Re: 20th Century art -- 2001-2002 Cultural Literacy Class Forum

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 04:27:43 05/02/02 Thu
Author: LR
Subject: Re: 20th Century art
In reply to: Christine Millar 's message, "20th Century art" on 05:03:15 05/01/02 Wed

While it may be hard at first to see something as simplistic as lines and squares on a canvas as art, there is no doubt that the artist must have had some message. The artist must have some purpose, which is hopefully more than just making money and achieving fame, for creating a composition.

Take for example Piet Mondrian. While the artwork of his that we have seen has an extreme simplistic quality, he was in fact a Dutch traditional painter, trained at the Academy in Amsterdam. It was after all of this classical training that he was influenced by cubism and began to develop his famous neoplasticism (I think its called nonobjectivism in the book) style. He not only developed a style of art, but also a theory to go along with that, which basically was that artwork not only reflected but influenced society.

Since he was capable of traditional art, but elected to stick with primary colors and ninety degree angles, one would have to say that he had meaning behind it. So, even if we can't understand it, we should try to respect it as acceptable art.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Re: 20th Century art -- Christine Millar, 08:23:14 05/02/02 Thu