Live data from Hacker News

Museum of Bad Art

museumofbadart.org

131–140 of 154 posts

Re: Museum of Bad Art

#131
post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually went to the penis museum 5 years ago! It was... maybe not the best thing. It's not exactly clear in a lot of the marketing materials, and even once you arrive, that it's just a single room behind the front desk. It felt a lot more like a road side attraction than anything else. The gift shop in the front was a similar size to the museum in the back. To be fair my expectations of a penis museum weren't THAT…

Everyone wants it to be bigger, but we just have to work with what's there.

But if people drive up even just to gawk at it, you've won.

Re: Museum of Bad Art

#133
"What is art anyhow?"

some answers I could think up:

- whatever I like is art

- whatever some people who are "better than me" call art is art

- whatever an artist can sell to a rich person for a high price is art...

I can't make up my mind.

Re: Museum of Bad Art

#134
post #79
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What makes a bad art piece anyway? Whatever the people who buy art and are influential say is bad. In general, very wealthy people and the dealers in their orbit determine which art is worthy and which art and artists will be forgotten.

My favourite painting of all time "The Escorial from a foot-hill of the Guadarrama mountains" by Lucas van Uden [ https://data.fitzmuseum.cam.ac.uk/id/image/media-4256550851 ] is quite a small painting that I'm sure most people have never heard of, hell, I'd never heard of it before I found it tucked politely in a corner of the Cambridge Fitzwilliam Museum, and I sure as hell don't know who Lucas van Uden is. Neverth…

Just doing a quick search of auction prices for his work it looks like it can be had by fairly regular people. Mostly looks in the range of a few thousand euros for an oil on canvas landscape. Go get one!

Re: Museum of Bad Art

#136

> "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...

It's not even a bad rendition of the naked human body.

Re: Museum of Bad Art

#137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve been had.

So have I.

This is amazing dialog. Deserves a website of its own. You two should collaborate.

The important stuff tended to, I honestly don't find humor in criticizing amateur art, especially without a background or any info on the creator, etc.

I can definitely see how you might differ. I'm glad I'm different, even if I miss obvious things and don't get super funny jokes.

Re: Museum of Bad Art

#139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's the critique I would like to have seen from MOBA for such a work: > human fetus made of chicken bones Delicious.

If you are what you eat then many of us are made primarily of chicken. I could read it as a commentary on society

But what are chicken mainly made of?

Re: Museum of Bad Art

#140
post #107

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" collecti…

Yes. Art exactly like what's shown in this museum is commonplace in serious art galleries or exhibits, and there is not really anything anyone can say or do, except just walk past it or use it as a palette cleanser.
Post reply on HN