about the vaule of Bob's art in the eye of a museum artist. I just dont think there is any one thing you guys are debating here, and im sorry to say, i do not enjoy this debate at all.
In defense of Bob Ross, in more than one episode he explained his pallette and what kind of brushes to get and why, also more than one video he explained what kind of paint and also how he used to do the "magic white". There is a lot of worth in the A la Prima style he used and how it works in show business, he's work is simple but it sells and makes people pay attention to what good art is... He is not the only teacher out there and no one should stay with him, but he is a wonderful start up teacher for so many different mediums. You know what, how about a challenge... one painting anything you want (that is easy to read for the eye, like an eye for example) using his alla prima style, not the fact that he used three painting, three pencil sketches and a painting, no ciaroscuro, decent challenge for me at least.
That's great to know, thank you so much for sharing your expertise with us :) We hope you enjoyed the video-- you might also like this one about Jim Carrey's artwork, feel free to check it out: ua-cam.com/video/w04cjOp7Rqw/v-deo.html - Mia, Art Prof Staff
He was all about making people want to try. There is nothing wrong with that, even if it was just to sell paint and supplies. My only criticism would be that painting really requires an ability to recognize colors in nature, and how to blend colors to recreate it. In his show, he never really explains any of this. He just does it.
Ahhh, I hadn't thought about that, but you're totally right! He doesn't really go into the mechanics of color palettes. Do you have any examples of mainstream artists that explain their color choice process really well? -Lauryn, Art Prof Teaching Artist
The people who prescribe to go to his classes are not exactly artist in the first place. They are enthusiastic people who want to learn a painting system it just happens to be Bob Ross's system. You're making something out of this it really shouldn't even be a problem.
I agree with you-- I think in his sphere he was truly a game changing creative! He accomplished something most artists can't even dream of, reaching so many people in such a down to earth way - Mia, Art Prof Staff
This technique it is hard ! It is not easy. It takes alot of practice. Even if you do the same scene they will all be unique. My dream is to teach to kids Bob Ross in my school as an after school class. Bob does teach ! What do you know if he did not go back and retouch his paintings ? He only had less than 30 minutes on tv. He did 3 versions of each painting. One for his books, one for tv and one for reference which has much more detail. I'm sure he took his time in real life. On the show he does mention where he gets his ideas and inspiration and took pictures. So what if he paints just landscapes they are sublime.
Haha, we actually love Bob Ross here at Art Prof, he was definitely skilled at his techniques, and makes art accessible and was very relatable in ways that we hope we can offer too. Here's a full playlist of our Crit Clash videos: ua-cam.com/play/PLvt8_pMl6ywmErraSADL1K2FNt9XMl9sN.html -Lauryn, Art Prof Teaching Artist
When watched from bird’s perspective, the whole thing looks like an art of performance, in front of camera when millions of people looking over his shoulder, feels more art this way than what actually his paintings are all about. Maybe his artistic statement should really be to force people to think what the art’s really all about - to bring the argument. And he choose this medium to create this multi layered concept art! 😀
Totally! I have some friends that also do direct painting. I think it's brave, I couldn't do it, but it really works for them! -Lauryn, Art Prof Teaching Artist
The whole argument is wrong... you can't argue so many points all toguether. But some things are wrong for other reasons. "Art is no entertaiment"... what?!... Lets ask Mozart about that. What about every Disney animated movie?. Beside entertaiment, art have being for teaching or religious adoration. "Art can't be fast, or easy", yeah, no. How much time do you think Miró spend in some of his paints, how dificult is to copy some of Picassos drawings (I know He have some masterful too, It's not the point), I don't think Pollock can be consider as a virtuoso. "Museums" Yisus, even Warhol have His stupid reprodutions in museums. "You need to paint in situ", yes, like when they recreated a garden, and a flood inside the sixtine chapel... I see much moore revolutionary art born from imagination than obserbation, I know It is important, but c'on, some "vistas" are just imposible, Zdzislaw Beksinski comes to my mind. And to be honest, the mona lisa, would have benefited from a landscape like the ones Bob painted. "The same thing with little variations", I guess Clara Lieu doesn't know what a "fugue" is, or never heard Beethoven n*5... 3 notes that sound every second of the sinphony. There is much moore, but in conclussion, Claras argument is the argument of the tradicionalist, wich I understand, because I have use it... but Bob is not a fine artist, isn't even a master painter, He never said so. The technique He teach, is a trampolin, is a lie that you see Bob paint and when you tried and discover It is actually dificult to "paint well", you don't keep going. If you have the fire inside, you start with Bob, you show your mediocre landscape to your grandmother, and she thinks that you have talent, and incentivate you to keep learning. Also, don't fool yourself thinking that what the masters did whas so much complicated, yes it is slower, yes you need practice and patience, but if you want to paint, you are gonna learn, maybe not the ways of the universities, but there is so many masters that learn from error. And, maybe you are not a young hungry artist, maybe you are a good old lady, who whant to paint with Her friends, and haven't the time or the memory to start whith perspective, color theoryand what have you... one can say art need to make you feel... well, Bob make a lot of people feel good... so maybe He was just an artesan, that is fine too.
Thank you for contributing to the conversation, what I enjoy about running this channel is getting to heard a broad range of opinions. I'm not sure if you know this, but in case you didn't know, in these Crit Clash videos, we assign a point of view, so frequently, a lot of what we say in the video isn't what we actually believe in real life. In this case, I made a lot of arguments that are a complete contradiction to what I actually think. IMO, Bob Ross brought art to the public in a way that was very easy and accessible. There's a lot of talk at art museums, in academia, etc. about making art accessible, but few have even gotten close to what Bob Ross did, he truly changed the public's perception of painting. -Prof Lieu
While I don't think art being in museums is the only indicator of quality, I do think it is a qualifier of ambition. Ambitious artists who think about their work contextually within art historical canon aim to have their work in museums. Whether they get there or not is a different matter. Bob Ross has no ambition, or intellectual/emotional content or any kind of depth.
I think Bob had plenty of time to make a good painting Jordan, sad as it is that he died so young. ..and if Vermeer and Bob Ross did a 30 minute paint off Vermeer would whip his arse. Above: just some thoughts I had when watching the stream. It seems there are 3 elements to this crit: Bob Ross the man, Bob Ross the art teacher and Bob Ross artist. I don't know much about Bob Ross. I'm Australian (he was never on TV here) and came across him on the internet. When I first saw his work I thought, "I would classify his general palette as "muted unicorn vomit". His art is awful, full stop. Unlike weekend painters whose works might not be masterpieces, but that are infused with a genuine enthusiasm and wonkiness that could be seen as endearing, Bob's paintings look like plastic tableaux. From what I can tell there was never an evolution to his work. What he produced at the beginning of his career was pretty much what he was producing at the end. Even if an artist's work is not particular individual or revolutionary, you usually see some kind of progress in technical ability and conceptual sophistication. He was probably a hell of a nice guy and if his videos got people painting then that's great. I have to admit I found the image of the Bob Ross painting class really disturbing. This seems to be one step (up? down?) from colour by number. I couldn't help but see that group as a line up of robots, all doing the same thing at the same time, exactly as ordered by the head honcho. Now, I realise that's a bit unfair and if people go to these things as a nice social event while playing with paint, then all power to them. If some then go home and start to make paintings of their own, great. But it still gives me the creeps. If you take the argument that Bob Ross was a lovely guy and a great art ambassador therefore his paintings themselves are valuable, then you have to also accept the opposite argument, that is, Picasso was a horrible man with an out of control ego who was an inveterate womaniser therefore all his paintings are garbage and should be discarded. Neither side of the argument contains any logic.
"..and if Vermeer and Bob Ross did a 30 minute paint off Vermeer would whip his arse." This made me laugh so hard, I absolutely love that our audience can nerd out with us in this way about art history! I like the way you break down Bob Ross, because he is so much more than just his artwork. That's completely different than say most contemporary artists today. To the average person, they would never have an opinion on Kara Walker's personality, or Olafur Eliasson's. Practically like comparing apples and oranges! -Prof Lieu
Imagine comparing an old master against someone who just want to have fun painting and have fun with his audience... Imagine as well blaming and judging Picasso with modern eyes. I dont know if you knew this but Wagner was an awful person yet his music is superb. you just can't judge past with the morals and criteria of the present... This all said, yes vermer would wipe his ass but in my opinion bob ross was never a showoff artist nor he wasn't comparing himself with others, or claiming he was top notch... Comparing two guys from different timelines would be comparing the idyllic landscapes paintings found in the walls Pompei (65ad) which lacked of perspective because that wasn't invented back then, against some renaissance work made around 1300 to 1400 something... And... i bet my ass Ross could do some advance and elaborate stuff yet he tried to demonstrate that not only anyone can draw/paint but anyone as well is able to create good/decent artworks
@@Lichkuroro Interesting perspective. Yes, I know a lot about Wagner. I was a professional cellist and have played many of his operas. Regardless of the period in which a painting is created you can tell a master from a lesser artist. To say that the work of masterful medieval painters is less skilled than those of the renaissance because they have not mastered perspective is missing the point. The critique here is on the quality of the work, not a comparison of styles. I'm not sure about your final assertion that Ross was capable of more than he showed in his videos. If that were the case, you would see some of those works, somewhere and you would see evidence of that sophistication even in his quickly made work: as it is, I can't see it. I think Ross made a great contribution in getting people inspired to paint and I know he is beloved to many, but a great artist he was not.
Blue Wren first of all I’m not trying to go against you or your opinion and just trying to make a point. With this said I’m not referring Bob Ross as one of the great painters of these times, no. And I bet that wasn’t his intention. Regarding his skill and moreover quality remember he’s aiming is for amateurs or those who wants to become part of the artsy world, that’s why his technique is easy to follow and replicate. I never meant to bash the early ages painters.. At that point in history some of the painters were at their top/prime, what I was trying to demonstrate is that you just can’t compare different eras, because if around 60 something ad perspective didn’t exist just imagine that around the time of the pyramids foreshortening didn’t existed yet... I’m not trying to gain internet points or prove that my logic/argument is better than yours. But I just want to shed some light into the arguments that prof. Carla said (don’t remember her last name, maybe Liu)
Bob Ross didn’t teach how to paint his exact painting he teached you the techniques to do it. I am now about to graduate with a plastic arts bachelor degree and i have totally used some of his techniques in my own personal art. We also have to take into consideration that he had a tv program and here they were debating on the paintings he did in the program but he mentioned that he did realism and portraits but he just preferred landscapes. His paintings were never made as fine art that was never his purpose that doesn’t mean that they’re bad. As easy as that.
He had his paint specifically made for him. (Watch the documentary!!!!!! lol) It was oil. And the thinner (that stuff he cleaned his brush with by flapping his brush on the leg of the easel....they think he probably got cancer from that.
A black square was in a museum. A jar of urine with a crucifix was in a museum. There have been pieces of art in museums that I could do right now... and I have zero artistic skill.
I feel that way a lot too sometimes :') I suppose it's the conceptual aspects about the pieces that make them interesting to galleries - Mia Rozear, Art Prof Staff
Haha, thanks for watching!! If you'd like to see another art debate, here's one about Jackson Pollock you might enjoy: ua-cam.com/video/HZp3PBnSaA8/v-deo.html - Mia Rozear, Art Prof Staff
Lol. Jordon won, but only because he had the easier side to defend. (Who can drag the nice little smiling man with the TV show?) I don't like his stuff and never found him interesting (I did, however, religiously watch the guy who drew after the Popeye cartoons!). I do envy Ross' massive art empire, though. That would be cool. Usually that level of success is reserved for banal, easy to digest, uninspiring stuff that appeals to the lowest common denominator of art fan. I'm happy he found his happy place. But I would not be interested in art if I thought that was all it was. Great debate!
honesty you need to step back and look its easy to drag bob ross the best one being when a person did a chart on how often bob ross would have an element in his painting. with mountains be 1/3 of the time and trees at 91% its fun and relaxing but its at the end it is a gimmick I love bob ross so please put the pitchforks down I can just be critical of what he actually was producing
Prof Lieu, Bob Ross said he paints like that because the show was only 20 min and he painted live. I'm sure that in his other real work he used many techniques and did more complex works :( Don't bully Bob!!! hahhaha
The "so called professionals" clearly feeling the burn. That's success. @Clara - very harsh words used. If you don't like him, it's okay. But to use nasty words .. not done. He had mass influence. And that becomes a problem for people and then starts the judging game. For Bob, his fun became his profession. Sadly for (some) professionals - their profession never really was(is) fun for them.
Prof is nothing if not passionate-- whether she likes something or not! Personally, I love Bob Ross. Whether it be nostalgia from childhood, or simply the atmosphere of calm and true devotion to his work, I think he's so special. I've heard his work is "boring", but for me it's not just about his paintings alone-- it's his entire process of teaching the world. Truly wonderful, at least to me! - Mia, Art Prof Staff
Bobb Ross is one step away from paint by numbers, generics landscape paintings. I think Duchamp's fountain was much greatly more appreciated than anything Bob Ross could ever put on. Bichons fountain the piece was a urinal submitted under another artist name he invented to test the limits of art galleries submission process, this goes back to the idea of the signature advocating the making art.
I think they both have very different intentions as artists as well! One's is more education oriented, the other is more "groundbreaking" in the art realm :) - Mia, Art Prof Staff
I had a painting professor who HATED him. During one class she went on a rant about him and she was vicious! I mean, I understand that his style is considered generic but to have such hate for him is something I couldn't, and still don't, understand. He inspired people, who would never think twice about picking up a brush, to make their own oil paintings.
I have no idea how many people in this country actually go to museums, galleries or take art classes regularly but he at least got people to want to create. I don't think he was talking to formally trained artists, he was talking to regular folk.
When artists start talking crap about him and his style it makes it seem like they're just obnoxious. People understand what he's making.
I don’t like his art but your reasons are very valid and the main reason he’s still popular.
She was jealous.
Your professor clearly lacked the insight you share, & focused on final products.
@@johnadams2063lmao when people can’t dislike something without someone calling them jealous. I don’t like his art. It’s boring. There’s no character and that’s my opinion
I think the summary of the discussion would be the question: what is art? While professor Lieu was talking about elite art... Bob Ross was teaching mass art. Yes, the ordinary folks he was teaching to create, might never see their works in a museum, however, this form of craft/art has the right to exist.
IMO, Bob Ross' work is definitely "art," I think the difference is the delivery and presentation of his artwork is a major departure from what is more typical in terms of a professional artist. I think it's not quite as black and white as "art for the masses" and "elite art," as every artist carves their own unique niche and engagement with the world. If I only look at his paintings, I find them kitschy and poorly painted, but I recognize and appreciate the reach and affect he has on the layman. There are few artists who have that level of visibility with the general public.
@@artprof do a full & finished 18x24 oil painting in 27 minutes start to finish and see if you can do better. :-)
@@darthkek1953 most artists wouldn't make a full painting in 27 minutes because the process of making a detailed landscape is far more labor intensive than what bob Ross is making. An artist might make plein air paintings in that time working from landscapes before them. A studio artist might take those paintings back to their studio and study them, make a drawing, transfer it to the canvas, do an under painting, a grisaille, block in color, first layer of details, second layer of fine detail, glazing, and so on. These steps could take a few days as the oil dries. It's a little more complicated than how you're framing it. And who knows... that plein air paining might be better to some than something Ross makes in that time, all in the eye of the beholder
First of all, dentists need paintings. Hospitals need paintings. You can make a living doing landscape paintings for no other purpose than to dress up an office. I don't see anything wrong with that. Not all art needs to be created with the intent to hang in a museum. Second, I see what Bob Ross did as a starting off point for students. Let's say you have someone who feels they have no artist ability and no interest in creating art. They see a Bob Ross video and say "I'll give that a try." Now, they know how to blend colors and paint in perspective. What if, after they learn that, they start expanding on it and then go on to actually paint things that CAN hang in a museum? Whatever inspires people to start painting is a good thing. If all a person ever did was copy directly from a Bob Ross tutorial, then yes, that's not great. But just getting someone to pick up a brush for the first time could lead to something great.
I have tremendous respect for art museums and their role in the world, but that said, I do think how artworks are deemed "museum worthy" is inherently flawed. So in real life, I actually disagree with the argument I presented in this video. (in case you didn't know, in these Crit Clash videos, we assign a point of view, so frequently, a lot of what we say in the video isn't what we actually believe in real life) I also credit Bob Ross with why I started Art Prof; he made art accessible and fun to a large population of the world, and that in itself is very meaningful. -Prof Lieu
Yes, that is very true. Its like using a reference to draw. You don't really use a reference to copy it entirely, but use its techniques and perspectives to heighten your own artwork. You could always add your own personality in them. They work as a sense of direction for artists.
Also, for non artists, its totally fine for someone to just paint an exact replica of Bob Ross paintings. Its not just the narrative that you NEED to put in your pieces, somethings, relaxation helps too. I mean like drawing also have many other skills such as having a creative mind and hand eye coordination as well. Its pretty beneficial for the target audience of bob ross... Whom the majority isnt an artist.
LOL at the 1st sentence... I didn't see that defense coming... dentists need paintings. But your points are good... offerings by pbs to help people know where to start painting... a nice service to people, as a start with art
@@artprof Snobbery and fashion are a problem in all creative fields, imho. Personally I’m not keen on his visual aesthetic but he’s no more formulaic/stylised than say Claude Lorraine or Canaletto, and museums are full of those. 🤔 I think he could be judged a conceptual performance artist- the concept is art therapy for the terrified and traumatised. The calming encouragement performance is the actual artwork, the painting itself is incidental.
Great point! I used to work for an interior designer who’s main business was selecting artwork specifically for healthcare. The colors, subjects and themes selected for hospitals and doctor’s offices is not an accident. It is chosen with the patient’s comfort in mind and landscapes are soothing. ☺️
Bob Ross Paintings were never attended to be "real art". They were therapy. Quote: "Having held military positions that required him to be, in his own words, "tough" and "mean", "the guy who makes you scrub the latrine, the guy who makes you make your bed, the guy who screams at you for being late to work." Ross decided that if he ever left the military, he would never yell or raise his voice again." When you watch him, it's like he overcompensates. Anyways, most people watched him to relaxe. And I think, that's exactly what he wanted them to do. He didn't care, whether his pieces were considered art or made anyone think. He just wanted peace and to be a nice person.
Thanks for sharing this background on Bob Ross, know this now makes his work even more special and heartfelt. We have more Crit Clash videos in this playlist: ua-cam.com/play/PLvt8_pMl6ywmErraSADL1K2FNt9XMl9sN.html
-Marc Stier, Art Prof Staff
JIKitty I think this is the most important comment. What is art if not an exploration of the self, the other, perception, and experience? That’s a distillation of the therapeutic process. Bob Ross did it on TV and taught generations how to use that process for themselves. Maybe he didn’t paint masterpieces, but he was a master of of peace.
Seeing Bob Ross was like therapy. I became calm and relaxed everytime i watched this wonderful guy on TV. Also how he talked about his love for painting and seeing him really happy while painting was a wonderful experience.
Art doesn't have to be super deep to be art. It could just be your own interpretation of reality in a way that you enjoy or you think is beautiful. Bob Ross wasn't trying to communicate deep meanings through his art like the art you'd see fine artists doing, he was simply painting an interpretation of life in a way he enjoyed. That is perfectly valid, even if it's not in the same category as fine art.
Great points! I think most art can only be deemed unsuccessful or successful based on its intent. As in, does the audience view the piece in the way that you want them to? Especially in terms of emotion. Bob wasn't much of a fine artist, he just wanted to make happy little paintngs :) Jordan, Art Prof Teaching Artist
The Ross paintings you are showing are some I've never seen. There is a photographic realness with depth you can't achieve with a great camera!!
Bob teaches technique, including how to mix your paints so that they will stick to the canvas...not to your brush and actually draw paint off the canvas onto your brush. He invites you to experiment with various brushes and the knife tool that gives such amazing results! If someone prefers to copy Bob's scene, that is not.
Jorden (sp) wins this, Clara. Look again at the unique and beautiful paintings you've shown and all your arguments fall apart. I enjoyed both of you. Thanks!
@@frshprncejf I hope this is Jordan! I really enjoyed the debate you had with Clara(?) about Bob Ross paintings. We went to the Detroit Institute of Art to see a Van Gogh exhibit. Fascinating!..but I didn't care for some of the portraits. (I doubt he'd mind my thoughts on them!!) Every artist gets ragged on, I'll bet. Many Monets are similar...Picassos, too. Right? So Bob is in good company.
I'm a yr late with comments, but here's one more. Glad I discovered your debates.
My daughter and I watch Bob Ross all the time (it's by far her favorite show and she's only 5). When we paint together, she quotes him all the time saying stuff like, "We don't know where this little tree lives so let's just put him here," or "This is my world and I can make it however I want so I'm going to make a happy sky." I think this is what makes Ross a true master - not that his skill was perfect or his paintings were worth millions, but that he created a world with his show than empowered people to pick up a brush, look at a canvas, and say to themselves, "What kind of world do I want to create?" That question transposes to daily life so easily and encourages us all to create the world we want to live in through our actions. That, in my mind, is worth far more than any painting could ever be worth regardless of which gallery or museum displays it.
That's such a good way of looking at it! Your daughter sounds so creative and the fact that Bob Ross allows her to express that creativity is amazing. He really is a great inspiration, no matter how you look at it. If you liked this video, you might also enjoy this one about David Bowie's work: ua-cam.com/video/C_MoeSn4MTk/v-deo.html - Mia Rozear, Art Prof Staff
His "career" was the Air Force. He didn't take up painting until after his retirement.
Alla prima is not a shallow form of oil painting. Van Gogh was an alla prima painter!
I don’t agree with the museum judgement. To get into museums has more to do with who you know vs quality of art.
That's a good point, networking is definitely a big factor when it comes to being a fine artist. Thank you so much for watching :) - Mia Rozear, Art Prof Staff
I do not have any art studies, I did not hold a brush since 7th grade and 2 years ago my sister showed me Bob Ross on UA-cam and I was mesmerized. I said: I could do that... and I did at 40 years old. I do not consider myself artist, but I am painting ever since.
Btw I subscribed to this channel, because I want to expand. So basically you have to thank Bob Ross for that.
I feel that Bob Ross really reminds me of many photographers today. They all follow a very specific style to cater an audience. If they diverge from their style, people would very quickly leave them.
Thanks for sharing your point of view! I think this is common in a lot of different fields, musicians struggle with this when they release a new album, if the album is too much of a departure from what they were initially known for, people often times complain about it. On the other hand, musicians can get flack for doing the same thing over and over again. It's a tricky balance! -Prof Lieu
Bob made the mistake of perming his hair and when his PBS shows took off he lamented that he couldn't stop perming his hair.
I enjoyed this way too much lol! This is basically my internal dialogue with myself from the first day I learned about Bob Ross, his videos are so relaxing and pretty much iconic, but let's be honest, those paintings are frankly beyond boring and pretty much the definition of kitsch lol. In some weird way I kind of love this cultural dissonance and seriously enjoy exploring these gray borderline areas of art. Fantastic content, thank you:)
Thanks for your thoughtful comment! IRL, (as opposed to in what I argue in this video) I'm similar in that parts of me do deeply appreciate the way he made painting accessible to so many people, but then I look at the technique in his paintings and the painting nerd in me just can't find much to sink my teeth into. -Prof Lieu
Thats very true. Everyone have their own tastes. For me personally, i love world building and i like writing books. Looking at Bob Ross magical "perfect" nature scenes just makes me imagine that I'm in them. I would love to have one of his pieces in my house.
About Bob Ross, his paintings may seem incomplete or boring, but I view his endearing narrations, "happy little accidents," ability to be super quick at painting (which could be why his paintings are so simplistic), etc as a completion of his artwork...like a chill performance art.
Just to clarify. I do not have the expertise or appropriate skills to evaluate Bob Ross's professional style. Not yet. And, on a personal level, I do not know about museums, but I would not put his paintings above my sofa, just not my style. However, regardless of the fact, was his technique poor or not, or brand created by the media or not, what he did, IMHO, revolutionary. Indeed, Bob Ross did not explain what brushes, paint, canvases he used or demonstrated a great technique for 30 min given (simply not realistic, and Public TV is not RISD). But he definitely inspired people to go to Michaels, figure out what they need and create. I would absolutely agree: "On the other hand, I do appreciate his engagement with the general public. He brought art into everyone's lives, made it accessible and fun, and I think that alone is commendable. -Prof Lieu
Accessibility to art is one of the main reasons why I started Art Prof, and Bob Ross was really the first artist who achieved that on a global scale which is quite simply, amazing. You're right, it all starts with the simple action of picking up the brush. So many people would not have picked up a brush if it had not been for Bob Ross. -Prof Lieu
Prof Lieu you are wrong. He was a true inspiration to generations. There is a lot of 🗑 at museums. He painted in 20 minutes. He was not trying to be in a museum. He was trying to teach us to explore our creativity as kids.
I'm not sure if you know this, but in case you didn't know, in these Crit Clash videos, we assign a point of view, so frequently, a lot of what we say in the video isn't what we actually believe in real life. In this case, I made a lot of arguments that are a complete contradiction to what I actually think. While I'm not a big fan of his paintings in terms of his painting technique and presentation of his subject matter, I do believe that he contributed tremendously to the way art is perceived by the public. So many people I have spoken to are intimidated or turned off by how elitist art/artists can be and Bob Ross completely changed that, IMO, for the better. -Prof Lieu
@@artprof I understand and enjoy the videos. I am not an artist, but Bob Ross has inspired me in my creative field. My oldest son graduates from high school this year and has chosen to pursue an art degree. Your portfolio critique videos have help tremendously in him getting admitted into some great Art programs so far. So you are an inspiration as well. Thanks.
Agreed! You don't have to be a visual artist to have Bob Ross influence you. So glad to hear that our resources have helped your son, best wishes to him! -Prof Lieu
in 1995 the year bob passed i stopped smoking and started painting bob was my inspiration
My favorite thing about Bob Ross is how he made art feel approachable to those who might find it intimidating.
Absolutely! - Mia Rozear, Art Prof Staff
I'm imagining the Artprof staff meeting. Let's Crit Clash Bob Ross! All ayes! Who wants to be Con? Crickets.
I always let the TAs pick, so I often times have to take the more obviously difficult position! 😂 I felt like I was arguing against the Easter Bunny in this Crit Clash! -Prof Lieu
The paintings aren’t really the end product. The videos are the end product. Also this could have been researched better.
My first experience with the amazing Bob Ross was that my Grandpa loved watching him on the PBS channel on his black and white box TV. I got hooked and actually got closer to my grandpa that way. He wasn't an artist but was an art enthusiast so to speak.
Oh that is such a wonderful memory-- even if your grandpa wasn't really an "artist", it must have been incredible to bond that way! - Mia Rozear, Art Prof Staff
I think him being a household name this many years after his death really says something about the staying power of his art. That said I don't think he needs to be in museums necessarily since he is already immortalized in his videos.
Many of her arguments demonstrate her complete lack of understanding and appreciation for the time constraints and the medium constraints (tv in the 80’s and early 90’s) that Ross had to contend with. Ross never claimed his work was fine art, and he commented many times that he wasn’t proficient in portraiture. Lastly, if you actually watch his videos he spoke many times about alla prima as only one way to use oil paint, and that he specifically chose to teach alla prima so that students could feel as tough they accomplished something sooner than later and that more traditional painting was much more labor intensive and required a deeper knowledge of the medium itself. He never tried to pass of alla prima as his invention and encouraged people to use the technique as a way to enjoy oil paints while suggesting more detailed study for those with more time or interest.
This is such an underrated comment. The Prof is so ill informed on Ross that she doesn't have any concrete points to make. All her arguments world fall flat only if she watched any of his shows where he himself debunks them.
What a way to find out Bob Ross is dead...
I thought he was a little old man, living his best life in a log cabin in the mountains :'(
Yeah it's really sad. He died back in 1995, but it's amazing how much his art/public image still lives on. The fact he's making such a comeback shows the impact he's made on the art world. - Jordan, Art Prof Teaching Artist
The Smithsonian just bought all of his paintings from the Ross family.
Not all like 7
he deserves it
The family didn’t own the paintings. The producers do. That’s why his son Steve is no longer associated with the joy of painting. FYI
Brandon Gorin
More like two of them
Also, I just want to point out, that he mentions in a couple of videos that he used to do portraiture when he was studying under another artist, and he hated it. He had the range and the ability. He just found something that was very sellable and never veered off the 'company line'.
As an intermediate level traditional artist (color pencils be my weapon of choice) I say that Clara has some really good points that I agree with. I'm not too sure about the museum arguments because... come on ppl take up painting as a hobby and don't wanna become professionals. What's wrong with never getting recognized by museums anyway? But the idea that workshops are created expressly to copy Bob Ross' technique reminds me of a story in which a creative kid had his creativity stomped out of him by his education system. I FELT that argument.
I have realized that the "museum argument" is pretty flimsy! -Prof Lieu
I love Bob Ross. As a kid, I loved watching him paint on pbs. His voice was so soothing and he was so kind and encouraging. He made it look so easy. I never tried his paintings cuz obviously I was kid and had zero access to such kinds of paints. But I enjoyed watching him create art and to this day, I’m 40 now, I still enjoy watching people create. There’s something soothing about it.
I agree, there's such a satisfaction to be found in watching a piece of art come together :) - Mia Rozear, Art Prof Staff
I first got introduced to Bob Ross when i was around 5 or 6 on PBS too!!
I love Bob Ross! - Mia, Art Prof Staff
Back in the early 1990's took lessons in Bob Ross painting, was working two jobs and it was a way to spend quality time with each of my sons. I would take one son at a time and spend the day taking a class and doing lunch and my sons are all in their 40's now and they still talk about the time spend together. So yes his style of painting is time well spend thank Mr. Ross.
The main thing is that it taught a good foundation to refine and more importantly: the Joy of Painting. Even if you don't want to make a career of it the techniques are excellent for painting as a hobby. Painting just for the sake of painting.
I discovered Bob Ross when I was bedridden with a difficult pregnancy. He was about 5 years older than I. Ross was a quirky character but the art was Motel 6. On par with Thomas Kinkade and those big-eyed Keane paintings or painted plates. The visual arts world equivalent of elevator music. Too sweet. Too idealized. Nothing to grab onto. Eye-candy. Kitschy. Did you ever look at one of his paintings and come away with questions and new thoughts? If he inspired people ... hey, don't pop their bubble. Loving bad art is better than not loving art at all.
yes yes yes yes but i don't know about the last phrase :)
A lot of illusions happen in the art world. When I consider it, is Jeff Koons balloon dog, deep? I can see the criticism of Thomas Kinkade, yet something in it resonated with people, in a difficult world... a longing for community, peace, a positive life. Just because art people think they are 'in' does not mean it is all true...
Ross once said "he wants to create a happy place for everyone , if you want to be sad go watch news TV."
Wow. That was so interesting to watch! Really great arguments! And your chemistry is amazing!👏🏻
I wachted most of his PBS programs and thanks to him I learned to paint mountains and trees etc, back them I was like 19 or 20 years old, so my respects to the late Bob Ross.
I remember watching BR when I was little and I remember thinking I don't care for trees, mountains or snow. I like flowers, beaches, front doors, and old forgotten things. I learned more about him later and felt bad that he was pigeonholed into what he was allowed to do which included keeping his Afro when he felt like making a change. I'm glad his show existed because it gave those of us who liked to keep their minds and hands busy something to explore individually. ❤
I didn't know that about his hair & the pigeonholing, that's so sad.... I wish I could give him a big hug and tell him how influential he was in the lives of so many artists! - Mia, Art Prof Staff
When I grew up, there were only 4 channels. This was one of the best choices as a kid, but after a while, his personality grew on you. He had a pet squirrel. OMG. 😅🤠
What a fun debate! Hope you do more of these in the future.
Totally! These vids are always fun :) - Mia, Art Prof Staff
I encountered William Alexander in the 1980's. Didn't know about Bob Ross until a few years ago. The pupil became the master.
Yes and it may not have been a pretty take over from some stories I’ve heard.
Clara won in my mind. Chop that happy Tree Jordan xD Great Crit!
Hahahaha I feel like I got my butt kicked in this one. 😂 -Prof Lieu
come on lets be honest everyone watched Bob Ross just for him bashing his washed paint brush against something lol. I have nothing against Bob Ross and ok it's not "techniquely" correct esp Alla Prima, however I'm facsinated by his style - tried it and failed not for me I like taking time with my Oil Paintings lol. But what he did was show painting wasn't something to be afraid off and anyone can paint. This is a positive as it got people to try it out, ok its very formulaic and if you stray out of his technique your in serious difficulty lol. It does create ten a penny painters who do identically the same thing which is the downside - but those who used it as a foundation and then expanded into their own style but gave them the kickstart they needed - then thats a good thing.
The same argument of that he paints only the same subjects over and over again, Portrait artists only do one style of painting the portrait. Also a lot of "art" in galleries have a difficult time of being call art as long as it has a pretensious title or called "Untitled #45" lol. Also Live anatomy paintings or still life groups everyone is painting the same thing? you could argue it depends where your sat but there will be those with the same view or focus on the same point.
Love Bob Ross and he inspired me and made think that I can do it
Hi! my first but not last crit clash, it was amazing! You are cute both of you. Thanks for all your sharing knowledges
This was a wonderful discussion/argument/Crit Clash. I really enjoyed it. You both made good points. I’ve seen a few Bob Ross shows and still find them entertaining. I love all things “art”. I think all creativity deserves a look. There’s room in this world for everyone’s creative expression. But you guys did a great job and you made me laugh so much! I needed that. Thank you.
So glad you enjoyed this Crit Clash! ❤️ I too watch Bob Ross episodes late at night, they're so soothing and make me feel good about painting. 😊 -Lauryn, Art Prof Teaching Artist
In our "Crit Clash" videos, we assign a point of view to each artist for the purposes of this debate. Our intent with these debates is to provide a broader look at how artists and artworks are perceived. The arguments that you hear our staff artists present within this video are not necessarily what their true opinions are on the artist/artworks in real life. In many cases our staff artists may well be presenting arguments that are the opposite of their true opinion. After the live stream ends, we meet in the #crit-clash-reveals channel in the Art Prof Discord server (invite link: discord.gg/g5XQRpT) so that our staff can reveal what their true opinions are, so please join us there! Watch more Crit Clash videos in this playlist: ua-cam.com/video/sHhuSCt_cac/v-deo.html
Too many art channels trying to capture the asmr aspect that makes Bob Ross internet famous at the moment. I dont want to fall asleep, I want to learn something... Stop whispering while you paint, show some excitement, make me want to paint and not fall asleep.
I love Bob Ross and I started painting using his videos but I agree with everything Clara says here. She definitely won.
Really? I thought I sort of got my butt kicked by Jordan 😂 -Prof Lieu
@@artprof I think Bob Ross gets full points for nostalgia, likeability and ease of access. As Jordan says, he absolutely bridges the gap for complete novices.
But in terms of critical art review, it's not daring, he never really stretches himself beyond maybe changing up the canvas type. In terms of tutorial there is A LOT that he's leaving out (and never alludes to either, which I think also hurts novices). I have no problem with specializing in landscapes but there is such scope for drama and expression in landscapes that he never even attempts. And so they all look like boring, serene, overly saturated, cookie cutter versions of the same 10 mile stretch of Alaskan land somewhere.
After I moved to US in 1996 and git my first job as housekeeper at hotel, I have discovered Bob Ross by accident when I enter room to clean. It was on PBS and I was amazed by Bob Ross, his persona and as an artist. He motivated me to start painting and he was my first mentor. I still love to watch his videos and listen to him all day long but I moved on as an artist. I'm appreciative to Bob Ross, he helped me greatly but he is starting point in art career as an artist then yo move on to more complex style and media. Any way ,that's my opinion
Yes! I completely agree with your sentiment-- he is perfect for inspiring people to learn art and how to think creatively :) - Mia, Art Prof Staff
Loved this! I remember watching his show as reruns as a kid in the 90s. I was so fascinated by art. He was positive and gave art a low stakes, stress free feel which is what I really needed as a teen trying to make art. It was less about his actual paintings and more about his painting philosphy. I just sold my first painting at my first art showing at a gallery and I have Bob to thank for inspiring me to pick up a brush and make something.
But would I ever hang a painting like his in my house? Hell no. I love you Bob but your painting style sucks.
That is such a lovely story, it's amazing what he did for so many people! -Prof Lieu
That’s exactly what I was trying to convey with my comment, but you said it better.
You misunderstand Bob Ross. His job was to encourage a first-timer to pick up the brush and get something going. Indeed in just a few paintings you can achieve quite a reasonable level of success. Bob never developed beyond his technique, but he did perfect it (you give yourself 27 minutes, no more, and see what you can achieve). But his master (Bill Alexander) was a MASTERFUL artists and some of their students have done very well for themselves.
It is a shame that William Alexander who first brought that painting technique to the public isn't remembered
You're right, sometimes the real geniuses behind techniques aren't given the credit they deserve. Thanks for bringing him up though, I'll do some research about him! - Mia Rozear, Art Prof Staff
the life story of Bill Alexander could easily be made into a movie . Everything from his father being murdered by German mafia , his mother raised him in a cabin with dirt floors . She passed away when he was 15 years old . Bill worked for the park system in Germany which was a Government job so when ww2 broke out , he was sent off to war . He was shot and hospitalized and when he recovered he chose to be sent to the western front because he felt he could surrender to the Americans unlike the Russians who probably would have killed him . Bill did surrender and was a prisoner of war where he spent his time cutting Gi’s hair and painting their girlfriends portraits . When the war ended , Bill left Europe and moved to Canada. From there he began looking for ways to paint faster for his almighty , happy , dollar .
To me, Bob Ross wasn’t so much an “artist” as someone who spread a version of oil painting that was to be done as a pastime.
Great point
Thank you very much for the video, it was very interesting to see. As a random person in the internet I, of course, have my own random opinion on everything in the world :)
1. Sure, Bob Ross did not teach how to do some elite art or “paint for real”. He did not teach to draw from observations. He also did not teach perspective, construction, composition, and many many other things. Yes his courses do not replace an art university. Well, they don’t have to. These are courses for complete beginners. The main thing his courses give - motivation.
People are easily frustrated, not everyone has enough self-motivation, not everyone has time (or willingness) to spend on art, etc, etc. Not everyone can or want to draw cubes in perspective and spend some years studying art before they are able to produce something nice. It is like teaching math by throwing a bunch of formulas to students for a whole year and after that starting using them on some examples. Bob gives a boost right now. Having produced something nice gives self-confidence, it gives nice results right now, however good they are. It is “I can create an actual painting like a real artist” feeling. It is a demo-version of being an artist. This is what he sells.
Those, who want, can build up on this motivational boost and dig deeper. Other may decide that this is not what they want, some may decide that this is the level where they want to stop. Being able to do what Bob offers is good enough for maaaany people, as not everyone wants to be exhibited in museums. Some people just want to make nice painting for themselves or their loved ones. Who cares.
2. I don’t know whether it was for the purposes of the debate or not, but this mindset “art outside of museums is not proper art”, etc can be a little bit too elitist. Yes, sure, you are an art professor, it is your job to judge art. The problem is, when you judge Bob Ross’ tutorials applying the same judgment, it is like when you are coming to a kindergarten and start tearing apart children’ drawings because they are not good enough. Yes, paintings by Bob and people who repeat after him are not masterpieces. But nobody ever claimed so and there is no intention to produce a masterpiece. I do not know whether there is an established definition of art, but I believe there should be something about producing something which looks beautiful. And from the point of view of Bob’s students, what they do is beautiful, which makes it art. Yes, I don’t think that top museums would put works of Bob’s students on their walls, but these works take their honorable place on the walls of their houses.
3. I just realized that some of his catchy phrases like “beating devil out of brush” are actually quite smart. They emphasize and make fun of routine activities. Anyone can forget or be lazy to beat the brush, no one forgets to beat the devil out. Everyone wants to draw little happy clouds. Etc, etc.
I really appreciate hearing your opinion on this debate! In case you didn't know this before, we assign a point of view to each of us in these Crit Clash videos, so a lot of what we say in the debate is not necessarily what we actually believe in real life. I have definitely said a lot of stuff in these Crit Clash videos that is the opposite of what I truly believe! -Prof Lieu
I think the real value of what Bob Ross did was make art feel accessible to a lot of people for whom it might not have otherwise. Something you were allowed to try, allowed to enjoy. The use of landscapes are part of that - very relatable. People who watched may or may not have ever tried their hand at his technique, but I bet they all went on to look at art as something that could be part of their lives.
I think so too, he truly brought art into homes of thousands of people!! Lots of people might not have realized how accessible art could be for them until watching Bob Ross :) - Mia, Art Prof Staff
Two of Bobs paintings are in the smithsonians permanent collection not all of them. And they are in the American history section. His paintings are in a warehouse in Virginia owned by the former producers family
Oh, good to know! Thanks for watching :) - Mia Rozear, Art Prof Staff
A friend of mine got her grade 5 in piano and played a good bit of classical music. She said her favorite composer to play was Mozart because he only wrote 1 piece but he wrote it 3000 times. Bob Ross is a bit like this. He seems to only paint around 4 or 5 paintings but he has painted them thousands of times. Having said this, Love his way of doing mountains and large rocks and his trees at times are indeed magical but most are thrift store standard. Kevin HIll however has taken the mantle of Ross and shows how or what his method could be.
I think that's true about a lot of artists. Many artists talk about how they'll see the same object or landscape or person every day, but while painting or drawing, it's as if they are looking at said object/landscape/person for the first time each time. I think Bob Ross must feel that way too while painting. -Lauryn, Art Prof Teaching Artist
I found Bob Ross through the internet. For me he is a true artist. His passion comes through the screen. Sure the landscapes he makes look "generic", but the skill is undeniable. People tend to think creativity is always about making something nobody imagined. But there's creativity in execution of well known subjects. Bob Ross excels in creative execution. His paintings are uniquely identifiable as his.
I think Bob Ross brought the idea that art is accessible to everyone, not just because a few tips and tricks can make pretty paintings, but kept it light hearted and low stress. Plus that art can be therapeutic, with his calm gentle demeanor. Also while yes it’s not very creative, but for many, people think because they are not creative they can’t do art. Some people learned to walk by figuring it out on their own, some because someone held their hand. I think for a lot of people it got them to start. I think his contribution wasn’t his art itself or his techniques, I think his contribution was more about that art or to be an artist is more accessible than people thought
Coming here three years late because I finally caught the bob ross bug :)
I think it's interesting that Bob Ross' paintings have never been sold, and while he was living, they never hung in a gallery. This signifies his intent: his art was never about the paintings. The art which he disseminated to his audience, was his videos. So, discussing bob Ross' paintings is only discussing half the art.
His true artistry, and his enduring art, is his performance: His conversation with the viewer, as they watch him paint. With a gentle and quirky manner, he invites the viewer to join him in imagining the creation of a painting.
On first encountering Ross, the viewer marvels at the magic trick of such a fantastic painting emerging from nothing, in a matter of minutes, with marvellously uncomplicated technique, the illusion of a fantastic landscape appears.
Then, the viewer attends to the technique and imagination at play - with the scrape of a knife or the stroke of a brush, a "happy" tree, which lives next to it's "neighbours" in a "family" emerges. Somewhere in the painted forest there's a "happy little squirrel".
After viewing many videos, the viewer responds with recognition, mentally participating with Ross, recognising and anticipating new techniques, and deliberating as Ross introduces new ones.
And that's not getting in to the innovation of techniques which Ross developed in order to support his fast and effortless painting style - his dry on wet oil technique, black canvas techniques, jesso paintings and other stylistic tricks undermine the narrative that art must be difficult, painful, and deliberated over. Part of me wonders if some of the elitism that critics approach Ross with is actually fear of exposure - if Ross can create the illusion of such detail in the matter of twenty minutes, and if it can be so easily replicated by the public, what does it mean for the process and technique of traditionally taught art?
I completely agree with you, this is very well said! I think the performance and act of teaching-- making artwork accessible to everyone-- is the true heart of his artistry. Love him! - Mia, Art Prof Staff
Bob Ross was the best..he taught you what a great artist you could be
Okay, just two cents of my opinion. For me, I think that Bob Ross was a great art educator. He spent his art career in teaching the fundamentals to people with short attention span, and he had built confidence in those who are struggling with confidence issues. So despite the fact, that he may not be an innovative giant as an artist, his contribution in terms of getting more people into art is both helpful as well as useful.
As for the point on "copying his works" as a curriculum guide, well this is a common practice among many prestige academies, the French academy taught Bargue's drawing templets. Over the centuries, they produced great artists too. Thus, from an educator point of view, I can see where Mr Ross' approach is coming from.
Next, will be the issue on his paintings of imaginary landscapes primarily and nothing else. As for this, I think that perhaps he was a specialist rather than a "multipotentialite" in the field of his art career. I find that that is alright, as there are pros and cons in being a specialist or a multipotentialite. So my position is neutral on this.
As for this debate, well, both Jordan and Clara did a wonderful job in defending their position. Well done, and hope to see more of these debates in the future.
Thank you for your discussion, I think these are all valid points. The fact that Bob Ross was not just making artworks that went in a museum - that these were made to be interfacing with the public through TV is a really important part to consider in any critique of his work.
All of our past crit clash debates are here: ua-cam.com/play/PLvt8_pMl6ywmErraSADL1K2FNt9XMl9sN.html 😉 Thanks for watching! -Lauryn, Art Prof Teaching Artist
I think the debate can open up people's eyes to the reality of kitsch and of high art. Both have their place in our lives.
I think it's entirely possible for something that's mass produced to be beautiful and have thought and intention put into it. I would hesitate to call it "art".
I agree, there is plenty of room in the middle, and lots of "high art" is still influenced by kitsch, and vice versa. -Lauryn, Art Prof Teaching Artist
I think this is a great point, it's wild how many different scenarios & circumstances can change how we view mass produced artworks, like fame/artist/context... truly a lot to think about! - Mia, Art Prof Staff
every artist has something to give to the world and Bob Ross gave to all an opportunity and experience to learn to paint and to not fear it. His platform was a 30 minute painting each show or day but that is what gave hundreds or thousands, maybe even millions the opportunity to explore art and who really knows the true impact of the gift he gave all?
Well said! He gave me tons of inspiration to start painting and find new creativity. -Marc Stier, Art Prof Staff
Really interesting points of view that speak to Western thinking about art. When I learnt Chinese brush painting techniques from a Chinese teacher Western methodology was dismissed and a Chinese viewpoint was taught : which emphasises copying masters until you can surpass the master.
Oh that's really interesting, thank you so much for sharing!!! There are so many ways to view and practice art - Mia Rozear, Art Prof Staff
Back in the 60s, when there were few options to learn to paint for people living in farm country, Bob Ross taught my grandmother to paint. So, I'm on Team Jordan.
Totally! His value comes from the way he democratized art instruction! -Lauryn Welch, Art Prof Teaching Artist
I love Bob Ross but his paintings are one of the reasons I initially hated oil paintings. Now I know the different artistry in oils but you saw just those landscapes everywhere. I appreciated his entire demeanor and confidence building. But in the 70’s paint by numbers was in everyone’s homes. I love them now for their kitschy look. But it didn’t feel like art.
That's completely understandable-- personally, I don't connect with those types of landscape paintings that much either. It all comes down to someone's taste, I guess! Undeniably, he's a very talented painter :) - Mia Rozear, Art Prof Staff
I’m not into Ross as an artist. Never could follow. But he is peaceful and makes art less scary. He made it accessible.
I think that's the best thing he did-- making art accessible for so many people! - Mia, Art Prof Staff
When I watch his videos, many times I wish he just stopped at some point which would be enough for a good painting, but he’ll overwork it and make it so real looking, that will not give you space for your own imagination... which is also a good way of learning I guess. But I love his videos. I watched him as a kid and still watch it and laugh at things he does repetitively. We even bet with my gf how many trees he’ll paint at the end of the session. 😀 The guy’s a legend!
Haha, that's a great game to play! Bob Ross is so comforting-- I totally get what you mean about leaving room for imagination though, that would've been amazing. Thanks for watching :D - Mia Rozear, Art Prof Staff
A couple from Maryland bought the rights to Bob Ross and are making big profits off of his legacy. A lot of people feel that Bob's family was ripped off. I have read reviews saying that they have lowered the quality of his oil paints and that you should buy other brands of student grade paints if you are going to take his classes.
That's so interesting-- so much history there to dive into! You've never think Bob Ross would be such a character from his videos, just a happy guy who paints... - Mia, Art Prof Staff
100% with you Clara!
Team prof! - Mia, Art Prof Staff
I dont hate u guys, but i dont understand what is being debated in this debate, it feels like the subject are all over place, and there are no one subject being debated, jordan was talking about the impact Bob has on tv and the general public, while claire is talking about the quality of Bob's painting. Jordan was talking about the value of Bob's art in the eye of the average viewers and aspiring artist, while claire was talking about the vaule of Bob's art in the eye of a museum artist.
I just dont think there is any one thing you guys are debating here, and im sorry to say, i do not enjoy this debate at all.
In defense of Bob Ross, in more than one episode he explained his pallette and what kind of brushes to get and why, also more than one video he explained what kind of paint and also how he used to do the "magic white". There is a lot of worth in the A la Prima style he used and how it works in show business, he's work is simple but it sells and makes people pay attention to what good art is... He is not the only teacher out there and no one should stay with him, but he is a wonderful start up teacher for so many different mediums. You know what, how about a challenge... one painting anything you want (that is easy to read for the eye, like an eye for example) using his alla prima style, not the fact that he used three painting, three pencil sketches and a painting, no ciaroscuro, decent challenge for me at least.
That's great to know, thank you so much for sharing your expertise with us :) We hope you enjoyed the video-- you might also like this one about Jim Carrey's artwork, feel free to check it out: ua-cam.com/video/w04cjOp7Rqw/v-deo.html - Mia, Art Prof Staff
He was all about making people want to try. There is nothing wrong with that, even if it was just to sell paint and supplies.
My only criticism would be that painting really requires an ability to recognize colors in nature, and how to blend colors to recreate it. In his show, he never really explains any of this. He just does it.
Ahhh, I hadn't thought about that, but you're totally right! He doesn't really go into the mechanics of color palettes. Do you have any examples of mainstream artists that explain their color choice process really well? -Lauryn, Art Prof Teaching Artist
The people who prescribe to go to his classes are not exactly artist in the first place. They are enthusiastic people who want to learn a painting system it just happens to be Bob Ross's system. You're making something out of this it really shouldn't even be a problem.
I agree with you-- I think in his sphere he was truly a game changing creative! He accomplished something most artists can't even dream of, reaching so many people in such a down to earth way - Mia, Art Prof Staff
This technique it is hard ! It is not easy. It takes alot of practice. Even if you do the same scene they will all be unique. My dream is to teach to kids Bob Ross in my school as an after school class. Bob does teach ! What do you know if he did not go back and retouch his paintings ? He only had less than 30 minutes on tv. He did 3 versions of each painting. One for his books, one for tv and one for reference which has much more detail. I'm sure he took his time in real life. On the show he does mention where he gets his ideas and inspiration and took pictures. So what if he paints just landscapes they are sublime.
Haha, we actually love Bob Ross here at Art Prof, he was definitely skilled at his techniques, and makes art accessible and was very relatable in ways that we hope we can offer too. Here's a full playlist of our Crit Clash videos: ua-cam.com/play/PLvt8_pMl6ywmErraSADL1K2FNt9XMl9sN.html
-Lauryn, Art Prof Teaching Artist
When watched from bird’s perspective, the whole thing looks like an art of performance, in front of camera when millions of people looking over his shoulder, feels more art this way than what actually his paintings are all about.
Maybe his artistic statement should really be to force people to think what the art’s really all about - to bring the argument. And he choose this medium to create this multi layered concept art! 😀
Oh, so true!! There are so many ways to think about it :) - Mia Rozear, Art Prof Staff
Direct painting in oil is perfectly valid. See Velasquez, Beaux, Zorn, Sargent, etc.
Totally! I have some friends that also do direct painting. I think it's brave, I couldn't do it, but it really works for them! -Lauryn, Art Prof Teaching Artist
I heard one online artist comment that "Painting like Bob Ross is fine if you want to paint for the thrift store market."
The whole argument is wrong... you can't argue so many points all toguether. But some things are wrong for other reasons. "Art is no entertaiment"... what?!... Lets ask Mozart about that. What about every Disney animated movie?. Beside entertaiment, art have being for teaching or religious adoration. "Art can't be fast, or easy", yeah, no. How much time do you think Miró spend in some of his paints, how dificult is to copy some of Picassos drawings (I know He have some masterful too, It's not the point), I don't think Pollock can be consider as a virtuoso. "Museums" Yisus, even Warhol have His stupid reprodutions in museums. "You need to paint in situ", yes, like when they recreated a garden, and a flood inside the sixtine chapel... I see much moore revolutionary art born from imagination than obserbation, I know It is important, but c'on, some "vistas" are just imposible, Zdzislaw Beksinski comes to my mind. And to be honest, the mona lisa, would have benefited from a landscape like the ones Bob painted. "The same thing with little variations", I guess Clara Lieu doesn't know what a "fugue" is, or never heard Beethoven n*5... 3 notes that sound every second of the sinphony. There is much moore, but in conclussion, Claras argument is the argument of the tradicionalist, wich I understand, because I have use it... but Bob is not a fine artist, isn't even a master painter, He never said so. The technique He teach, is a trampolin, is a lie that you see Bob paint and when you tried and discover It is actually dificult to "paint well", you don't keep going. If you have the fire inside, you start with Bob, you show your mediocre landscape to your grandmother, and she thinks that you have talent, and incentivate you to keep learning. Also, don't fool yourself thinking that what the masters did whas so much complicated, yes it is slower, yes you need practice and patience, but if you want to paint, you are gonna learn, maybe not the ways of the universities, but there is so many masters that learn from error. And, maybe you are not a young hungry artist, maybe you are a good old lady, who whant to paint with Her friends, and haven't the time or the memory to start whith perspective, color theoryand what have you... one can say art need to make you feel... well, Bob make a lot of people feel good... so maybe He was just an artesan, that is fine too.
Thank you for contributing to the conversation, what I enjoy about running this channel is getting to heard a broad range of opinions. I'm not sure if you know this, but in case you didn't know, in these Crit Clash videos, we assign a point of view, so frequently, a lot of what we say in the video isn't what we actually believe in real life. In this case, I made a lot of arguments that are a complete contradiction to what I actually think. IMO, Bob Ross brought art to the public in a way that was very easy and accessible. There's a lot of talk at art museums, in academia, etc. about making art accessible, but few have even gotten close to what Bob Ross did, he truly changed the public's perception of painting. -Prof Lieu
While I don't think art being in museums is the only indicator of quality, I do think it is a qualifier of ambition. Ambitious artists who think about their work contextually within art historical canon aim to have their work in museums. Whether they get there or not is a different matter. Bob Ross has no ambition, or intellectual/emotional content or any kind of depth.
Thanks for sharing your point of view! - Mia Rozear, Art Prof Staff
I think Bob had plenty of time to make a good painting Jordan, sad as it is that he died so young.
..and if Vermeer and Bob Ross did a 30 minute paint off Vermeer would whip his arse.
Above: just some thoughts I had when watching the stream.
It seems there are 3 elements to this crit: Bob Ross the man, Bob Ross the art teacher and Bob Ross artist. I don't know much about Bob Ross.
I'm Australian (he was never on TV here) and came across him on the internet. When I first saw his work I thought, "I would classify his general palette as "muted unicorn vomit". His art is awful, full stop. Unlike weekend painters whose works might not be masterpieces, but that are infused with a genuine enthusiasm and wonkiness that could be seen as endearing, Bob's paintings look like plastic tableaux. From what I can tell there was never an evolution to his work. What he produced at the beginning of his career was pretty much what he was producing at the end. Even if an artist's work is not particular individual or revolutionary, you usually see some kind of progress in technical ability and conceptual sophistication.
He was probably a hell of a nice guy and if his videos got people painting then that's great. I have to admit I found the image of the Bob Ross painting class really disturbing. This seems to be one step (up? down?) from colour by number. I couldn't help but see that group as a line up of robots, all doing the same thing at the same time, exactly as ordered by the head honcho. Now, I realise that's a bit unfair and if people go to these things as a nice social event while playing with paint, then all power to them. If some then go home and start to make paintings of their own, great. But it still gives me the creeps.
If you take the argument that Bob Ross was a lovely guy and a great art ambassador therefore his paintings themselves are valuable, then you have to also accept the opposite argument, that is, Picasso was a horrible man with an out of control ego who was an inveterate womaniser therefore all his paintings are garbage and should be discarded. Neither side of the argument contains any logic.
"..and if Vermeer and Bob Ross did a 30 minute paint off Vermeer would whip his arse." This made me laugh so hard, I absolutely love that our audience can nerd out with us in this way about art history! I like the way you break down Bob Ross, because he is so much more than just his artwork. That's completely different than say most contemporary artists today. To the average person, they would never have an opinion on Kara Walker's personality, or Olafur Eliasson's. Practically like comparing apples and oranges! -Prof Lieu
@@artprof We could have a very fun discussion over coffee, no doubt!
Imagine comparing an old master against someone who just want to have fun painting and have fun with his audience...
Imagine as well blaming and judging Picasso with modern eyes.
I dont know if you knew this but Wagner was an awful person yet his music is superb. you just can't judge past with the morals and criteria of the present...
This all said, yes vermer would wipe his ass but in my opinion bob ross was never a showoff artist nor he wasn't comparing himself with others, or claiming he was top notch...
Comparing two guys from different timelines would be comparing the idyllic landscapes paintings found in the walls Pompei (65ad) which lacked of perspective because that wasn't invented back then, against some renaissance work made around 1300 to 1400 something...
And... i bet my ass Ross could do some advance and elaborate stuff yet he tried to demonstrate that not only anyone can draw/paint but anyone as well is able to create good/decent artworks
@@Lichkuroro Interesting perspective. Yes, I know a lot about Wagner. I was a professional cellist and have played many of his operas. Regardless of the period in which a painting is created you can tell a master from a lesser artist. To say that the work of masterful medieval painters is less skilled than those of the renaissance because they have not mastered perspective is missing the point. The critique here is on the quality of the work, not a comparison of styles. I'm not sure about your final assertion that Ross was capable of more than he showed in his videos. If that were the case, you would see some of those works, somewhere and you would see evidence of that sophistication even in his quickly made work: as it is, I can't see it. I think Ross made a great contribution in getting people inspired to paint and I know he is beloved to many, but a great artist he was not.
Blue Wren first of all I’m not trying to go against you or your opinion and just trying to make a point. With this said I’m not referring Bob Ross as one of the great painters of these times, no. And I bet that wasn’t his intention. Regarding his skill and moreover quality remember he’s aiming is for amateurs or those who wants to become part of the artsy world, that’s why his technique is easy to follow and replicate. I never meant to bash the early ages painters.. At that point in history some of the painters were at their top/prime, what I was trying to demonstrate is that you just can’t compare different eras, because if around 60 something ad perspective didn’t exist just imagine that around the time of the pyramids foreshortening didn’t existed yet... I’m not trying to gain internet points or prove that my logic/argument is better than yours. But I just want to shed some light into the arguments that prof. Carla said (don’t remember her last name, maybe Liu)
Prof. Lieu makes a great point about those painting nights where people just copy something. winner is Lieu!
If I remember correctly I met B0b Ross When he taught a fried oil painting in the school og art at Ball State University Muncie Indiana
Oh wow, that's awesome! - Mia Rozear, Art Prof Staff
Bob became resurrected during lockdown. always will be beloved.
Quarantine Bob revival! - Mia, Art Prof Staff
His program could have been called Zen and the art of Bob Ross Paintings.
Yes, it totally feels that way! -Lauryn, Art Prof Teaching Artist
Would make great wallpaper for an eccentric grandmother.
Hahaha, perhaps! - Mia Rozear, Art Prof Staff
Bob Ross didn’t teach how to paint his exact painting he teached you the techniques to do it. I am now about to graduate with a plastic arts bachelor degree and i have totally used some of his techniques in my own personal art. We also have to take into consideration that he had a tv program and here they were debating on the paintings he did in the program but he mentioned that he did realism and portraits but he just preferred landscapes. His paintings were never made as fine art that was never his purpose that doesn’t mean that they’re bad. As easy as that.
I totally 100% agree with you! He shared his work with the world and inspired millions, to me that's a real artist :) - Mia Rozear, Art Prof Staff
Bob was a drill sergeant in the US air force before he stated painting.
He was a man containing multitudes! -Lauryn, Art Prof Teaching Artist
Bob ross . Is bigger than and more well known than most artists today . Let alone 25yrs yrs ago .
He had his paint specifically made for him. (Watch the documentary!!!!!! lol) It was oil. And the thinner (that stuff he cleaned his brush with by flapping his brush on the leg of the easel....they think he probably got cancer from that.
Oh so interesting! That's so sad :( - Mia, Art Prof Staff
A black square was in a museum. A jar of urine with a crucifix was in a museum. There have been pieces of art in museums that I could do right now... and I have zero artistic skill.
I feel that way a lot too sometimes :') I suppose it's the conceptual aspects about the pieces that make them interesting to galleries - Mia Rozear, Art Prof Staff
It's a beginners art form. It's decorative art. It's not traditional art or fine art.
I think of Bob Ross as like an introduction to painting, well at least that's how it was for me.
I agree! Mia Rozear, Art Prof Staff
Sure my first art tutorial I have ever watched. Impressive hairstyle 😂
Haha, thanks for watching!! If you'd like to see another art debate, here's one about Jackson Pollock you might enjoy: ua-cam.com/video/HZp3PBnSaA8/v-deo.html - Mia Rozear, Art Prof Staff
Just got to live guys leave Bobby alone he's done more for the art world than a lot for the regular person and their well-being.
Negative critique begins at 8:10
Lol. Jordon won, but only because he had the easier side to defend. (Who can drag the nice little smiling man with the TV show?) I don't like his stuff and never found him interesting (I did, however, religiously watch the guy who drew after the Popeye cartoons!). I do envy Ross' massive art empire, though. That would be cool. Usually that level of success is reserved for banal, easy to digest, uninspiring stuff that appeals to the lowest common denominator of art fan. I'm happy he found his happy place. But I would not be interested in art if I thought that was all it was. Great debate!
honesty you need to step back and look its easy to drag bob ross the best one being when a person did a chart on how often bob ross would have an element in his painting. with mountains be 1/3 of the time and trees at 91% its fun and relaxing but its at the end it is a gimmick I love bob ross so please put the pitchforks down I can just be critical of what he actually was producing
Prof Lieu, Bob Ross said he paints like that because the show was only 20 min and he painted live. I'm sure that in his other real work he used many techniques and did more complex works :( Don't bully Bob!!! hahhaha
One Trick Pony? Like Sargeant?
The "so called professionals" clearly feeling the burn. That's success.
@Clara - very harsh words used. If you don't like him, it's okay. But to use nasty words .. not done. He had mass influence. And that becomes a problem for people and then starts the judging game.
For Bob, his fun became his profession. Sadly for (some) professionals - their profession never really was(is) fun for them.
Prof is nothing if not passionate-- whether she likes something or not! Personally, I love Bob Ross. Whether it be nostalgia from childhood, or simply the atmosphere of calm and true devotion to his work, I think he's so special. I've heard his work is "boring", but for me it's not just about his paintings alone-- it's his entire process of teaching the world. Truly wonderful, at least to me! - Mia, Art Prof Staff
@@artprof 100% agree. Thank you for spreading love and good vibes.
I know exactly what to get from the art store after watching bob ross - "phthalo blue"
Haha, I love phthalo! - Mia Rozear, Art Prof Staff
Bobb Ross is one step away from paint by numbers, generics landscape paintings. I think Duchamp's fountain was much greatly more appreciated than anything Bob Ross could ever put on. Bichons fountain the piece was a urinal submitted under another artist name he invented to test the limits of art galleries submission process, this goes back to the idea of the signature advocating the making art.
I think they both have very different intentions as artists as well! One's is more education oriented, the other is more "groundbreaking" in the art realm :) - Mia, Art Prof Staff