Art or Eyesore?

Seeing as it has sparked a debate and got you all thinking, it has done it's job as a piece of modern art.

Modern art isn't supposed to make you comfortable.
____________
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move. - Douglas Adams

hemorroids make me uncomfortable does that make them art as well

Definitely a piece of scrap.....


____________

Damn, this sloooooow connection gave a double post .... Sorry :-(

When it is all over that is probably what it will be. But the scrap metal value will be more than it cost.

Art is in the eye of the be holder.
____________
Pluto will always be a planet to me.

Cash Donation Specialist

Very true Uli. I remember going to the Louvre when I last visited Paris, and was quite disappointed with the Mona Lisa. I was expecting something a lot bigger but its only 30" x 21" and you are so far away its hard to see it behind all the bullet proof glass. It's a nice picture of a pleasant woman, I just can't see what all the fuss is about.

I don't get Piccaso, but Klee. Then again, my sis and I never agreed.
____________
Pluto will always be a planet to me.

Cash Donation Specialist

I understand the Picasso paintings, I just don't particularly find them that aesthetic. Lowry's stuff looks like a 10 year old has painted it. I tend to prefer the landscapes by Constable, Cézanne, Turner etc. Portraits by Gainsborough are excellent. It's the Monet impressionists that I'm not keen on, nor the Van Gogh Post Impressionists.

The British painter Jeremy Barlow is quite good Barlow, but those twits that throw a bucket of paint on the floor and ride a bike through it and call it art, are just off their trolley. But each to his own.


____________
Damsel Rescuer, Kitty Patron, Raccoon Friend, Uli Fan,
Julie Supporter, ES99 Admirer, PETA Member, 1st Childhood

Perhaps the most controversial was the Tate's pile of bricks. To this very day most people think the Tate and the art world were conned, and so do I. Bricks It's the same as Damien Hirsts sheep. How does anyone think that displaying dead animals in formaldehyde is an artform, no matter what esoteric title it is given? (Away from the flock) A dead sheep is still a dead sheep

I am quite sure that these type of people sit down for hours, to deliberately design the most useless bit of tat, or the most shocking exhibit, just to see how outrageous they can be and get away with it in the name of art. And sadly they do, and they get paid lots of money for it as well. They are artists alright, P*ss artists!

The other problem is that the art world takes itself far to seriously. I used to work in Mayfair, and nearly every day you could see the chinless wonders at some trendy gallery exhibition, clutching their warm glass of chardonnay and making ooohhh noises at bits of rubbish on the wall, and feeling very avant-gard. But one simply has to be seen at these do's dahlink!

Yet just a mile away are (or were) the pavement artists opposite Green Park tube station. Some of their work really did deserve exhibiting. Then there is the Regents Canal hole in 2D that looks so like a 3d chasm in the ground that everyone walks around it. Hole That is real artistic talent.

But as Uli says, art is in the eye of the beholder. Perhaps it would help if we had rather more down to earth and realistic beholders!