The banana psyop begins
>>7817559Ah crap I didn't see my first thread went through my bad
Can you move on about the fucking banana alreadyGetting pissmad about it shows that maybe the money laundering scheme artist was onto something
>>7817559Since OP is too fucking lazy:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5NOc9em5gc
>>7817567@grok tldr this video
>>7817564it does show the lengths someone will go to appear cultured and intelligent by ascribing meaning to literally anythinghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOjV6w1wA8Uthe comment section is an artwork in itself
>>7817574It tells you how to understand art (without feeling dumb).
>>7817559>>7817567>"Because no one tells you how to understand art..."Wasn't that the entire fucking point of art theory in highschool?>>7817564You're on a board for art, where everyone is trying to master this craft, so of course we have some (very) strong opinions on it, and in particular, what many feel is a mockery of the medium.I loath such works that lack any sort of skill or effort, and I feel strongly that a visual artwork should be critiqued partially by these things, else we end up in a world where someone can just put their dirty fucking bed in a gallery and have it called art... oh wait.
>>7817574Mr. Shekelstein gave me 10 funbucks if I say banana is legood, so please start thinking it's true and ignore the money laundering.
not giving you views, faggot
>>7817559She doesn't even talk about the wall banana.She could have at least used it as an example, and given her own interpretation of it.
>>7817559congratulations on her transition
>>7817567Does she acknowledge in the video that she is dressed as Ed?
>>7817559The fact that we are still talking about this fucking banana is the art
>>7818250Then spread those cheeks boy, because I'll do something you'll think about for the rest of your life.It's not butt rape, it's art!
>>7818049Yes. At one point she looks directly into the camera, suddenly shouts "Gravy!", and pulls out a cannon ball sized jawbreaker, before unlocking her jaw and somehow fitting that thing in her mouth.I clapped because I got the reference.
>>7817613That is a fantastic installation, I love that.
>>7818674It's not, and I hate you.
>>7817567>>7817559No one cares about this crap. Their only way to get any exposure is by baiting hate-responses and acting like the educated, high IQ victim. It's better to just ignore this, not even answer to questions how I find it. Much like I don't talk about the garbage in my trash bin.
>>7817613>WOW! I can admire the cruel fate that poor people face without ever actually having to interact with any of those filthy worms!>Its like an amusement park just for me!Maybe Luigi(from the hit Super Mario Bros. Series of video games) was onto something
The banana is, in all seriousness, more artworthy than most of what is posted on /ic/
>>7819144It will be better than anything you'll ever make, at least.
>>7819139I'm pretty sure based on the way it's made, the artist may have one point been living in a situation like that and felt the need to express it directly.
Reminder that the "fountain art piece" was just some dude getting butthurt about not having it accepted into gallery and just making a photo on his own and making a show or something
>>7819297You see I get that, but as a guy whos been to a couple of gallery's myself and realizing HOW far away and inconvenient they are to get too, along with how secretive these places can be where you have to be "in the know" to even figure out where these galleries are most of the time it only really leaves two kinds of people attending, either art fags like me or fucking rich fags trying to launder money.Like think about this anon, if it wasnt for the internet and the trend to get engagement clicks through rage inducing crap, would you and I or any other fucking normal person ever get to even SEE this fucking Banana on wall at all? No, it would only be seen by artfags who jerk each other off or rich folk, but you would still have dumbfucks like the girl in the OP telling people that this was a profound and bold fucking thing, and I know that cause the same shit happened with this shit >>7819380 Its all fucking "Its a big club and you aint in it" and "Dude once you read these 20 Art History books you'll get it" kind of shit. So even if that bedroom piece had a more sincere story to it I know its actually only gonna be viewed by Richie Rich who is looking to add to his private collection or fags like me and fuck that noise
>>7819408While somewhat true.Appealing to retard plebs isn't exactly any sign of artistic quality, it's more an appeal to regression than anything.Like, think of it this way, is the ability to wiggle electrons around on demand not a revolutionary concept? It's something only a few very well educated people truly understand, and everyone else has to just trust them on faith and god (of science) that it's actually significant and noteworthy. Now, if we only considered 'real engineering' to be things anyone can understand, we wouldn't have made it to banging rocks together let alone doing internet things.
>>7819416I see what you mean but I guess my issue is more about access then fucking anything. Like in your example most people dont know the ins and outs of electrons but at least that info is public, theres no gatekeepers on the knowledge of atoms and how you need to go under this one bridge and past the strip club to an unsuspecting building in LA to get the knowledge, you can just go to a local library or see a documentary or rent an ebook, and if you get filtered thats on you but at least its fucking there. Its not a matter of appealing to plebs but its access. Like even Shakespeare knew not to give access to just the rich, he made sure that normies who wanted to attend fucking Hamlet or whatever could(they just would have to stand for like 6 hours)
>>7819431I get it, but who do you think the experience is more valuable for, especially if you have limited space: people interested enough to follow the breadcrumb trail, or random guys of the street?You can still go to a public museum, they're not exactly hidden. But if I was an artfag and wanted to artfag with all the artfags, I wouldn't want half the room to be gormless yuppies and their shit kids.
>>7817567>568 views
>>7817559"Artists" will do shit like this and then wonder why they lost to clankers.lol
>>7823939>There's some bad art, so we must ruin all art!Retard.
>>7817613>>7819297I've thought about installations like these a few times and in the end I'm just finding myself unable to see them as art. I don't want to play art arbiter or anything like that so take the following as just my internal reasoning that I wanted to share with someone:I fully empathize with the creators' experiences, feelings and intentions behind these pieces, but I feel like they fail in both the art and the impact/realization departments.In art they fail for what I'd say is a lack of visual interest, technique and possibly creative expression: they are not interesting to look at, they do not display usage of techniques that are visually impressive in and of themselves (the counterexample here being a painting of a disturbing subject - often certainly not something I want to look at at all but I can understand classifying it as art), nor is the creator expressing their creativity as the medium itself.In impact/realization I would say they fail as they, in my mind, fail to convey the feelings and sensations of realization of the subject they are trying to portrait, because they are divorced from the context. If I see this bed in a museum, the feeling I get is mainly of disgust, because that's what it is, while placed in that museum, a disgusting object, without the human part that would make me remorseful or sad or contemplative of depression. If I were to see the same bed in the context of a visit to this person's home, then I'd be moved, because I would get all the context of the place and the human story which gives it all weight.Really much of it comes down to the fact that disgust is just such a strong emotion, and it is hard to feel anything but for an objectively disgusting object without being part of the situation or place that created it. It's the same way how graffiti in the city are beautiful because they tell stories about the places and people that moved in them. Can't just take that out and put it elsewhere. It becomes artifici
>>7824794So then if the feeling the artist was trying to get across was disgust, I think it could be called art. But usually that is not the intent.Another installation that came to mind was this "heart made out of cigarette butts" I saw a while ago on YouTube which, I admit, is a cool concept. But in the end, try as I might to "reinterpret" the piece according to the story I know about it, if the piece itself mainly transmits a feeling of disgust, I can't really say it's good art about the reality of decay and death and sorrow that cigarettes cause. But if the intention had been to make people disgusted of cigarettes, then that'd be good art.
>>7824800>So then if the feeling the artist was trying to get across was disgust, I think it could be called art. NTA, But if I drop a turd on a plate, put that on a pedestal in a gallery, and get the reaction I wanted (disgust), that makes it art?If so, then I feel our definition for what is and isn't "Art" to be very sorely lacking.You may argue that the bed is different, but how so? They're both lazy, they both lack any skill in the artistic crafts, so what makes my turd on a plate 'less than' the dirty bed?If the Dirty Bed is a justified piece of art, what argument do we have against the turd on the plate, or the banana duct taped to a wall?
>>7818282*moans*
>>7817559>Art insiderwho fucking cares what those jews think? just draw
