Artists must be allowed to make bad work • Hacker News Board

Re: Artists must be allowed to make bad work

#71

Post by Delk » Tue, May 16, 2023, 1:31 PM UTC

jcarrano wrote: post #51

I thought this was already the case, considering most "art" is garbage anyways (well, 90% of everything, according to that rule). I do not thinks artist are "punished" more for making bad works, as much as they are loosing that extra "excess attention" that our media-high society gives them. Of course, if you put regular human beings on a pedestal and make an Idol of them then any minor misstep will be unforgivable.

> I do not thinks artist are "punished" more for making bad works, as much as they are loosing that extra "excess attention" that our media-high society gives them.

It might be partially about attention, but the problem with fine art is probably that it needs to be something novel or reach beyond the mundane somehow. Most people can keep doing more or less the same mundane work with mundane results every day and it's still passable or even completely fulfills expectations. You can't really do that when the work kind of by definition is expected to spark something or speak to its audience.

Re: Artists must be allowed to make bad work

#72

Post by dsign » Tue, May 16, 2023, 1:34 PM UTC

This has been coming to my mind in the context of fiction writing.

Today, the writer's gold standard is publication. In fact, many readers say they won't read anything that hasn't been "published" by a publisher.

But the incentive of a publisher is money and sales, which means they will search for things that sell in volume, or handicap the writer's work so that "it sells." And how the publisher guesses if something will sell? They will look for things that have sold in the past, they have no other way. And they will do it even if it crushes the bibliophile's soul of everybody at the editorial, because they got bills to pay. And it results in...more of the same. It's not art anymore, it's commercial fulfillment, and it's not enjoyed to the point of being remembered.

There is one good thing about fiction writing though, it's called beta-reading. It's a thing authors do, but it's also a great opportunity for readers to contribute to a story, to make it more to their liking. If you ever are feeling hyper-critic of a piece of contemporary fiction, as an alternative to cancel-bombing the author because they produce "bad work" and have the daring of publishing it on their own, consider doing some beta-reading.

Remember, Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown was traditionally published and an amazing commercial success[^1].

[^1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX5IV9n223M

Re: Artists must be allowed to make bad work

#73

Post by Finnucane » Tue, May 16, 2023, 1:43 PM UTC

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #25

There’s even a museum for them: https://museumofbadart.org/

Oh no, they've moved out of their gallery at the Somerville Theater. I mean, that's not a tragedy, just less convenient for me personally.

Re: Artists must be allowed to make bad work

#74

Post by MichaelZuo » Tue, May 16, 2023, 1:46 PM UTC

dagw wrote: post #70

MichaelZuo wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't believe classical style visual art is overrated. My local art gallery, the AGO, had a large exhibition on Caravaggio a few years ago and I remember seeing the shocked expressions on the majority of the visitors.

had a large exhibition on Caravaggio What is interesting and telling is that they showed a 'name' like Caravaggio, and not any of the countless contemporary painters who are every bit is technically skilled as Caravaggio was, and perfectly capable of emulating his style. If the classical visual style was still relevant in itself, every art gallery would be showing off those contemporary artists.

Which 'contemporary artists' still paint in the classical style? I can't think of any.

Re: Artists must be allowed to make bad work

#75

Post by MichaelZuo » Tue, May 16, 2023, 1:48 PM UTC

pfannkuchen wrote: post #68

MichaelZuo wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't believe classical style visual art is overrated. My local art gallery, the AGO, had a large exhibition on Caravaggio a few years ago and I remember seeing the shocked expressions on the majority of the visitors.

There is social pressure to have this reaction to appear cultured, which is a bit of a confounder. Not knocking the skill involved, being a high fidelity human rendering engine takes a lifetime of dedication as well as a base level of natural talent which very few possess.

I feel pretty confident in my ability to see through people that are faking it.

Maybe I am exaggerating my perceptiveness, but being shocked by Caravaggio paintings is not at all uncommon.

Re: Artists must be allowed to make bad work

#76

Post by antiterra » Tue, May 16, 2023, 1:50 PM UTC

pfannkuchen wrote: post #63

Visual art is overrated and misunderstood IMO. Artists of the past were basically human rendering engines, which was very important because we didn’t have any other kind of rendering engine and looking at artificial images can be pleasing. Can you imagine what seeing a nice painting of a person was like when you had never seen any other kind of artificial image in your life besides handmade ones? It was probably mind…

I think it’s likely you’re projecting your personal experience onto others. I knew someone who was obsessed with the Red Room by Matisse. He was in no way pretentious or academic in inclination, but something about the actual painting itself entranced him and he could disappear into it for long periods of time. I honestly don’t know what was so powerful about it for him, but he was clearly having a genuine experience different than mine. Authoritatively providing my conjecture regarding his ‘relative reaction’ would be immensely pompous.

Art is more than technique, the music performances that move us are very often not the absolute highest level of virtuosity. Photographs were incredibly common in my lifetime, but I was still very strongly affected by paintings on books, album covers and in museums.

Further, non-representative visual art has a rich history. You merely have to look at the amazing art produced out of Islamic aniconism.

Re: Artists must be allowed to make bad work

#77

Post by dagw » Tue, May 16, 2023, 1:57 PM UTC

MichaelZuo wrote: post #74

dagw wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

had a large exhibition on Caravaggio What is interesting and telling is that they showed a 'name' like Caravaggio, and not any of the countless contemporary painters who are every bit is technically skilled as Caravaggio was, and perfectly capable of emulating his style. If the classical visual style was still relevant in itself, every art gallery would be showing off those contemporary artists.

Which 'contemporary artists' still paint in the classical style? I can't think of any.

Go visit some of the top art academies around the world. There are still schools out there training people in the classical styles.

The fact that you can't really think of any artists or ever see their work out in the world kind of proves my points.

Re: Artists must be allowed to make bad work

#78

Post by MichaelZuo » Tue, May 16, 2023, 1:59 PM UTC

dagw wrote: post #77

MichaelZuo wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which 'contemporary artists' still paint in the classical style? I can't think of any.

Go visit some of the top art academies around the world. There are still schools out there training people in the classical styles. The fact that you can't really think of any artists or ever see their work out in the world kind of proves my points.

Some of it must have been uploaded onto the internet. Are you sure there aren't any examples you can link?

Re: Artists must be allowed to make bad work

#79

Post by intelVISA » Tue, May 16, 2023, 2:03 PM UTC

pfannkuchen wrote: post #68

MichaelZuo wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't believe classical style visual art is overrated. My local art gallery, the AGO, had a large exhibition on Caravaggio a few years ago and I remember seeing the shocked expressions on the majority of the visitors.

There is social pressure to have this reaction to appear cultured, which is a bit of a confounder. Not knocking the skill involved, being a high fidelity human rendering engine takes a lifetime of dedication as well as a base level of natural talent which very few possess.

I liken camera to art as (recent) ML is to code.

The machine may threaten to usurp the mass market but the few, skilled organics will always, hopefully, have artisanal works to sell.

Re: Artists must be allowed to make bad work

#80

Post by SketchySeaBeast » Tue, May 16, 2023, 2:04 PM UTC

pfannkuchen wrote: post #63

Visual art is overrated and misunderstood IMO. Artists of the past were basically human rendering engines, which was very important because we didn’t have any other kind of rendering engine and looking at artificial images can be pleasing. Can you imagine what seeing a nice painting of a person was like when you had never seen any other kind of artificial image in your life besides handmade ones? It was probably mind…

I think you're misunderstanding the history of art. Art up until the invention of the camera wasn't simply to generate the most realistic image possible.