51–60 of 271 posts
"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.
But art critics have started to analyze it, so who knows.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So any critique now is cancel culture?
This critique is clearly singling out a few of the 5000 images for lack of adherence to the current standard of PC. The headline is in line with this- who does seriously think that art should be "pretty"? What "is not so pretty" is supposed to mean, other than that there's some stuff in it we should disapprove? Asking art- good or bad- to be politically correct is ridiculous; and anyway the "artwork" is a composition…
And yes, art can be racist or misogynistic or problematic in other ways. There's nothing wrong with calling it that. Or do you think it's cancel culture to call "Birth of a Nation" racist?
In case anyone missed it, the artist was also double-dipping on the sale: https://amycastor.com/2021/03/14/metakovan-the-mystery-beepl...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This critique is clearly singling out a few of the 5000 images for lack of adherence to the current standard of PC. The headline is in line with this- who does seriously think that art should be "pretty"? What "is not so pretty" is supposed to mean, other than that there's some stuff in it we should disapprove? Asking art- good or bad- to be politically correct is ridiculous; and anyway the "artwork" is a composition…
The critique is calling the art bad and sometimes mysoginistic. It is not, in any way, calling for the artist to be canceled. And yes, art can be racist or misogynistic or problematic in other ways. There's nothing wrong with calling it that. Or do you think it's cancel culture to call "Birth of a Nation" racist?
Please. "I'm not saying we should do something about it, but oh my gosh, look how offensive it is".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This critique is clearly singling out a few of the 5000 images for lack of adherence to the current standard of PC. The headline is in line with this- who does seriously think that art should be "pretty"? What "is not so pretty" is supposed to mean, other than that there's some stuff in it we should disapprove? Asking art- good or bad- to be politically correct is ridiculous; and anyway the "artwork" is a composition…
The critique is calling the art bad and sometimes mysoginistic. It is not, in any way, calling for the artist to be canceled. And yes, art can be racist or misogynistic or problematic in other ways. There's nothing wrong with calling it that. Or do you think it's cancel culture to call "Birth of a Nation" racist?
Not explicitly, no. But it seems to me to follow the well known pattern of "hey, look, I've found something damning buried among X's old stuff".
Yes, art can be racist, it's just not the metre you use to judge it.
A small tangent, I don't get NFTs, what's stopping me from creating a new NFT with beeples image, or if there is hashing involved with beeples image and a couple of pixels changed?