151–160 of 271 posts
I assume that being outrageous must be part of what Beeple and the buyer are going for. To that end, I think the most outrageous thing to do would be for Beeple to make another NFT of the same artwork and sell it as the first time that an artwork has been sold for the second time. When that also sells for several million people will go mad.
"We didn't need a preview": the content of the art isn't important. Like most NFTs, it's just a url that you can sign a hash of for dollars. What's more interesting is the allegation that this is "tape painting": sold to an accomplice for the purpose of promoting the NFT "art" market.
I'm not sure I get this point of view. We know that famous artists did random rude and badly-satirical drawings for fun. Their dick drawings were contained in some old notebooks and trashed. But I bet someone would buy a preserved notebook of someone semi-famous with 5000 pages of drawings, mostly regardless of contents. This is pretty much the equivalent of that - daily fun which went to the internet bin rather than…
The author is oblivious to the fact that he can't think his way around his pangs of identity guilt. He doesn't realize the mere mention of black people isn't a taboo for most people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Cringe doesn't mean bad - I would say 90% of Jim'll paint it is cringe and awesome https://jimllpaintit.tumblr.com/ There are different kinds of cringe though. Also, Jim'll paint it definitely looks like he's more talented than Beeple. > And having 5000 daily pieces is art by itself. Quantity over quality?
> Quantity over quality? Isn't focusing on quantity the only reliable way to improve quality? See also, the usual Ira Glass quote: https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/309485-nobody-tells-this-to... .
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Criticism != What this article does. Tone and style makes the difference between criticism and the works of the Schreibtischtäter. It's a great German compound word from Schreibtisch (=desk) and Täter (=perpetrator). It's the person sitting at a desk, keeping their hands clean, writing to make others do the dirty work.
What dirty work? Didn't this guy get $69 million dollars? And you're using a word which from the wikipedia article is described as: "The term "desk murderer" (German: Schreibtischtäter)[1] is attributed to Hannah Arendt and is used to describe state-employed mass murderers like Adolf Eichmann, who planned and organised the Holocaust without taking part in killings personally." I'm amazed.
Although as someone working in the same sphere the "Everydays" idea has been quite a negative influence on the quality of work you see out there and the work has taken on a lot of similarities.
It goes so low as to try to paint Beeple as a racist because he had the cheek to... draw a black person?
Honestly, the art world is poison. What a horrible article.
Criticizes heavily his earliest works being included, which would be absolutely fine only the entire point of the artwork is something is created every day - yet this reviewer seems to insist on reviewing each individual work as if it had been a long term project in its own right.
I don't usually like to get personal, but I'm absolutely sure the person who wrote this is an insufferable snob.
btw, I'm not saying you cant say his art is bad, they just did it in an incredibly poor way.
First I heard of Beeple was like a year ago, on Corridor Crew: https://youtu.be/_ul9jrCXhR4 So when I read about some NFT crypto art selling for 69 million, I was genuinely surprised that it was at least someone I had heard about before. It’s not exactly my cup of tea, but I respect Beeple’s dedication to his art. When I read this article, it felt less a critique of the merits of Beeple’s art, and more like a hit pie…
Honestly, they could have just posted the images and that would have been condemnation enough. I mean, good for him for making money, but let's not pretend this is interesting art for anyone over fifteen.
I walked away from this thinking the $69M image was much cooler than I expected it to be. Its like a representation of the artist's whole body of work, ~4000 lower quality sketches progressing into ~1000 in his current style. I feel like this art critic is not in touch with meme culture. Many of the examples contained were quite striking and interesting, don't find drawings of dicks or naked people particularly shock…
Modern “art” is very often offensive, but usually that is seen as a good thing. It’s “irreverent”, it “challenges norms”. I suppose the problem is that this particular hack challenges the wrong norms?