Long Live Kitsch - Music Banter Music Banter

Go Back   Music Banter > Community Center > The Lounge > Current Events, Philosophy, & Religion
Register Blogging Today's Posts
Welcome to Music Banter Forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with over 70,000 other registered members. After you create your free account, you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 1,100,000 posts.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-26-2010, 08:52 PM   #11 (permalink)
gun whales
 
gunnels's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Knoxville/Nashville, TN, USA, NA, E, S, LC, MW, Known Universe
Posts: 1,713
Default

It's pretty much always been like that, though. All artists (including composers) either commissioned their work for someone in the upper class or tried to sell it to them. It's how they made their living.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sequoioideae View Post
Fuck your hashtags, they have no power in this realm.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FETCHER. View Post
I'm awfully sorry I'm not as good at writing pretentious posts as you are.
Let's Play TF2 Sometime.|Unrepresentative Last.fm.|Puns, Pokemon, and Miscellany
gunnels is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2010, 08:56 PM   #12 (permalink)
Mate, Spawn & Die
 
Janszoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: The Rapping Community
Posts: 24,593
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Conan View Post
I just feel we've reached a point where it isn't about the art anymore, but the high society that eats it up.
Who do you think was buying the artwork the surrealists made?
Janszoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2010, 08:58 PM   #13 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: A humble bachelor pad
Posts: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Janszoon View Post
Who do you think was buying the artwork the surrealists made?
Kindergarten teachers, gives the kids a standard they can actually reach.
Chollie Mank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2010, 08:58 PM   #14 (permalink)
Mate, Spawn & Die
 
Janszoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: The Rapping Community
Posts: 24,593
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gunnels View Post
It's pretty much always been like that, though. All artists (including composers) either commissioned their work for someone in the upper class or tried to sell it to them. It's how they made their living.
Exactly. Whether it's churches, governments, businesses or just wealthy patrons, it's pretty consistently the rich and powerful that finance art throughout history.
Janszoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2010, 09:00 PM   #15 (permalink)
Mate, Spawn & Die
 
Janszoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: The Rapping Community
Posts: 24,593
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chollie Mank View Post
Kindergarten teachers, gives the kids a standard they can actually reach.
That's terrible, lizard.
Janszoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2010, 04:02 AM   #16 (permalink)
Dr. Prunk
 
boo boo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Where the buffalo roam.
Posts: 12,137
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chollie Mank View Post
I say gentlemen, this female can speak quite eloquently.
I wouldn't call myself an eloquent speaker, I'm just a guy who rants about everything.

...And yeah, I'm a guy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Conan View Post
Modern Art is so pretentious it's almost a joke, now. Hell, it is a joke.

I only associate creatively with people who view art for what it really is - an expression of the inner self or view of the outside world through the eyes of another human being... not a contest to be a esoteric and pretentious as possible. I could care less if it's "cliche" or "kitsch" or "unenlightened" or "uneducated" of me to prefer Surrealism to a black dot leaning slightly to the left on a bare canvas. They call it "challenging", and I call bullshit.

Modern Art critics have pretty much been proven to be completely up there own asses and all about impressing other snobs. I've seen cases where the critics were shown "paintings" done by the researcher's children of the pre-school to kindergarten age, supposedly done by a world renound artist that all the European critics raved for. Not surprisingly, they took the bait and praised the art as genius.
Someone did that with elephants too, same result.

Critics praise "true art" as that which defies convention but so many of these guys are up there own ass about how abstract art is the only good kind of art, it has BECOME convention.

And by making figurative art or "kitsch" art, you are defying the conventions upheld by the art community. And that is just naughty.

People who make "kitsch" art are people who are considered to make art as a product, art for consumers. It's obvious that for this reason Thomas Kinkade is considered a kitsch artist.

But during the renaissance, all the top artists made their work for an elite group of people, that's how they made their living, and it doesn't matter how much love and care they put into their work, by making art for consumption or to please other's tastes, it should be considered "kitsch" by the definition art critics use.

But how is abstract art true self expression? You know not everyone likes that kind of art, but critics will demonize anyone who doesnt conform to modern art ideals. And because it's become so fashionable it's not at all uncommon for rich people who know f*ck all about art to buy a Rothko or two to make their place more "modern", the word "kitsch" was invented to define stuff like this was it not?

Critics are consumers too you know.

And the mere idea that there's more artistic credibility in making art for critics than everyday, not so privilaged people is f*cking absurd. People actually like the work of Boris Vallejo, nobody likes the work of Damient Hirst, they just pretend to like it because it's fashionable.

Art critics consider "kitsch" a disease, as in anything that becomes popular and desired and imitated WILL become kitsch, but they ignore the fact that by going fap happy over stuff like Pollock and Damien Hirst, these things have become "kitsch" themselves.

Simply liking something turns it into "kitsch", so, should we just not like anything to keep the disease from spreading?

Oh yeah, and Damien Hirst, what a c*ntbag that guy is. He specializes in "emperor has no clothes" art, the guy puts dead sharks in some kind of jelly or whatever and not only is it successfully passed off as art, it has become a mass produced product.

He's the Kinkade of the modern art community, but you know what? At least Thomas motherf*cking Kinkade makes his art for un-pretentious, simple everyday people. So what if he makes his stuff for ready consumption, so did Da Vinci and Michaelangelo, but they made it for very high class people, so what's the difference? It's more artistically credible to make art for rich people than to make art that anyone can afford?

I'm not saying Kinkade is in the same field as those from the Renaissance, f*ck no, but you know what I mean.

I don't like his work, too much bloom and sh*t. But I actually think he has more artistic credibility than the stuff art critics praise today and that just comes to show the terrible state modern art is in.

Almost any new modern art movement I have an interest in, like neo-surrealism or lowbrow art, it's immediately written off as "kitsch", as modern art continues to be a hysterical parody of itself.

Critics have become so obsessed with this word that it now describes virtually everything in existance. Everything traditional is kitsch, that means all music and movies that have some coherent structure or genre traits to them is kitsch, but that truly means everything.

EVERYTHING is kitsch. Everything.

Also, the thing I hate most about kitsch as a derogatory term is that it implies that art can NEVER appeal to human emotion, or even be provocative, that means that even if art isn't sentimental or idealistic, even if it just wants to provoke any kind of reaction, it is "kitsch".

To be true art, it can only stimulate you intellectually, I guess while you rub your chin and smoke a pipe.

Thus "art" is a denial of basic human emotion, basic human nature. We are emotional beings, why is that shunned upon? Emotion drives us in everything we do weither we admit it or not. That is just the way we are.

Until we evolve into giant floating brains with no need for emotion (easy to assume this is what art critics want) we can never appreciate "art" over "kitsch".

No one truly likes "art", they just like the idea of liking art. It just gives us an excuse to feel superior to others for having "refined" taste.

But everyone likes "kitsch", because kitsch is anything and everything that stimulates us emotionally, even sex is kitsch.

Critics love to use the excuse "false emotion", well, what validates art is the way it is percieved by the viewer. All this stuff about "aura" critics go on about is ridiculous, like I don't even know if they're joking.

Bedises, all human emotion has a simple biological cause and purpose so you could argue that all emotion is false. But who cares? I feel emotion, so it feels real to me.

So it doesn't matter if the artist treats it as merely a product, if it has an aesthetic or emotional impact on me, that validates the art for me, that's how it goes for all art mediums.

Critics are not art lovers, because art cannot be loved. Art is something you make for critics to circle jerk over as they flaunt their alledged superiority over everyone else.

Kitsch is something that can be genuinely enjoyed. So if kitsch is the death of art as all critics proclaim, all I can say to that is.... good.
__________________
It's only knock n' knowall, but I like it

http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs

Quote:
Originally Posted by Strummer521
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowquill View Post
I only listen to Santana when I feel like being annoyed.
I only listen to you talk when I want to hear Emo performed acapella.
boo boo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2010, 04:31 AM   #17 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
bungalow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Hot-lanta
Posts: 3,140
Default

i believe jackhammer is indeed a john cassavetes fan
bungalow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2010, 04:33 AM   #18 (permalink)
Dr. Prunk
 
boo boo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Where the buffalo roam.
Posts: 12,137
Default

D'oh.

EDIT: I removed his name.
__________________
It's only knock n' knowall, but I like it

http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs

Quote:
Originally Posted by Strummer521
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowquill View Post
I only listen to Santana when I feel like being annoyed.
I only listen to you talk when I want to hear Emo performed acapella.
boo boo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2010, 06:00 AM   #19 (permalink)
Mate, Spawn & Die
 
Janszoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: The Rapping Community
Posts: 24,593
Default

I think it's great that boo boo is taking the time to rant about something that hasn't been relevant since at the mid-20th century at the latest.
Janszoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2010, 06:42 AM   #20 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: VAN
Posts: 2,530
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Janszoon View Post
I think it's great that boo boo is taking the time to rant about something that hasn't been relevant since at the mid-20th century at the latest.
gotta take a break from contentious issues such as videogames and having hair sometime

Last edited by CAPTAIN CAVEMAN; 04-27-2010 at 06:49 AM.
CAPTAIN CAVEMAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Similar Threads



© 2003-2024 Advameg, Inc.