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

Museum of Bad Art

museumofbadart.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 154 posts

Re: Museum of Bad Art

#101

Post by willis936 »

rectang wrote: post #90

I dislike it. Ostensibly this is taking on art museum snobbery, but many of these works are by amateurs and were literally pulled out the trash. It feels like an embittered teacher making fun of a kid, while the class snickers at the spectacle of public humiliation. To each of the artists: congratulations for having the courage to trust in your imagination. I hope that others have engaged with your works with greater…

It didn't feel mean sprited when I went. Many of the pieces were actually good in their own way. Sure, some were simply technically lacking, but those weren't what viewers found interesting. The human fetus made of chicken bones is what I remember.

Re: Museum of Bad Art

#103

Post by codexb »

rectang wrote: post #90

I dislike it. Ostensibly this is taking on art museum snobbery, but many of these works are by amateurs and were literally pulled out the trash. It feels like an embittered teacher making fun of a kid, while the class snickers at the spectacle of public humiliation. To each of the artists: congratulations for having the courage to trust in your imagination. I hope that others have engaged with your works with greater…

I think you're missing the point, or at least the point I took away from it.

Much of the art in the collections is genuinely interesting and enjoyable, even if it is technically "bad", in the sense that it's a poor attempt at a certain type of art.

Re: Museum of Bad Art

#104

Post by nuclearnice3 »

adamc wrote: post #95
rectang wrote: post #90

I dislike it. Ostensibly this is taking on art museum snobbery, but many of these works are by amateurs and were literally pulled out the trash. It feels like an embittered teacher making fun of a kid, while the class snickers at the spectacle of public humiliation. To each of the artists: congratulations for having the courage to trust in your imagination. I hope that others have engaged with your works with greater…

Yeah, it seems unkind. What is the purpose here? To teach about art, using art that maybe was someone's learning attempt seems like a huge mistake (and is likely to scare away students). If you aren't teaching, why talk about bad art at all?

Here's a delightful and illuminating 6 minute video which explains some of the purpose.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HB6UhGbyXfE

Punchline at the end: "We don't say negative things about the art or the artist. Our stated goal is to collect, exhibit, and celebrate this art that would be appreciated nowhere else."

Re: Museum of Bad Art

#105

Post by smsm42 »

debugnik wrote: post #13
Zealotux wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Browsers should come with an option to ignore `user-select` rules.

It's worse than that, they're using some lame WordPress plugin called wp-content-copy-protector to hijack shorcuts to copy or view source as well. Really hostile and yet ridiculously easy to bypass.

> show_wpcp_message('You are not allowed to copy content or view source');

Yes I am, you poor deluded soul, yes I am. There's absolutely no way for you to control what happens to the content once it has left your server. And using such tricks is a huge red flag about the professionalism of the site makers.

Re: Museum of Bad Art

#106

Post by rectang »

willis936 wrote: post #101
rectang wrote: post #90

I dislike it. Ostensibly this is taking on art museum snobbery, but many of these works are by amateurs and were literally pulled out the trash. It feels like an embittered teacher making fun of a kid, while the class snickers at the spectacle of public humiliation. To each of the artists: congratulations for having the courage to trust in your imagination. I hope that others have engaged with your works with greater…

It didn't feel mean sprited when I went. Many of the pieces were actually good in their own way. Sure, some were simply technically lacking, but those weren't what viewers found interesting. The human fetus made of chicken bones is what I remember.

Here's the critique I would like to have seen from MOBA for such a work:

> human fetus made of chicken bones

Delicious.

Re: Museum of Bad Art

#107

Post by smsm42 »

To be honest, if it weren't labeled "bad art" and were put aside of other modern art, without any labeling or commentary, or even better with standard commentary about "the artists boldly defying the established conventions to express the feelings deeply in their soul" and so on - I would not be able to say which is which and which comes from some official "best of" collection and which from a mock "bad art" collection.

Re: Museum of Bad Art

#108

Post by bwanab »

I have to admit that going to the Museum of Bad Art always has had a similar effect on my very poor art eye as going to the Institute of Contemporary Art across town.

Re: Museum of Bad Art

#109

Post by asdfasvea »

The best general art museums I've ever gone to were 80% crap, 15% meh and 5% good. The average general art museum is 90% crap, 9% meh and 1% ok.

But that's the nature of the beast. You can't have a diverse collection where half the pieces are good to any individual. 1 person's opinion of great art is 99 other people's crap.

There really are very few pieces in the world where 90%+ of people agree they are great pieces of art.

Re: Museum of Bad Art

#110

Post by rectang »

otteromkram wrote: post #71

> "MOBA curators believe this painting, as well as others in the collection, may have been affected by the artists' never having actually seen a naked woman.“ Cold blooded. (ref - https://museumofbadart.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/PAULIN...

Repaired links:

https://museumofbadart.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/PAULIN...

... which is the fourth picture in on this page:

https://museumofbadart.org/in-the-nood/

Post reply on HN