Dubstepforum.com

Gewze wrote:it is shit though. art should be something a usual person couldn't do without practise/teaching. i could draw 3 rectangles and paint them at the end of the day. (''then why didnt you'') because theres no skill in that and if i wanted to paint something it'd be more intricate.

Where do you get the idea that his paintings are easy to create?

They are exceptionally layered and internally luminous..much like encaustic painting....

That kind of non-muddy translucent velvet clarity is not that easy to master...
especially when juxtaposing colors...



I also like to think that if 10 of us went about making our own versions of his work....
It would be incredibly interesting in color, texture. and compositional variation

the concept is not at all finished...

I'm not a very objective person to be speaking on this though..
considering what I look at every morning and night...
..this years wall calandar..Malevich

..don't get me wrong though...it's just a painting

like it - don't like it - who cares

I can't handle the concept of preciousness at all - at this point in my life...



Who wants the job of being guardian of things...It's like an invitation to criticism




I'm in the white room with no curtains...

<iframe src="/forum/video.php?url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fh0cR0YjYU" frameborder="0" style="overflow:hidden; height:auto; max-width:540px"></iframe>

In that world where we as a people can together build a total of 2 rocketships
to mars...before the meteor hits...

I already know I'm one of 15,000 without the winning lottery ticket so...

We still have to live in the meantime - Real Housewives of New Jersey or BBC Biography:Mark Rothko...


Sometimes I feel like I'm dealing with passover...
Painting thick stripes of blood over my doorway...

No relation to topic except maybe as an example of highly emotive but relatively simple painting:

-so overwhelmingly depressing and euphoric at the same time.

I remember reading a blog post where it was compared to Burial which just makes so much sense.

<iframe src="/forum/video.php?url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T34tr2K-bIc" frameborder="0" style="overflow:hidden; height:auto; max-width:540px"></iframe>

I killed the thread...

with my overactive bipolar type enthusiasm.

bright maroon wrote:I killed the thread...

with my overactive bipolar type enthusiasm.

nah, you're talking a lot of sense on here

Naan Bread wrote:No relation to topic except maybe as an example of highly emotive but relatively simple painting:

-so overwhelmingly depressing and euphoric at the same time.

I remember reading a blog post where it was compared to Burial which just makes so much sense.

indeed
and if this is burial, then surely this is badman vip



(the quality on that pic is so bad though)

Stiletto Feel wrote: Might be wrong, but that might be Malevich's 'Black Square'

isn't this supposed to be in the corner of a room instead of hung on a flat wall??

Has anybody ever been to an outsider art convention?

jameshk wrote:Surely its the oneup-manship that they're paying a ridiculous amount for it rather than the actual quality of the artwork itself. It's a status symbol. Shame that so much money gets wasted on crazy stuff like this and doesn't go towards things that will help people.

It's not a waste of money. Buying art is generally a form of investment (and it's probably nicer having your wealth in the form of some paintings around the house rather than locked away in some bank account).

Naan Bread wrote:No relation to topic except maybe as an example of highly emotive but relatively simple painting:

-so overwhelmingly depressing and euphoric at the same time.

I remember reading a blog post where it was compared to Burial which just makes so much sense.

see thats amazing

exfox wrote:

kirky wrote:

exfox wrote:

arktrix wrote:

exfox wrote:it's NOT a piece of shit ffs. YES the amount of money is ridiculous, YES it should have been used for other causes, YES a painting should not be that expensive, but NO it's not a piece of shit

Subjectivity is a new word for you to learn.

calling something a "piece of shit" is a judgement that claims to be objective though. i don't mean to say everyone must like rothko, but calling a painting a piece of shit is considering shitness as an attribute of this painting - ie not a subjective opinion.

Tell me why you like it, what is so inspiring about it.

i'd have trouble putting it to words tbh, but i find rothko's paintings quite fascinating, i always feel like i can drown in them. seeing some of them in reality helped me getting this feeling though.
now again, i can totally understand why one would not like it, even hate it - but saying "it's shit" is a bit much.

Completely with you here.

This thread is mad depressing. People instantly shouting "shit" at one of the most famous artists on the planet, because of a little photo they saw on an internet forum. Go to an art museum, see the paintings in person - how they're meant to be seen - and give it some thought before you're so quick to judge a man who many hail as a genius.

Gewze wrote:

Naan Bread wrote:No relation to topic except maybe as an example of highly emotive but relatively simple painting:

-so overwhelmingly depressing and euphoric at the same time.

I remember reading a blog post where it was compared to Burial which just makes so much sense.

see thats amazing

This one does a lot for me

Rothko's stuff must be better in person like most art (but especially so in this case) as it just doesn't look very good from the pictures on this forum

Rothko I love, as has been said already, to judge him based on tiny jpegs is ridiculous. It's always funny to see people completely dismiss something they are in no position to do so. As for the value, of course it's worth all that money, the very fact someone paid that money for it means it's worth it. And if it's sold again down the line, I bet it goes for more money.

As an aside, If we want to talk about overrated artists...Damien Hirst will always be top of my list (though I'll still probably go see his exhibition at the tate modern as I can go for free - always good to challenge your beliefs i guess)

Damien Hir$t

Electric_Head wrote:How can anyone justify spending that much on canvas and paint?

It's not that much money, it's just that you're that poor.

It will be worth double that in 40 years, at least. That is the way wealth works.

Didn't Munch outsell Cezanne recently?

.

nowaysj wrote:

Electric_Head wrote:How can anyone justify spending that much on canvas and paint?

It's not that much money, it's just that you're that poor.

I have my health.

This reminds me of an endless discussion I've been having with a mate of mine. He hates Mondriaan, while I love his work. Wonder how much an original Mondriaan would go for