"scoob" (scoobsti)
11/16/2014 at 18:07 • Filed to: None
10
22|
"scoob" (scoobsti)
11/16/2014 at 18:07 • Filed to: None | 10
| 22 |
Brian Silvestro
> scoob
11/16/2014 at 18:09 |
|
don't be absurd
the streets are never that clear in the city
Fookin' Prawns
> scoob
11/16/2014 at 18:13 |
|
SCOOB SMASH
jkm7680
> scoob
11/16/2014 at 18:14 |
|
Why exactly would a pane of class be there, and what purpose does it serve?
Denver Is Stuck In The 90s
> scoob
11/16/2014 at 18:15 |
|
WHY IS THERE ONLY HALF A BUS!?!?
AthomSfere
> Denver Is Stuck In The 90s
11/16/2014 at 18:23 |
|
You call that a half? Is it a really short bus for people who like to jump through windows?
|
AthomSfere
> jkm7680
11/16/2014 at 18:23 |
|
I am thinking: because art.
|
jkm7680
> AthomSfere
11/16/2014 at 18:26 |
|
Artists confuse me sometimes.
|
AthomSfere
> jkm7680
11/16/2014 at 18:32 |
|
Me too, most the time.
I mean seriously:
|
jkm7680
> AthomSfere
11/16/2014 at 18:37 |
|
Like, I understand you need the talent of a moderately smart forest animal to put a couple of canvasses together and draw a little bit. But really, this is not art. (The picture that I'm putting up is probably Kinja'd.)
JustWaitingForAMate
> scoob
11/16/2014 at 18:44 |
|
That half bus was really doing my head in until I released there's a building there.
|
AthomSfere
> jkm7680
11/16/2014 at 18:51 |
|
"You don't get it maaannn, these squares represent how we all hide a part of ourselves but also reflect the society that we rebel against. "
~Best artsy person quote I could muster. Not an actual quote.
JDIGGS
> AthomSfere
11/16/2014 at 18:57 |
|
Thats some weak fucking art, a big square with a pane of glass.
Me thinks cause somebody pretended to make art and sell it to the land owner.
My friend, that is most certainly not art.
davedave1111
> jkm7680
11/16/2014 at 19:00 |
|
To say it's not art, first you have to define what is art - and that's precisely the question that piece is asking. Art is not necessarily decorative.
|
davedave1111
> AthomSfere
11/16/2014 at 19:03 |
|
Honestly, of all the things to pick...
That van Gogh is absolutely stunning, although a small, low quality photo like that one doesn't begin to do it justice. It's a genuine masterpiece, by one of the greatest painters of all. What on earth do you have against it?
As for the shoes, I'm really baffled. Lots of people object to modern art that's non-representative, or not decorative, or doesn't require great craftsmanship, but this piece doesn't fit any of those categories.
|
scoob
> Denver Is Stuck In The 90s
11/16/2014 at 19:48 |
|
Must be a really reflective building.
|
Denver Is Stuck In The 90s
> scoob
11/16/2014 at 19:49 |
|
Must be
|
AthomSfere
> davedave1111
11/16/2014 at 21:23 |
|
So you like the shoes?
The Van Gogh - I guess I don't get impressionism at all. It's crude, it's bland, and it is considered one of the best works of an artist I don't get or appreciate in a genre that makes little sense to me.
Thunderface
> scoob
11/16/2014 at 22:05 |
|
Where is the rest of that bus?
|
scoob
> Thunderface
11/16/2014 at 22:09 |
|
Behind a very reflective building!
|
Thunderface
> scoob
11/16/2014 at 22:11 |
|
oh I see it now lol
|
davedave1111
> AthomSfere
11/17/2014 at 16:11 |
|
I like the shoes a lot more than that boring stone statue of a man behind it.
The van Gogh - have you seen it in person? The textures are astonishing. And impressionism as a whole, well, I'm not sure what's not to get. It's special effects, from before CGI was even dreamt of.
|
AthomSfere
> davedave1111
11/17/2014 at 22:55 |
|
I have not seen it. Honestly, I generally don't get art at all except certain abstract and modern art but only for the lines. I get no higher meaning from it, much like cars. I can like a car, the lines the flow, the power, science etc... But when we start talking design language it gets hokey to me, so going out to the Louvre or any other museum to see something like Starry Nights does not appeal to me. The Louvre itself however I like a lot.