FA+
Shop
334
Views
Views
19
Favorites
Favorites
Category
Artwork (Digital) / Portraits
Species Hyena
Size 1881 x 1959
File Size 5.26 MB
Report this content
More from Bahaha
Because i have a particular debate to make on the cultural relevance of fine art in the age of folk art on scales of global internet connected fandom art. As well as the inherent failure of post-modern and whatever we are at now that post modernism is eons old: to seeve any social purpose to the great majority of human beings. As art is, in part catharsis, and education in perspectives of our world. It would more appropriately be purposed in the acessable venue of daily life in billion multitudes, as we see art here on FA; rather than a single proprietary piece in a white wall box gallery, museum, or some uber rich guy's warehouse to launder his tax evasion profits.
Suck my limp dick Juliard masters tuition.
(Saville is the best i love her i hope she sees this and hates me (affectionately).)
Suck my limp dick Juliard masters tuition.
(Saville is the best i love her i hope she sees this and hates me (affectionately).)
Category Artwork (Digital) / Portraits
Species Hyena
Size 1881 x 1959px
File Size 5.26 MB
I have to ipsofacto my argument into place first. Cuz i havent fully rationalized why me copying my favorite artist's painting helps me express how much i disdain what "fine arts" elitism has become.
Once/if i ever do; ill curl up in your lap, or you in mine. Who knows what our dynamic would be. And we can discuss art theory till the world stops turning.
Once/if i ever do; ill curl up in your lap, or you in mine. Who knows what our dynamic would be. And we can discuss art theory till the world stops turning.
Purrrrrrrrrrrrrr
So yeah, my theory of art is that its value or worth as a single piece, or as all art entirely; is it's effectiveness in conveying emotion, reason, and perspective in a way that helps people understand themselves, their lives, and those of the lives and phenomenon around them.
Those people that need this affirmation, understanding and catharsis are the people that struggle the most. The masses, the working classes, the phat asses.
But fine art or "high art" is patroned by, and thoroughly creates to sell to the wealthy, rather than the masses. And like all wealth, good high art is hoarded by that wealthy elite, as well as any art created will have to appeal to that patronizing sensibility of the wealthy. Which thdn makes the art less accessable to experience by the masses, it makes it only affordable by the wealthy, as well as in appealing to the masses it is focused mostly in artistic statements that comment on the navel gazing philosophies of the idle rich. Which is itself obfuscative, and contrived so as to not be immediately understood by the less idle minds of people financially struggling.
But folk art, fan art, amateur art, and art distributed through mass media, albeit with its own pit falls of censorship, corporate ownership of platforms, and the constant spectre of marketing mechanisms controling the direction of displayed content. This method is still more effective than high art, at sharing life love and understanding.
So yeah, my theory of art is that its value or worth as a single piece, or as all art entirely; is it's effectiveness in conveying emotion, reason, and perspective in a way that helps people understand themselves, their lives, and those of the lives and phenomenon around them.
Those people that need this affirmation, understanding and catharsis are the people that struggle the most. The masses, the working classes, the phat asses.
But fine art or "high art" is patroned by, and thoroughly creates to sell to the wealthy, rather than the masses. And like all wealth, good high art is hoarded by that wealthy elite, as well as any art created will have to appeal to that patronizing sensibility of the wealthy. Which thdn makes the art less accessable to experience by the masses, it makes it only affordable by the wealthy, as well as in appealing to the masses it is focused mostly in artistic statements that comment on the navel gazing philosophies of the idle rich. Which is itself obfuscative, and contrived so as to not be immediately understood by the less idle minds of people financially struggling.
But folk art, fan art, amateur art, and art distributed through mass media, albeit with its own pit falls of censorship, corporate ownership of platforms, and the constant spectre of marketing mechanisms controling the direction of displayed content. This method is still more effective than high art, at sharing life love and understanding.
The beauty of art has always been its subjectivity, and while I don't think those so wealthy to not understand financial struggle have much of a perspective to share beyond the greed that keeps their lives moving forward, I do think that separating art into financial classism alone removes the purpose of it...so overall I'm inclined to agree with you. I can't help but feel negating art for the elite entirely would just be the opposing side of the very same problem.
Im not suggesting negating, or taking art away from the wealthy, its not possible to escape their control of the art markets. I.e. here or anywhere on on the internet, our activity still serves the profit of mega corporate meta data mining and requires us to buy into technology that strays us from the reality of our own existence to their benefit.
Just that, i. The sense of reaching people, and having situations like this where we lowly plebs are discussing the virtue of our hobbies serves us and our audiences on FA better than Jenny Saville's painting in whatever single gallery the owner has it sold or leased to.
Just that, i. The sense of reaching people, and having situations like this where we lowly plebs are discussing the virtue of our hobbies serves us and our audiences on FA better than Jenny Saville's painting in whatever single gallery the owner has it sold or leased to.
Comments