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

91–100 of 154 posts

Re: Museum of Bad Art

#91

Post by PrismCrystal »

gspencley wrote: post #49
Yawrehto wrote: post #14

Honestly, most of them are still better than I could draw.

I was tempted to create a top-level post suggesting that they just call themselves "Museum" since "Of Bad Art" is redundant, but I figured the joke would get lost and I'd just get down-voted into oblivion. I'm fairly creative, I can draw (at one time in my life I seriously wanted to be a comic book illustrator) and I'm a musician. I appreciate that art is subjective, often difficult to do well and that technical skil…

With a work of a size like "Voices of Fire", one has to consider the possibility that it hits differently in real life versus seeing a reproduction in a book or on the internet. For example, some people who were sceptical about the value of Mark Rothko’s paintings (which are fairly comparable in style) were won over once they saw the works in person. Or consider how Arvo Pärt, a composer who writes music in a style that could be labeled anti-modern, was moved almost to tears at seeing Anish Kapoor’s modern-art sculpture Marsyas.

Museums like the National Gallery of Canada like having in their collection pieces that might make people go wow, and tell other people who in turn might visit the museum.

Re: Museum of Bad Art

#93

Post by eth0up »

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…

My sentiments are very similar, and I'm glad to read someone else articulating it here.

Edit: Are we missing something?

Re: Museum of Bad Art

#94

Post by microtherion »

the_af wrote: post #68
gspencley wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was tempted to create a top-level post suggesting that they just call themselves "Museum" since "Of Bad Art" is redundant, but I figured the joke would get lost and I'd just get down-voted into oblivion. I'm fairly creative, I can draw (at one time in my life I seriously wanted to be a comic book illustrator) and I'm a musician. I appreciate that art is subjective, often difficult to do well and that technical skil…

I didn't know this piece or the artist. Went through the few examples in Wikipedia of his art and it's almost all like this, minimalist blocks or stripes of color. Definitely not my thing. Why does it matter? To me, because it's different for a masterful artist to purposefully create something minimalist (e.g. Picasso) when you know they could make something technically complex if they wished so, vs an artist for whi…

Some time ago, I attended the memorial service for a skilled painter (not exactly a household name, though), and one of the stories told about him was that he visited the municipal museum, where there was a new exhibit of a newly acquired abstract expressionist painting (I believe by Mark Rothko), which just consisted of painted rectangles.

He studied the painting for some time, and then asked to see the director of the museum, to inform him that the painting was hung upside down! When asked why he would think that, he pointed out that wet paint does not flow upward…

So it is indeed possible for a connaisseur to distinguish interesting details in a painting like this.

Re: Museum of Bad Art

#95

Post by adamc »

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?

Re: Museum of Bad Art

#96

Post by iainmerrick »

geophile wrote: post #85
ferguu_ wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My thoughts exactly! What makes a bad art piece anyway? While they might not have yet mastered the brush or the canvas, these artists are obviously passionate all the same, and isn't that what matters? Real bad art is soulless and as such would offer no value, be it entertainment or contemplative, when placed in a gallery. That is a true Mueseum Of Bad Art, and I suppose the curators know this. I thought some of thes…

I think it is quite simple to characterize MOBAs curation process. First, it has to be bad, in an ambition-vastly-exceeds-talent kind of way. Second (per MOBA rules) there is a price limit on each acquisition. It used to be $5, but may have been adjusted for inflation.

You could satisfy those constraints with an expensive traditional museum piece by a) asserting that it is bad, and b) stealing it.

Re: Museum of Bad Art

#97

Post by card_zero »

verteu wrote: post #86
bigstrat2003 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, modern art is almost universally bad. I suspect that it is because artists are absolutely soaked in art from all over history. They study it, they live and breathe it, and by this point they are bored of it. So they try to make something different and unlike the art of old, but have lost sight of the fact that normal people aren't jaded and bored of old art like they are. So they wind up making stuff which can…

Perhaps a large fraction of art was always bad, but only the best old art is remembered today. Modern art hasn't been culled by time.

Modernism is over 100 years old!

Re: Museum of Bad Art

#98

Post by ikesau »

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 find it endearing. a celebration of human striving and failing. it reminds me of the quote from the incredible fiasco episode of This American Life:

> Jack Hitt: And what you have to understand is that everybody in this sort of community understood that they were-- there was certainly a sort of air of everyone sort of reaching beyond their own grasp. Every actor was sort of in a role that was just a little too big for them. Every aspect of the set and the crew-- and rumors had sort of cooked around. There was this huge crew. There were lots of things being painted.

> Ira Glass: See, but this, in fact, is one of the criteria for greatness, is that everyone is just about to reach just beyond their grasp, because that is when greatness can occur.

> Jack Hitt: That's right. That's right. And maybe greatness could have occurred.

Re: Museum of Bad Art

#99

Post by iainmerrick »

1970-01-01 wrote: post #44
weberer wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh wow, that's bullshit. I just tried to copy the address and got a little alert saying "ALERT: Content is protected !!"

Fuck this anti-copy bullshit site. Here: The Museum Of Bad Art, MOBA MOBA is the world’s only museum dedicated to the collection, exhibition, and celebration of art that would not be welcomed to any traditional art museum. Our collection includes sincere art in which something has gone wrong in a way that results in a compelling, interesting image. Location: inside the Dorchester Brewing Co, 1250 Massachusetts Ave, B…

Among all the other bullshit, this is a pretty circular definition:

MOBA is the world’s only museum dedicated to the collection, exhibition, and celebration of art that would not be welcomed to any traditional art museum

Bullshit - plenty of traditional art museums have "outsider art" exhibitions.

That term is arguably still a bit snobby, but it's better than just calling it "bad art" because a lot of it isn't actually bad at all!

Re: Museum of Bad Art

#100

Post by GuB-42 »

gspencley wrote: post #49
Yawrehto wrote: post #14

Honestly, most of them are still better than I could draw.

I was tempted to create a top-level post suggesting that they just call themselves "Museum" since "Of Bad Art" is redundant, but I figured the joke would get lost and I'd just get down-voted into oblivion. I'm fairly creative, I can draw (at one time in my life I seriously wanted to be a comic book illustrator) and I'm a musician. I appreciate that art is subjective, often difficult to do well and that technical skil…

I didn't know about "Voice of Fire" but it is the story makes it interesting.

By itself, the painting is not bad, kind of like a flag, just not particularly remarkable. But that it was bought for $1.8M with taxpayer money and the controversy it created is where its real value lies. With a name like "Voice of Fire", it is almost as if it was the plan. According to the Wikipedia article, it has been valued $40M in 2014, which, if real, would have made that $1.8M a worthy investment!

Post reply on HN