Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Was modern art a CIA psy-op? (2020)

daily.jstor.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 264 posts

Re: Was modern art a CIA psy-op? (2020)

#131

Post by ivan_gammel »

tryauuum wrote: post #126
cyberjar wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"the Default Country" is a good one. I'll have to start using that.

I think it a reference to "default city" from the russian internet, when people noticed that people from Moscow never specify the city when talking about topics which would normally require knowledge of which city are they residents of Eventually it evolved, sometimes people say "hey, I'm from DC" or "hey, I live in DC2" (that means the second largest city, Saint-Petersburg)

Yes. Default Country for the world on many English-speaking forums is the same as Default City for Russia.

Re: Was modern art a CIA psy-op? (2020)

#132

Post by Antibabelic »

brodo wrote: post #103
ivan_gammel wrote: post #85

Not the first time when the Default Country thinks they invented everything. The title is almost comical. Modern art, as everyone should know, started in 1860s in Europe inspired by technological advances, globalization of trade and cultural exchange. Japanese art made huge blast, photography pushed to seek new forms of expression, social progress demanded new messages and new images. We had impressionism, post-impre…

Overall a great point, but I have a nit-pick: > Modern art, as everyone should know, started in 1860s in Europe As someone who is active in the German art scene, the understanding is not that clear-cut. Modern art, as I learned it, is "art in the modern period". So everything after the middle ages. Basically when people stopped only drawing religious art and portraits of nobles. What started in the 1860s is "modernis…

What kind of art do you think the MoMA (Museum of Modern Art), houses?

Re: Was modern art a CIA psy-op? (2020)

#133

Post by Mikhail_Edoshin »

gizajob wrote: post #87
Mikhail_Edoshin wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Art became an investment and artistic properties ceased to matter.

The bankers could make the art themselves then, if that were the case. Fine art still needs to be made by artists. Conceptual art can be made by anyone with a concept.

This would still take at least time. But it's a bit more layered. Art must be original. But the originality cannot be the aim of art. It will emerge itself if the artist strives for truth, because all the originality is already given to him by the true Creator.

Modern artists aim solely for originality. As a result modern art consists of nothing else. It's empty; fake. At the same time it does require ever increasing effort to find something superficially new; like crypto mining. That is still a fulltime job, that's true.

Re: Was modern art a CIA psy-op? (2020)

#134

Post by OroPla »

mauvehaus wrote: post #10

Oh man, I just listened to an episode of Decoder Ring about why making classical realist sculptures in the US is a challenge. It gives some interesting context about the rejection of realism in the post-war West: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/we-are-monumentally-ba...

Maybe that is why realism is chased so much in video games in the west, while eastern countries rarely are interested.

Re: Was modern art a CIA psy-op? (2020)

#136

Post by kakacik »

coldtea wrote: post #123
zombot wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The art of arbitrarily redefining existing terms will never die out.

It's the art of understanding terms have different meanings based on context and use, not one based on some definition handed down by the Gods that's applicable everywhere, that we should not let die out.

Not its about using correct words with specific meanings instead of vague terms that at the end have incorrect claims, even you had to resort to that to get your point across.

'Humans are horrible', oh no I meant only that subset of 3 individuals, you should understand my context... thats weak excuse to be polite.

Re: Was modern art a CIA psy-op? (2020)

#137

Post by modo_mario »

brodo wrote: post #103
ivan_gammel wrote: post #85

Not the first time when the Default Country thinks they invented everything. The title is almost comical. Modern art, as everyone should know, started in 1860s in Europe inspired by technological advances, globalization of trade and cultural exchange. Japanese art made huge blast, photography pushed to seek new forms of expression, social progress demanded new messages and new images. We had impressionism, post-impre…

Overall a great point, but I have a nit-pick: > Modern art, as everyone should know, started in 1860s in Europe As someone who is active in the German art scene, the understanding is not that clear-cut. Modern art, as I learned it, is "art in the modern period". So everything after the middle ages. Basically when people stopped only drawing religious art and portraits of nobles. What started in the 1860s is "modernis…

>Basically when people stopped only drawing religious art and portraits of nobles.

We drew vastly more art. The kind you describe was just more likely to be preserved as the institutions they were on about and the buildings they resided in persisted.

Re: Was modern art a CIA psy-op? (2020)

#139

Post by estearum »

modo_mario wrote: post #137
brodo wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Overall a great point, but I have a nit-pick: > Modern art, as everyone should know, started in 1860s in Europe As someone who is active in the German art scene, the understanding is not that clear-cut. Modern art, as I learned it, is "art in the modern period". So everything after the middle ages. Basically when people stopped only drawing religious art and portraits of nobles. What started in the 1860s is "modernis…

>Basically when people stopped only drawing religious art and portraits of nobles. We drew vastly more art. The kind you describe was just more likely to be preserved as the institutions they were on about and the buildings they resided in persisted.

Surely people created a lot more art, but you're eliding the dynamic of professionalism. Art is ludicrously labor-intensive and so the vast majority of professional art (i.e. most art worth saving) would have been done for rich people.

Re: Was modern art a CIA psy-op? (2020)

#140

Post by Garlef »

OroPla wrote: post #127
zombot wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The art of arbitrarily redefining existing terms will never die out.

I agree that it is incredibly stupid to call something from 1870 "modern". The word modern has a a clear meaning of "just now" / "contemporary". Not two hundred years ago. It shouldn't be attached to anything that can age out of this meaning.

The word has not only one but several clear meanings:

> In the context of art history, modernity (Fr. modernité) has a more limited sense, modern art covering the period of c. 1860–1970.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modernity

Post reply on HN