Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure. But those making the claim are not talking about that. They're talking about the post 50s abstract expressionism and pop art movements. Just because it says "modern art" doesn't mean it refers to any and all modern art, much less 19th century art or say cubism or dada.
The art of arbitrarily redefining existing terms will never die out.
Was modern art a CIA psy-op? (2020)
251–260 of 264 posts
Re: Was modern art a CIA psy-op? (2020)
#252Who's behind the transgender psy-op? That's the one I really want to know.
> Who's behind the transgender psy-op? Right wing nutjobs who think the most important thing in the world is what exists between your legs. A few years ago there were news stories about a family that decided to raise their child "gender free" and that they would not announce the gender of the child to the world. The outrage that story produced was astonishing. People who would never in their entire life meet that kid…
Re: Was modern art a CIA psy-op? (2020)
#253Re: Was modern art a CIA psy-op? (2020)
#254Earlier 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.
We dont show them in museums tho.
Re: Was modern art a CIA psy-op? (2020)
#255Not 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…
Sure. But those making the claim are not talking about that. They're talking about the post 50s abstract expressionism and pop art movements. Just because it says "modern art" doesn't mean it refers to any and all modern art, much less 19th century art or say cubism or dada.
I think we can all agree that naming anything "modern" or "new" or "nu" (for new) is simply deeply dumbfucktarded.
GP talks about the 1860s: I'm sorry but nothing about the 1860s is "modern" in 2026. Just as nothing from 2026 shall be "modern" in 2160.
It's nearly as if at least one of the two hardest problems in computer science, naming things, applied to other things too.
Re: Was modern art a CIA psy-op? (2020)
#256"All Art is Propaganda" is a well known quote by various authors - https://quoteinvestigator.com/2024/04/08/art-propaganda/
Also George Orwell wrote a set of essays under that name (though he was primarily indicating Language/Literature) - https://archive.org/details/AllArtIsPropagandaCriticalEssays
Re: Was modern art a CIA psy-op? (2020)
#257Who's behind the transgender psy-op? That's the one I really want to know.
> Who's behind the transgender psy-op? Right wing nutjobs who think the most important thing in the world is what exists between your legs. A few years ago there were news stories about a family that decided to raise their child "gender free" and that they would not announce the gender of the child to the world. The outrage that story produced was astonishing. People who would never in their entire life meet that kid…
Re: Was modern art a CIA psy-op? (2020)
#258Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Meanwhile historians are out there, regarding things from 500 years ago as modern.
However, when you tie the word "new" or in this case "modern" to a time period that was over a hundred years ago you are just setting yourself up for failure and have to make do with calling things "after new" or in this case "post modern". But then where will this end?
What was wrong with calling periods proper names like Renaissance, Baroque and Romantic?
Re: Was modern art a CIA psy-op? (2020)
#259Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Who's behind the transgender psy-op? Right wing nutjobs who think the most important thing in the world is what exists between your legs. A few years ago there were news stories about a family that decided to raise their child "gender free" and that they would not announce the gender of the child to the world. The outrage that story produced was astonishing. People who would never in their entire life meet that kid…
She's spending her time and money advocating for women's rights, actually.
Re: Was modern art a CIA psy-op? (2020)
#260Not 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…