i honestly wish you made a series entirely dedicated to specific art movements and their respective representatives. you really have a fascinating way of explaining how things came to be
Do you ever just open a new nerdwriter video absentmindedly and then promptly close it and add to watch later because you need to save it for your undivided attention
Feel like I'm oblivious to fine art. there are always people talking about pieces that made them feel deep emotion and had them standing in awe for several minutes. I've been to several galleries and never felt that. seen a few Pollocks and never felt they were 'staring back at me'. To me they're pleasantly energetic squiggly lines. Frustrating that everyone else sees this profound depth I'm apparently blind to.
@Stealinbread yes but you must agree it's a very personal subjective thing, I would be more inclined to judge an artist's ability in a achieving a goal
Industrially produced paint came around this same time, allowing artists to work more freely out in the world and taking some of the manual labor out of the creation of a painting. Less construction and more curation.
“Paintings no longer represent...Today it has become the role of the painting to look at the spectator and ask them: what do you represent?” - thanks so much for introducing me to this quote from Wolfgang Paalen. It’s helped me understand so much of what I’ve felt when looking at the abstract.
Pfffft "its not the artist that must have talent, you must project your own talent into the pointless scribbles!" I know miniature painters that do Dungeons and Dragons figurines with more color understanding and talent than Pollock. these talentless hacks devolved the medium so much I cant even begin to explain it. Imagine hearing the worst traffic noise in the street and then have someone tell you that you "dont get it" when you cover your ears. I just have to laugh.
I remember seeing a Pollock at the museum during art school. After staring at it for a few minutes my instructor said "I dont get it, you're on your own with this one".. lol.
Because there is nothing, it is empty, no direction, no expression, no message, nothing, nothing to say, nothing to show, nothing to ask, just a splatter of color.
I like the fast tempo of this clip . The message is so condensed and words synchronize perfectly with the selected images taking us on a quick journey into the making of Modernism . Bravo
This comment should be pinned really. Jackson Pollock's stuff is easy to look at and go "so what" if you are just looking at it on a pc or god forbid, a smartphone. These things are huuuuuuuuuge and if you stare into it long enough, you just kind of fall into it so to speak. In fact, this goes for most abstract art on cavases. Looking at them through photos does no justice and in fact robs it of most of it's character. Visit the exhibition. Take a day off and just go do it. Spend time just staring at stuff and enjoying your thoughts with no disturbances. Y'all won't regret it :)
More than the art, actually. As much more thought and care is put into trying to apply meaning to the meaningless. The depth, passion, and complexity of all the flowery language used to talk about art, especially bad art, is infinitely more interesting than the art itself.
Chaos is not "more complex". It's as simple as a low energy set. That's why it's called chaos. Empty and senseless unless you write into it whatever you wish like writing onto a blank paper. But it's not art. It's psycho-trick. Gotcha?
@@misakarancevic8901 so you agree? Drip art is not complex. It is mindless noise. It is in fact simple, because no strong will effort is behind it. Art that is meaningful, thoughtful and intelligible can be complex and simple and in both instances beautiful.
"...I don't know that I could describe the feeling, but I didn't have to go searching for it either". You just communicated the essence of experiencing Art mentally, physiologically and emotionally regardless of what type of Art it is. Congrats Nerdwriter1, you crushed it!
Thank you so much. I just finished a Fine Arts at our school and we needed to do a presentation on an art movement. We heard separately how this movement came to this one, and this other one came from that one. But I really enjoyed looking at all of them strung together into pretty clear conversation. Great work!
Perhaps a video on Cubism? When I saw it flash up I particularly thought it was interesting in relation to other mediums such as photography and film. However there may not be much of a story here for a video aha so just projecting. Nice Vid man!
There is a big history to paintings and photography, when photography became a thing realistic portrayals of the world with painting lost its meaning, ¿Why try to replicate the world around us when a camera can do that? That's when some artistic movements were born, and that's totally video material! That's a great idea, I'd love a video about cubism!
I'll definitely be posting a video regarding the evolution and impact of Cubism in the near future, please feel free to subscribe and be sure not to miss it!
@@capuchinosofia4771 Several comments says that because of the photography invention, realism was not longer necessary, and therefore art had to change, this is a generally accepted idea, but to be honest is a little bit false. Realism was still popular around that time, and portraits were heavily used by the elite, even today, royals still use paintings instead of photographs, the truth is that the contact with asian and african art played a huge part. Manet, Degas and Monet used to collect japanese ukiyo-e art, Van Gogh said that all the impressionists loved japanese paintings. Also he would say that all his work was based in a certain way in the japanese art. The goal of japanese art wasn't photorealism as the european one, the style of the ukiyo-e was a big influence for them. Is well documented the huge african role in the cubism movement, images.app.goo.gl/dNYf2EfHe2HAqTEE9 images.app.goo.gl/La2PC8K1zaxrYnYH6 . Geometric works of art had a long history in asia and africa, way before the first abstract painters in europe, The first abstract painter Hilma Af klint, used to have certain practices, which had influences from other continents, those practices included meditation and sometimes comsumption of hallucinogic substances. The artists who did that kind of sessions often made geometric works. Kandisky was aslo involved in similar movements. Also the idea that the concepts and styles of the varguards have never been used before is not totally correct, this 1566 painting from G. Archibold could easily pass as a surrealist piece, images.app.goo.gl/AJcgHXGBszkfAuZU8 Some surrealists even thought that the 16th Manierism was their predecessor movement.
Robert Florczak, an artist and illustrator, did a test to his graduate students which consisted in: - Analyse the following painting by Pollock and explain why it's good. His students gave him very eloquent answers, full of compliments. But later he told them that it wasn't really a Pollock painting, it was just a close up of Florczak's studio apron.
that1s because they were induced to come up with arguments. If they were freely walking in a museum, they would probably ignore the "apron" and expend several minutes in front a real pollock"s .
I love your videos on paintings, you've always had a way with words but it translates so well to discussing a canvas and physical art movements like in this essay. Keep up the great work
"I do believe there is a drive in us to take things as far as they can go, and this century of modern art is and exhilarating example of that. it's inspiring how irrepressible human creativity can be" ...and now we have surreal and deep fried memes. human creativity sure is restless and ever changing.
Thank you for mentioning Hilma af Klint. Even if mentioned only briefly, your acknowledging her work is a start to recognizing female artists while stepping towards correcting inequalities in the art world and in its history.
This video is simply beautiful. From how you transition from idea to idea, and somehow still keep it related to the main title, and how the sound is beautifully integrated creates for a stimulating experience. Thank you.
If it wasn't for this channel, I never would have started making video essays myself. Incredibly inspiring, and can make you care about topics you would never think to.
I love your videos about artists! Please do more! Frida Khalo or Margaret Keane would be awesome to do videos on, their art relating to their lives is a rich subject. My favorite art video of yours is about the painting of Jupiter eating his children, honestly bone chilling when you said “chewing” at the end. Keep up the good work and AMAZING editing!
Thank you for mentioning Hilda Klimt! Truly a shame how she didn't want to be known at her time and purposefully released her paintings years after her death....
"Sculpting is a barbaric practice that implies mastery of an art that can not be mastered. I merely free the statues from the stone prison that surrounds them."
That's what I hate about abstract art. Abstract art is only valued as "good" when the painter is famous. Famous painters in modern can do whatever the fuck they like and pretentious art snobs will look at it like it's a masterpiece. It's not, it's a load of drops on a canvas. Even Pollock says he just spills his paint to create absolute shite.
Diepvries11 exactly. It’s only measured by the price someone paid for it. Whereas actual good art can be appreciate by anyone for using the components of drawing or painting ect. Almost anyone can appreciate a beautiful sunset, it takes a special kind of mental gymnastics to appreciate an accident on a canvas.
@@freedomsglory1 If you've made abstract art before you'll understand its value. You can let go of your thoughts about where each line is going and let it happen more subconsciously and still end up creating something that captures your emotions and perspective at the time of creating it.
@@Diepvries11 Abstract art is valued (in an emotional sense) on what you as a viewer feel when you see it. Everyone feels something different and since the painting is interpreted through the eyes of the viewer, the value of a certain painting is something that you can only decide for yourself. Pollock did not say that he created shit, he said that he spilled a bucket of art. If for you, the technical skill of a painter is more important then the feelings it evokes in you, then it is obvious that Pollocks paintings seem like absolute shit, but to other people it might be the best painting they ve ever seen. The problem with abstract art is that how do you decide which piece you put in a museum. How can you or even a small group of people decide what is important and what not in an artistic sense, when abstract arts value is determined by yourself? Big museums show what is important in art history and show regularly changing art installations by more well known contemporary artists (a museum is still a buisness and needs to pull in people). Smaller gallery s and smaller museums are for lesser known artists, it is their chance to become more famous and get the chance to see their art in a famous museum If you are a musician you wont be playing in stadiums when you first start out. You play small concerts until you are better known. Luck also play s a big part in this and how much people you pull in and how big your target group is. I don t believe that any black midi or noise musician will ever be considered good in the eye of the mainstream but it still has emotional value to it s listeners and music nerds As in the music buisness there are a lot of problems with the art buisness. As long as money is a concern and you only have a small group of people deciding on what get s shown and what not (it s the same with the people who make the charts or with the people at big music labels who decide which band is worth their time and money. It s a disgusting thing and it get s in the way of the art but everyone wants to make money. Capitalism does not rewarde the best art but the one that makes the most money) We will never be able to showcase every "good" painting. But saying that art is only valued as "good" if the painter is famous, is in my opinion false. As an artist you don t care for the price that somone else put s on it, you care for making art and hoping to be able to sustain your live by doing what you love. A lot of musicians, especially in more abstract genres, dont make music to become famous (although it is always a nice side effect for any kind of artist) but only for the sake of making music. If you go into art only to become rich and famous, you ve chosen the wrong carreer path. So many now famous artists have only started to gain fame after they already died. Some have even been viewed as shit during their time but that didn t stop them from expressing themselves, their feelings and experiences through their medium of choice.
Lucky enough to live in Canberra. Blue Poles is at my local gallery and it is amazing in person. You get lost in the drips but the "Blue Poles" achor you whenever you do but you are still free to wonder in and out of the drips behind. Really beautiful work. Its the only work of non representative art that my friends really like when they see it.
When I saw "Blue Poles," I was so struck by it, like a fireworks mortar had just gone off in front of me. A big thump; right in my chest. An amazing piece of art.
As an artist, the main reason why I don't prefer "Jackson Polluck Art" or the nonobjective abstract expressionist style of art, is that they lack in the scope of learning I am looking for as not just another artist, but as a scholar who wants to study in depth the meaning behind a work of art. When you reduce a painting down to nothing but squiggles, and lines, and then force the question, "what do you see?" To me it totally destroys my ability to look at a work of art from important details---such as the psychological, metaphorical (because I can't see much metaphor behind nonobjective art other than it just feels lazy), and symbolic viewpoints. I can't stare at a piece of art that holds no solid image together, and come up with any inquisitive topics to discuss, I'm sorry, I just can't. I want to look at works that hold true meaning, and have a story to tell, something tangible, something that can be analyzed deeper, and when an artist neglects to do this, or can't even explain his artwork to his viewers, I feel like this is where an artist fails to be a true artist.
I think the "modern abstract" art is clever way of shifting the focus on to the spectator, like saying - okay now let's see who can come up with most eloquent descriptions and appear smart 😄
I look at that painting, and although I can respect the people who see something in it, I see nothing but a man splashing paint on a canvas and convincing people it's worth something
i think analysis of pollock's drip paintings revealed a fractal nature to the curves within it. it is reminiscent of the branches of a tree that have been abstracted into drip lines. this was before fractals were known mathematically so the instantiation of that in these paintings was based purely on intuition. some people tried to imitate or copy pollock but failed because their paintings lacked the same characteristic fractal structure. disclaimer: i could be mis-remembering a bunch of stuff
Pollock, and Basquiat were not the ones twisting people's arms into paying big money. That was curators and gallery managers and the people they sold to reinforcing their investment by paying yet more for another work from the same person. Then once that happens you get people like Damien Hirst who actually charges people millions. He's running the racket himself.
Incredible video - as a lover of abstract impressionism, I often find that I cannot explain why it speaks to me so much. This video did that! Thank you for your amazing work
Honestly, I can’t explain how nice your video’s are. A lot of good information about art, film, music and more. Next to that the entire video is really well made. And really relaxing to watch
"The more abstract is form, the more clear and direct its appeal"... brilliant! never heard it said that way... abstraction as a concept described so "clear and direct"
aka Advertising. It’s spooky because the slippery slope (of possibly CIA funded, but it wouldn’t even have to be to prove the capitalist drive) of hyper minimalist - ‘mere, conceptual’ AB/Expressionism into ‘mere’ signifiers in a marketplace. Possible trickle down culture from conspicuously consuming logo-art to logo brands include: socialites getting reality shows, tik Tok kids identifying via 5-10 commodities, the Oval Office occupied by a guy steeped in NLP rewarded for manipulating the false qualifications that all his gilded high rise signage implied. Conceptual art is great, but when we play into the hype (media, but also through this nonsense “personal brand” content creator” influencer” that reduces us all to commodities) the very marketplace with excludes most of us (as multi-story, working, imperfect, asymmetrical, messy, dynamic and importantly- Poor in ways that will not be exploitable for “clout”) til these things are millions dollars and the mostly men that are celebrated for making them (aka coming up with the concept that nameless PAs actually fabricate) are too powerful to be touched when they’re violent and the loki ‘genius’ they are perceived to have becomes an elusive thing for less cynical folks still effected by a messy, asymmetrical, sensory world..
Art started as cave paintings - a tool to represent what's outside. Now that there are better ways to do that, it's evolved to represent what's inside the artist. I think it's simple enough.
Pollock was in Mexico City for a time, before he started doing Action Painting. The way Mexico City street workers repaired streets, was by punching holes in the bottom of a large can, attaching the can to the bottom of a broom, then filling it with hot tar and dripping streams of it evenly onto the pavement.
A high wall with a huge crowd of people running toward it, similar to World War Z. Closed my eyes and opened them again and saw a pirate ship. Each time I opened my eyes I saw something completely different... every time.
I once was cleaning an old wall and had to scrape off some rust, old paint, and bird crap. It looked just like that except maybe the staine had more structure.
The point is that what kind of brain is being illustrated? What if the modern human’s brain is anxious and messy?If it is, the production wouldn’t be an expression of art. It would be an expression of madness, chaos and anxiety.
I am telling my son, my 16 year old artist, in the morning to watch your videos: for education, for history, for the experience. Thank you for your videos. What a gift.
I heard once while watching a documentary that Pollock painting was a mathematical insight into what is known as **fractal**. where repeated random pattern emerges in every dimension and every zooming in or out! it was then used in computer graphics and studios to produce what we see today in movies like mountains, terrains, jungles...etc. which follow no distinctive pattern, just randomness!
I really wanna get behind the artist and truly believe every artist has their own form of expression and really really respect the body of work he has created however I personally have never had much of a reaction to these drip paintings, they do show the artists meditative concentration in carefully planting each drip however artistically speaking they are not very appealing.
Wowie Zowie! Very well done! 👏👏👏 What a brilliant distillation of the history of art in just 6 minutes! I’ve watched thousands of RUclips videos and this is probably the first comment I’ve ever written, lol.. that’s how impressed I am. I knew a lot of this stuff, I work in the arts myself.. but to be presented so succinctly yet clearly is a real testament to you all. Thank you, and bravo!
Pollocks drip "paintings" are a wonderful scam that stand as a testament to the sheer gullibility of a class of people that could serve up a cat turd in a martini and call it wonderful because of the quality of the glass.
I come back to your videos not just because of the content but because of how you present it. Your videos about art are art themselves. Thanks for the great content!
So well said. I had the same reaction to that pollack. Id always had a hard time understanding modern art and abstract expressionism until I stood in front of that painting. It floored me. Thanks for picking apart that experience for my brain to comprehend
The Pollock reminds me of the CMB (Cosmic Microwave Background) image. So it struck a chord when you mentioned it was like/felt like pure energy. Great vids.
You don’t have to love them. But I suggest that you keep exploring the art world, because I have found that one’s taste in art changes with time and exposure.
There's an enormous amount of blood sweat and tears that begot these works. Maybe the piece that will open your vista is a sculpture or a bit of film. Admittedly, paintings remain two dimensional for the most part. But one of the things I learned from art studies was of how art itself is a struggle between external expectations and opportunity, and internal lives. For a time opportunities to make a living, or life of art, came only to those who reinforced the will of the 'nobility' but experience does not belong only to those with the money to prove their existence, and in the process of exploring the very process of making art one learns of moments that interact with one's sense of self/being. As an illustration I think some of the impressionists really tried to pick up on something about the experience of being in a place in those moments when it's not about any academic value that an object or figure might have, but about the sensation of light and movement. It's kind of an experience of zen really; about what it's like to be truly present in a moment. But for the most part they come across to me as kind of cheesy and saccharine. So it's ALLL a question of YMMV, but it's all related in some way through history and experiences.
my past self would agree so i would understand, you dont have to be sorry, be comfortable on what your likes and dislikes cus thats what makes you, you
I wouldn't say it's going over your head. It's less about understanding and more about feeling. If it doesn't make you feel anything, that's fine. We all experience life differently. Maybe someday you'll find one that does. Maybe not. That's one of the beauties of art. We all get to experience it differently.
If you want to "understand" it, then take an artist that interests you and start reading about them. A lot of the early 20th century artists also wrote tons of letters to friends and each other, explaining thought processes and what goes into their art, their philosophies and so on.
I love abstract art as much as I love impressionism. For me personally, its all about something looking aesthethically pleasing. Surely, there's a lot of very talentless rubish among abstract art in the past few decades (being that it can be just an excuse to make a smear in a canvass or something along those lines), but guys like Franz Kline, Willem de Kooning, and actually even Pollock himself were all good, inovative artists who had something new to offer, and were all obviously talented (check their non-abstract works if you doubt it). But again, I can only speak for myself and my own tastes.
@Anja Martinez Ah, a good ole' 'if i don't get it, it's not legit'. So are all its enjoyers either liars or brainwashed somehow? :)) Also, not being something specific to 'understand' doesn't make it a scam... For some of us the 'real' stretches beyond the recognizable objects we see with our eyes (well, I'd even go so far as saying that I don't really believe there can be any true 'abstractness' manifested visually, as all possible shapes have some correspondend in reality. With music, for instance, it's a whole different story...) I for one love the work of Kandinsky. It's very lively, I see stories there, energy, the relationship between shapes and colours, his compositions are so... tight? I find it a bit hard to put into words. Compact and elastic all at once. Sometimes there's movement (there's one with a shape reminding me of a pendulum and when I watch it I feel its weight, momentum, the sound it makes...) Btw, I really recommend his book 'On spirituality in art' :) Also, there's a big something to be said about experiencing it LIVE. Figurative, abstract, it's so wholly different to stand in front of the work - not just for the colours and textures that cannot be fully replicated in a photo, but for the SIZE, proportion, how you relate to it in space
I'm writing a thesis on something similar. A good way to understand is that there is two modes of thought; critical and logic thinking vs visionary and fantasy thinking. These abstractions are an artist's attempt to engage with the fantasy function in it's most simple form. The act of painting becomes focused on expression and play as opposed to depicting the real and external world. Its cool
People who like abstract art are broke Americans trying to look unique. How in the bloody hell are you feeling emotions staring at a canvas with paint spilled all over it like a toddler was playing with it. HOW MATE?!!!!?!
They are a visual representation and encapsulation of the vibrational energy of the maker when he/she painted it, mirroring your own vibrational energy. The art of allowing is helpful, but feeling nothing or negative emotions from a piece are also valid insights. Skill is different than representing energy. Although the latter also requires a lot of insight from the artist. It's like mucisians who see colour when they hear music or create music with a colour pattern in mind... the artist tries to convey energy through colour and shapes on canvas.
@@thegardenofeve well, yes, there is abstract music as well. The abstraction offers the ultimate freedom of expressing oneself, no strings attached. By the way, I very much like your answer. My problem with this kind of art is that there is no mimesis in the Aristotelian sense of the word. I need some kind of mimesis. Too much freedom for the artist leaves me with too little freedom to interpret the result.
@@nightrider6136 I can imagine. It can be very uncomfortable when there are no restrictions. It's like when people have total freedom they fear it because it means they have to take responsibility and everything feels uncertain. I don't mean to frame this negatively on you, because I feel much the same. I know that restrictions in life can give us a feeling of comfort and ease, because we have a reference point and boundaries. Very interesting concept and feelings to talk about.
@@nightrider6136 hmm. After some more consideration, would you agree that the mimesis in such abstract art is the energy of the artist and the energy of the witness, instead of previous realist artforms (or even abstract art but with figures) where the mimesis is a representation of what we can see with our eyes? I mean, realism is a representation of what we perceive is outside of us, and the more abstract a work, is the more a representation of what we perceive is inside of us?
@@thegardenofeveah, well, i am not sure there is a good answer to this. However pure 'energy' does not seem enough to count for mimesis. And I am not talking about just realism. Take surrealism, impressionism, Berlin secession, fauvism, expressionism, pop art, even Hieronymus Bosch would do - they all communicate with recognisable shapes and forms. Communication works with recognisable signals. Otherwise you have just colors and sounds. Good enough in themselves but communicating nothing apart from what they are. It is like writing a novel with random words - a very possible piece of art but how many of them would you like to read?
Pollock's drip paintings to me is like when you look up at a your popcorn ceiling and start to see patterns and your brain just imagines a story or a face. When ever I see one of his paintings I get that feeling.
Because we at heart are children, and throwing random crap against something and calling it art is what children do all the time. And other children love it.
@@ryancroy children don’t really give af. You’ve failed the challenge. Theres no meaning in the art piece that stands alone. Appreciation towards the history or artist shouldn’t be the thing that makes art meaningful.
@leaf I think the art piece itself should stand alone and be meaningful by itself. Not that one can’t appreciate the artist or the history of art, but this kind of postmodern concept that anything is art just makes the art piece itself meaningless. I am of the belief that certain rules that one has to adhere to only brings out a greater challenge to human creativity.
I think gatekeeping what is and isn't "true art" is a lot more pretentious than someone painting simply to express themselves and not to impress anyone else.
Hey I hope you see this comment. Because of this I just found my favorite artist. I saw one of this art two years ago in a English class. From that day on, I realized that I was into art. But I never found out what the art or the artists name was, until now. So a big thank you to you.
Art is communication. Some people simply cant find the right words to describe their feelings...Thats why they draw or paint. to express those emotions. That is the point of Pullocks Art, That is the point of Abstract Art itself.
Thats my chilhood in reverse. I started painting 'abstractions' when I was 2 years old and ended up painting 'realisms' by the age of 18. I am serious.
![[#2024MAMA] BIGBANG (빅뱅) - 뱅뱅뱅 (BANG BANG BANG) + FANTASTIC BABY | Mnet 241123 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EQsYfiPR9uM/mqdefault.jpg)
i honestly wish you made a series entirely dedicated to specific art movements and their respective representatives. you really have a fascinating way of explaining how things came to be
Yes!!!!!
Yess, I'd love that!!
+1, i love learning about art and the cultures that create it
Yes please! I tried doing an online art history class and it’s boring me numb. A whole series like this would really be perfect.
I agree. And please, go slow. As someone who was never brought into contact with art as a child, all of these things are new to me.
the sound editing in this video is phenomenal.
the beeps and ambiance are so satisfying. he always does such a good job editing his vids
Especially the burp at 00:51 😅
His videos’ attention to subtle detail is as phenomenal as the details he breaks down in the videos
Joshua Chew so true!
With a bit more cowbell would be perfect
Do you ever just open a new nerdwriter video absentmindedly and then promptly close it and add to watch later because you need to save it for your undivided attention
always!!
I have JUST done that
Jackie Plantier I don’t...
Because when I click on one, all other things in my life don’t matter and I pay full attention nonetheless!
This is my first video on from this channel and I did that.
LOL indeed, this video has been in my watch later list for several months now, but today I decided to watch it
The time that took to edit the sound in this video is the real art I can feel. Though may go unnoticed, I just think its Beautiful.
Sound design is what I love about these videos.
@@firstprimehunter true
@@firstprimehunter agleed
I wonder how much this shift in art was a reaction to the invention of the camera.
I mean. A ton. Imagine you'd only know your president from paintings. Only remember your parents from paintings. The market would be way bigger
Photography: Exists.
Art: Parry this you filthy casual!!
Big
Picasso said “photography has come at the right moment to liberate painting, painting is freedom! “
@@stick-itproductions.3307 *parry
Feel like I'm oblivious to fine art. there are always people talking about pieces that made them feel deep emotion and had them standing in awe for several minutes. I've been to several galleries and never felt that. seen a few Pollocks and never felt they were 'staring back at me'. To me they're pleasantly energetic squiggly lines. Frustrating that everyone else sees this profound depth I'm apparently blind to.
@Stealinbread art shouldn't be judged on skill
@Stealinbread I'm not saying i like modern art it's not my think but you can't classify art it's about expression
@Stealinbread yes but you must agree it's a very personal subjective thing, I would be more inclined to judge an artist's ability in a achieving a goal
Stealinbread yeah and artists are supposed to break those rules and many of them do lol
Stealinbread Art isn’t supposed to be a test of skill. The point of a painting isn’t to be better than others.
It is no coincidence this all began when photography was invented.
@@33sesaa Well of all a sudden, you have a new technique that can represent reality better than paintings. So painting can't be about that anymore.
Industrially produced paint came around this same time, allowing artists to work more freely out in the world and taking some of the manual labor out of the creation of a painting. Less construction and more curation.
Great point
That's true but it can be overstated - reductive.
Exactly
“Paintings no longer represent...Today it has become the role of the painting to look at the spectator and ask them: what do you represent?”
- thanks so much for introducing me to this quote from Wolfgang Paalen. It’s helped me understand so much of what I’ve felt when looking at the abstract.
In that case the painting is no longer a piece of art. I am.
"It is the spectator, and not life, that art represents" or something like that, from the preface of the picture of dorian life
pretentious as fuck
@@justustherighteous371 Fair enough yo wouldn't understand
Pfffft "its not the artist that must have talent, you must project your own talent into the pointless scribbles!"
I know miniature painters that do Dungeons and Dragons figurines with more color understanding and talent than Pollock. these talentless hacks devolved the medium so much I cant even begin to explain it.
Imagine hearing the worst traffic noise in the street and then have someone tell you that you "dont get it" when you cover your ears.
I just have to laugh.
I remember seeing a Pollock at the museum during art school. After staring at it for a few minutes my instructor said "I dont get it, you're on your own with this one".. lol.
Because there is nothing, it is empty, no direction, no expression, no message, nothing, nothing to say, nothing to show, nothing to ask, just a splatter of color.
ON THE OTHER HAND though, maybe its beauty lies in its nothingness, inside its emptiness
I'm just tryna play devil's advocate here, don't mind me
I have to admit that I can no longer enjoy a traditional paintings, consider them "not an art".
r/things that never happened
I like the fast tempo of this clip . The message is so condensed and words synchronize perfectly with the selected images taking us on a quick journey into the making of Modernism . Bravo
Farid Fadel bravo is the world I would use for this whole channel.
@@aadi_tyahhh Modernism with a capital M is an umbrella term under which many isms of the 20th c may be listed
Not quite my tempo.
I wish he had slowed down a little. The whole point of how the painting grabbed him would've been better expressed with a smidge slower pacing.
I was surprised how physically large that painting was when I saw it in person
Kamelpasa Could you tell me where it is ?
@@thomascatty379 I don't know if it is there permanently now but I saw it in new york
This wasn't mentioned in the video, so the painting is "One: Number 31, 1950" and it's size is 2.7 x 5.3 m
@@thomascatty379 It's at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York. And it's not the unique masterpiece of their collection, to say the least.
This comment should be pinned really. Jackson Pollock's stuff is easy to look at and go "so what" if you are just looking at it on a pc or god forbid, a smartphone. These things are huuuuuuuuuge and if you stare into it long enough, you just kind of fall into it so to speak. In fact, this goes for most abstract art on cavases. Looking at them through photos does no justice and in fact robs it of most of it's character. Visit the exhibition. Take a day off and just go do it. Spend time just staring at stuff and enjoying your thoughts with no disturbances. Y'all won't regret it :)
Wassily Kandinsky influenced by:
-the impressionists
-the fauvisits
-music
-GEOMETRIC SPIRITUALITY OF THEOSOPHY
He steal Hilma Van K
GREED
Hilma af Klint did it first tho
i tend to think artists like pollock and Yves Klein are either on crack or the art is their crack
Great Artist do what?
Nerdwriter reminds me of the artistry that the analysis of art can have, possibly just as much as the art being analyzed.
Ekphrasis my dude. If you like this kind of thing, give Walter Pater a look.
rmcewan10 Cheers mate
read some of the collection of essays: "cutural amnesia"
After so many rage merchants and "sceptics" bitched and whined about modern art... I find it refreshing to see your take... In other words. Thank you.
More than the art, actually. As much more thought and care is put into trying to apply meaning to the meaningless. The depth, passion, and complexity of all the flowery language used to talk about art, especially bad art, is infinitely more interesting than the art itself.
This is just really well made content. It’s obvious how much care goes into each of these videos.
This reminds me of Chaos Theory. Things going from simple to complex until there is nothing left but uninterpretable static noise.
Yes, you have a point. Uninspiring, noisy, egocentric. Me, myself and I. And my precious "emotio s". Empty filth. Naked emperor
@@sebastianhauptmann4253 agreed. I'm not against chaos and complexity. There's definite beauty in it :)
Chaos is not "more complex". It's as simple as a low energy set. That's why it's called chaos. Empty and senseless unless you write into it whatever you wish like writing onto a blank paper. But it's not art. It's psycho-trick. Gotcha?
@@misakarancevic8901 so you agree? Drip art is not complex. It is mindless noise. It is in fact simple, because no strong will effort is behind it. Art that is meaningful, thoughtful and intelligible can be complex and simple and in both instances beautiful.
I'm the idiot that didn't understand half of what you guys are saying
I don’t enjoy modern art, but from lately what I learned is that I can appreciate it. Thank you for sharing
"...I don't know that I could describe the feeling, but I didn't have to go searching for it either". You just communicated the essence of experiencing Art mentally, physiologically and emotionally regardless of what type of Art it is.
Congrats Nerdwriter1, you crushed it!
Agreed!
❤
Thank you so much. I just finished a Fine Arts at our school and we needed to do a presentation on an art movement. We heard separately how this movement came to this one, and this other one came from that one. But I really enjoyed looking at all of them strung together into pretty clear conversation. Great work!
And now we have arrived to the pinnacle of modern art
I II
II L
@Kurt Barryman ow the edge
@Kurt Barryman is that's why they did call you ugly in school?
Fuck you
@Kurt Barryman I don't know if I didn't understood right because english is not my first language or because it was just as stupid as it seemed
@Kurt Barryman Enlighten me, how might one arrive at any "objective" definition of beauty?
Perhaps a video on Cubism? When I saw it flash up I particularly thought it was interesting in relation to other mediums such as photography and film. However there may not be much of a story here for a video aha so just projecting. Nice Vid man!
There is a big history to paintings and photography, when photography became a thing realistic portrayals of the world with painting lost its meaning, ¿Why try to replicate the world around us when a camera can do that?
That's when some artistic movements were born, and that's totally video material!
That's a great idea, I'd love a video about cubism!
Luchism
I'll definitely be posting a video regarding the evolution and impact of Cubism in the near future, please feel free to subscribe and be sure not to miss it!
@@capuchinosofia4771 Several comments says that because of the photography invention, realism was not longer necessary, and therefore art had to change, this is a generally accepted idea, but to be honest is a little bit false. Realism was still popular around that time, and portraits were heavily used by the elite, even today, royals still use paintings instead of photographs, the truth is that the contact with asian and african art played a huge part. Manet, Degas and Monet used to collect japanese ukiyo-e art, Van Gogh said that all the impressionists loved japanese paintings. Also he would say that all his work was based in a certain way in the japanese art. The goal of japanese art wasn't photorealism as the european one, the style of the ukiyo-e was a big influence for them.
Is well documented the huge african role in the cubism movement,
images.app.goo.gl/dNYf2EfHe2HAqTEE9
images.app.goo.gl/La2PC8K1zaxrYnYH6
.
Geometric works of art had a long history in asia and africa, way before the first abstract painters in europe,
The first abstract painter Hilma Af klint, used to have certain practices, which had influences from other continents, those practices included meditation and sometimes comsumption of hallucinogic substances. The artists who did that kind of sessions often made geometric works. Kandisky was aslo involved in similar movements.
Also the idea that the concepts and styles of the varguards have never been used before is not totally correct, this 1566 painting from G. Archibold could easily pass as a surrealist piece,
images.app.goo.gl/AJcgHXGBszkfAuZU8
Some surrealists even thought that the 16th Manierism was their predecessor movement.
Robert Florczak, an artist and illustrator, did a test to his graduate students which consisted in:
- Analyse the following painting by Pollock and explain why it's good.
His students gave him very eloquent answers, full of compliments.
But later he told them that it wasn't really a Pollock painting, it was just a close up of Florczak's studio apron.
Where did you find this story?
@@philomath6190 A video in youtube by PragerU called 'Why is Modern Art so Bad?
'
I watched the video and If you know Pollock's art you could definitly see it wasn't a pollock.
@NS I To be fair, you did already know what it was. The students weren't expecting to be lied to.
that1s because they were induced to come up with arguments. If they were freely walking in a museum, they would probably ignore the "apron" and expend several minutes in front a real pollock"s .
I love your videos on paintings, you've always had a way with words but it translates so well to discussing a canvas and physical art movements like in this essay. Keep up the great work
"I do believe there is a drive in us to take things as far as they can go, and this century of modern art is and exhilarating example of that. it's inspiring how irrepressible human creativity can be"
...and now we have surreal and deep fried memes. human creativity sure is restless and ever changing.
Thank you for mentioning Hilma af Klint. Even if mentioned only briefly, your acknowledging her work is a start to recognizing female artists while stepping towards correcting inequalities in the art world and in its history.
Damn that’s crazyyyyyyyyy
This video is simply beautiful. From how you transition from idea to idea, and somehow still keep it related to the main title, and how the sound is beautifully integrated creates for a stimulating experience. Thank you.
If it wasn't for this channel, I never would have started making video essays myself. Incredibly inspiring, and can make you care about topics you would never think to.
bruh this was so good, the editing was amazingly well thought out and the narration was immersive and interesting throughout. ur a legend
Your commentary focuses my thoughts, a nerdwriter video in the morning and I'm ready for the day.
I love your videos about artists! Please do more! Frida Khalo or Margaret Keane would be awesome to do videos on, their art relating to their lives is a rich subject. My favorite art video of yours is about the painting of Jupiter eating his children, honestly bone chilling when you said “chewing” at the end. Keep up the good work and AMAZING editing!
Love Keane but im sorry i am not a fan of Frida....
Respect your opinion though 👍
Favorite artist is klimt
If you love learning about art and artists, I hope you'll subscribe to my channel for full on art-centric content!
Was it Jupiter or Saturn? I read in Greek mythology that Saturn aka Chronos ate his children.
Thank you for mentioning Hilda Klimt! Truly a shame how she didn't want to be known at her time and purposefully released her paintings years after her death....
_I DON'T PAINT, I SPILL MY BUCKET OF ART..._
*~ Jackson Pollock*
"Sculpting is a barbaric practice that implies mastery of an art that can not be mastered. I merely free the statues from the stone prison that surrounds them."
That's what I hate about abstract art. Abstract art is only valued as "good" when the painter is famous. Famous painters in modern can do whatever the fuck they like and pretentious art snobs will look at it like it's a masterpiece. It's not, it's a load of drops on a canvas. Even Pollock says he just spills his paint to create absolute shite.
Diepvries11 exactly.
It’s only measured by the price someone paid for it.
Whereas actual good art can be appreciate by anyone for using the components of drawing or painting ect.
Almost anyone can appreciate a beautiful sunset, it takes a special kind of mental gymnastics to appreciate an accident on a canvas.
@@freedomsglory1 If you've made abstract art before you'll understand its value. You can let go of your thoughts about where each line is going and let it happen more subconsciously and still end up creating something that captures your emotions and perspective at the time of creating it.
@@Diepvries11 Abstract art is valued (in an emotional sense) on what you as a viewer feel when you see it. Everyone feels something different and since the painting is interpreted through the eyes of the viewer, the value of a certain painting is something that you can only decide for yourself. Pollock did not say that he created shit, he said that he spilled a bucket of art.
If for you, the technical skill of a painter is more important then the feelings it evokes in you, then it is obvious that Pollocks paintings seem like absolute shit, but to other people it might be the best painting they ve ever seen.
The problem with abstract art is that how do you decide which piece you put in a museum. How can you or even a small group of people decide what is important and what not in an artistic sense, when abstract arts value is determined by yourself?
Big museums show what is important in art history and show regularly changing art installations by more well known contemporary artists (a museum is still a buisness and needs to pull in people). Smaller gallery s and smaller museums are for lesser known artists, it is their chance to become more famous and get the chance to see their art in a famous museum
If you are a musician you wont be playing in stadiums when you first start out. You play small concerts until you are better known. Luck also play s a big part in this and how much people you pull in and how big your target group is. I don t believe that any black midi or noise musician will ever be considered good in the eye of the mainstream but it still has emotional value to it s listeners and music nerds
As in the music buisness there are a lot of problems with the art buisness. As long as money is a concern and you only have a small group of people deciding on what get s shown and what not (it s the same with the people who make the charts or with the people at big music labels who decide which band is worth their time and money. It s a disgusting thing and it get s in the way of the art but everyone wants to make money. Capitalism does not rewarde the best art but the one that makes the most money)
We will never be able to showcase every "good" painting. But saying that art is only valued as "good" if the painter is famous, is in my opinion false.
As an artist you don t care for the price that somone else put s on it, you care for making art and hoping to be able to sustain your live by doing what you love. A lot of musicians, especially in more abstract genres, dont make music to become famous (although it is always a nice side effect for any kind of artist) but only for the sake of making music. If you go into art only to become rich and famous, you ve chosen the wrong carreer path. So many now famous artists have only started to gain fame after they already died. Some have even been viewed as shit during their time but that didn t stop them from expressing themselves, their feelings and experiences through their medium of choice.
Lucky enough to live in Canberra. Blue Poles is at my local gallery and it is amazing in person. You get lost in the drips but the "Blue Poles" achor you whenever you do but you are still free to wonder in and out of the drips behind. Really beautiful work. Its the only work of non representative art that my friends really like when they see it.
When I saw "Blue Poles," I was so struck by it, like a fireworks mortar had just gone off in front of me. A big thump; right in my chest. An amazing piece of art.
Blue poles is my favorite Pollock and I have always wanted to see it in person
It kills it for me when i imagine artist just splashing color onto the canvas and not giving a shit if it represents something or if it has meaning...
that's abstract art for you :)
@@ecstaticmeatball8537 brainwashed sheep
@@alpacamale2909 pretty ironic cause you think that every art has meaning
irrelevant.
Holy fuck, the cut at 4:50...Nerdwriter, I think you're the most talented editor on this website.
Nausicaä ♡
As an artist, the main reason why I don't prefer "Jackson Polluck Art" or the nonobjective abstract expressionist style of art, is that they lack in the scope of learning I am looking for as not just another artist, but as a scholar who wants to study in depth the meaning behind a work of art. When you reduce a painting down to nothing but squiggles, and lines, and then force the question, "what do you see?" To me it totally destroys my ability to look at a work of art from important details---such as the psychological, metaphorical (because I can't see much metaphor behind nonobjective art other than it just feels lazy), and symbolic viewpoints. I can't stare at a piece of art that holds no solid image together, and come up with any inquisitive topics to discuss, I'm sorry, I just can't. I want to look at works that hold true meaning, and have a story to tell, something tangible, something that can be analyzed deeper, and when an artist neglects to do this, or can't even explain his artwork to his viewers, I feel like this is where an artist fails to be a true artist.
i keep coming back to this video... your choice of words, the sound design, the framing, it’s just all so brilliant
I think the "modern abstract" art is clever way of shifting the focus on to the spectator, like saying - okay now let's see who can come up with most eloquent descriptions and appear smart 😄
@@GeneSargentArt of course, he's not saying it isn't art. He's saying it's terrible art
I look at that painting, and although I can respect the people who see something in it, I see nothing but a man splashing paint on a canvas and convincing people it's worth something
i think analysis of pollock's drip paintings revealed a fractal nature to the curves within it. it is reminiscent of the branches of a tree that have been abstracted into drip lines. this was before fractals were known mathematically so the instantiation of that in these paintings was based purely on intuition. some people tried to imitate or copy pollock but failed because their paintings lacked the same characteristic fractal structure. disclaimer: i could be mis-remembering a bunch of stuff
Pollock, and Basquiat were not the ones twisting people's arms into paying big money. That was curators and gallery managers and the people they sold to reinforcing their investment by paying yet more for another work from the same person. Then once that happens you get people like Damien Hirst who actually charges people millions. He's running the racket himself.
For the CIA. Not kidding. Public record.
Incredible video - as a lover of abstract impressionism, I often find that I cannot explain why it speaks to me so much. This video did that! Thank you for your amazing work
It's because of videos like these that I decided to make videos on art! Thank you so much Nerdwriter!!
you do great work!
@@AcolytesOfHorror Aww thank you! That's much appreciated :)
Just subbed
I'll check your vids after this one
Just subbed, cool channel
New Nerwriter video means I drop everything and have to watch it :3
UWU :3
Absolutely. The man is good.
G2
Honestly, I can’t explain how nice your video’s are. A lot of good information about art, film, music and more. Next to that the entire video is really well made. And really relaxing to watch
"The more abstract is form, the more clear and direct its appeal"... brilliant! never heard it said that way... abstraction as a concept described so "clear and direct"
aka Advertising. It’s spooky because the slippery slope (of possibly CIA funded, but it wouldn’t even have to be to prove the capitalist drive) of hyper minimalist - ‘mere, conceptual’ AB/Expressionism into ‘mere’ signifiers in a marketplace. Possible trickle down culture from conspicuously consuming logo-art to logo brands include: socialites getting reality shows, tik Tok kids identifying via 5-10 commodities, the Oval Office occupied by a guy steeped in NLP rewarded for manipulating the false qualifications that all his gilded high rise signage implied. Conceptual art is great, but when we play into the hype (media, but also through this nonsense “personal brand” content creator” influencer” that reduces us all to commodities) the very marketplace with excludes most of us (as multi-story, working, imperfect, asymmetrical, messy, dynamic and importantly- Poor in ways that will not be exploitable for “clout”) til these things are millions dollars and the mostly men that are celebrated for making them (aka coming up with the concept that nameless PAs actually fabricate) are too powerful to be touched when they’re violent and the loki ‘genius’ they are perceived to have becomes an elusive thing for less cynical folks still effected by a messy, asymmetrical, sensory world..
@@coastaf take your meds.
You should consider longer format videos. You are thoughtful as expressed in your voice. You know your stuff. The more of you, the better.
I use to hate his paintings, but recently, they're are starting to grow on me.
Everyone says that after not liking Pollock. Even my Dad!!!
I’m so so happy you mentioned Hilma Af Klint, bless you
Art started as cave paintings - a tool to represent what's outside. Now that there are better ways to do that, it's evolved to represent what's inside the artist. I think it's simple enough.
Beautifully said
Pollock was in Mexico City for a time, before he started doing Action Painting. The way Mexico City street workers repaired streets, was by punching holes in the bottom of a large can, attaching the can to the bottom of a broom, then filling it with hot tar and dripping streams of it evenly onto the pavement.
The conclusion to the video moved me on a spiritual level. Thank you for doing what you do.
Your art views videos are my favourite. I love these. I learn so much. Thank you.
Agreed! They are very inspiring!
“I could feel it looking at me.”
I know, right? Only way that would happen for me is if I tripping. Otherwise, it is what it is. Paint drips.
This video and the words and the art that you used, gave me almost 7 minutes of complete happiness!
Nerdwriter: It has no objects from our world at all
Me: *spies vulva"
There is also clearly a head in there? (combine those two)
I thought I saw a Stormtrooper.
I saw a dolphin.
A high wall with a huge crowd of people running toward it, similar to World War Z. Closed my eyes and opened them again and saw a pirate ship. Each time I opened my eyes I saw something completely different... every time.
Congrats! That's apophenia. One of the beginning stages of schizophrenia.
If a piece of art grabs you and draws you in, makes you question, then that's what it's all about for me.
When I see Pollocks paintings, I always have to think about Nietzsches quote "if you stare into the abyss, the abyss stares back at you".
We need more content such as this, thanks Nerdwriter, I love this!
I once was cleaning an old wall and had to scrape off some rust, old paint, and bird crap. It looked just like that except maybe the staine had more structure.
Abstract expressionism is the human brain trying to illustrate itself
Key word "trying"
The point is that what kind of brain is being illustrated? What if the modern human’s brain is anxious and messy?If it is, the production wouldn’t be an expression of art. It would be an expression of madness, chaos and anxiety.
melika amiri art is an expression tho so wtf ru saying?
This is a bit pretentious
Only in the moment(s) the art is made, then comes a new try or representation
Jackson Pollock drips the hardest
Dudes got crazy drip
Best video I have seen to show someone about modern art.
I wish you put the names of all the paintings you used in this
Thanks for hooking me onto Chris Zabriskie. My study playlist just got bigger
I am telling my son, my 16 year old artist, in the morning to watch your videos: for education, for history, for the experience. Thank you for your videos. What a gift.
I heard once while watching a documentary that Pollock painting was a mathematical insight into what is known as **fractal**. where repeated random pattern emerges in every dimension and every zooming in or out!
it was then used in computer graphics and studios to produce what we see today in movies like mountains, terrains, jungles...etc. which follow no distinctive pattern, just randomness!
I really wanna get behind the artist and truly believe every artist has their own form of expression and really really respect the body of work he has created however I personally have never had much of a reaction to these drip paintings, they do show the artists meditative concentration in carefully planting each drip however artistically speaking they are not very appealing.
Wowie Zowie! Very well done! 👏👏👏
What a brilliant distillation of the history of art in just 6 minutes!
I’ve watched thousands of RUclips videos and this is probably the first comment I’ve ever written, lol.. that’s how impressed I am. I knew a lot of this stuff, I work in the arts myself.. but to be presented so succinctly yet clearly is a real testament to you all.
Thank you, and bravo!
Classical art is picture worth of thousand word
Modern art is thousand word to explain a picture.
You mean a thousand words to explain your made-up fiction about what the picture means (since it doesn't mean anything).
Pollocks drip "paintings" are a wonderful scam that stand as a testament to the sheer gullibility of a class of people that could serve up a cat turd in a martini and call it wonderful because of the quality of the glass.
I come back to your videos not just because of the content but because of how you present it. Your videos about art are art themselves. Thanks for the great content!
Why do I get so invested to the point of almost tears of pride/pure emotion everytime I watch one of you videos? ... Great work
relax
I really liked this! It also reminded me of how rapid and prolific meme content/creation has changed across social media platforms over time.
So well said. I had the same reaction to that pollack. Id always had a hard time understanding modern art and abstract expressionism until I stood in front of that painting. It floored me. Thanks for picking apart that experience for my brain to comprehend
What really explains Jackson Pollock is that he was a drunk.
Ayyy I saw you sneak Night Cafe in there ;)
Night hawks? Or is that a different painting? Lol. I didn't see it
@@ryanyesman7664 He means the one with the pool table at 2:27, Nerdwriter did a vid on it a while back.
my apologies, it is 2:29
This is the first time I've ever veiwed those drip paintings with anything other than contempt and ridicule. Thank you.
The Pollock reminds me of the CMB (Cosmic Microwave Background) image. So it struck a chord when you mentioned it was like/felt like pure energy. Great vids.
I am sorry but I cannot find myself the strength to love these new movements in the arts. I just do not understand them.
You don’t have to love them. But I suggest that you keep exploring the art world, because I have found that one’s taste in art changes with time and exposure.
There's an enormous amount of blood sweat and tears that begot these works. Maybe the piece that will open your vista is a sculpture or a bit of film. Admittedly, paintings remain two dimensional for the most part. But one of the things I learned from art studies was of how art itself is a struggle between external expectations and opportunity, and internal lives. For a time opportunities to make a living, or life of art, came only to those who reinforced the will of the 'nobility' but experience does not belong only to those with the money to prove their existence, and in the process of exploring the very process of making art one learns of moments that interact with one's sense of self/being. As an illustration I think some of the impressionists really tried to pick up on something about the experience of being in a place in those moments when it's not about any academic value that an object or figure might have, but about the sensation of light and movement. It's kind of an experience of zen really; about what it's like to be truly present in a moment. But for the most part they come across to me as kind of cheesy and saccharine. So it's ALLL a question of YMMV, but it's all related in some way through history and experiences.
Same I can't love them
my past self would agree so i would understand, you dont have to be sorry, be comfortable on what your likes and dislikes cus thats what makes you, you
There is nothing to understand & nothing to apologise about, "modern art" is garbage.
“How we got from wisecrack to nerd writer” Jackson pollock.
Thank you for making me understand the bigger picture of “that one painting” everyone said they could have done
Personally i just don't understand abstract art. That's not to say that there is only one understanding, but it just totally goes over my head.
I wouldn't say it's going over your head. It's less about understanding and more about feeling. If it doesn't make you feel anything, that's fine. We all experience life differently. Maybe someday you'll find one that does. Maybe not. That's one of the beauties of art. We all get to experience it differently.
@@micahkafka Thanks, that's a good way to look at it.
If you want to "understand" it, then take an artist that interests you and start reading about them. A lot of the early 20th century artists also wrote tons of letters to friends and each other, explaining thought processes and what goes into their art, their philosophies and so on.
I love abstract art as much as I love impressionism. For me personally, its all about something looking aesthethically pleasing. Surely, there's a lot of very talentless rubish among abstract art in the past few decades (being that it can be just an excuse to make a smear in a canvass or something along those lines), but guys like Franz Kline, Willem de Kooning, and actually even Pollock himself were all good, inovative artists who had something new to offer, and were all obviously talented (check their non-abstract works if you doubt it).
But again, I can only speak for myself and my own tastes.
@Anja Martinez Ah, a good ole' 'if i don't get it, it's not legit'. So are all its enjoyers either liars or brainwashed somehow? :))
Also, not being something specific to 'understand' doesn't make it a scam...
For some of us the 'real' stretches beyond the recognizable objects we see with our eyes (well, I'd even go so far as saying that I don't really believe there can be any true 'abstractness' manifested visually, as all possible shapes have some correspondend in reality. With music, for instance, it's a whole different story...)
I for one love the work of Kandinsky. It's very lively, I see stories there, energy, the relationship between shapes and colours, his compositions are so... tight? I find it a bit hard to put into words. Compact and elastic all at once. Sometimes there's movement (there's one with a shape reminding me of a pendulum and when I watch it I feel its weight, momentum, the sound it makes...)
Btw, I really recommend his book 'On spirituality in art' :)
Also, there's a big something to be said about experiencing it LIVE. Figurative, abstract, it's so wholly different to stand in front of the work - not just for the colours and textures that cannot be fully replicated in a photo, but for the SIZE, proportion, how you relate to it in space
0:41 it made me feel something too. it made me feel angry and insulted.
SAAAAME!
This is it.
Excellent demonstration of development and emergence of Modern Art. Thank you
Greetings from East Anglia in England.
Honestly... I hate drip paintings
Good for you
Not sure I hate it, but I do find it hard to accept art that isn't in some way, beautiful and Pollock is not beautiful.
@@Outland9000 I guess that is a better way of putting it
@@Outland9000 sounds like someone is stating their subjective opinions as fact. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder my friend
@@Trunks1200 I didn't say otherwise.
Old art: Emulate reality
New Art: Distort reality
Reality as one would describe it via a photograph? The philosophy of photography is a deep subject on its own.
I'm writing a thesis on something similar. A good way to understand is that there is two modes of thought; critical and logic thinking vs visionary and fantasy thinking. These abstractions are an artist's attempt to engage with the fantasy function in it's most simple form. The act of painting becomes focused on expression and play as opposed to depicting the real and external world.
Its cool
more like: interpret reality
@@flo84floflo84 nah
But why is distorting reality a bad thing`???
I'm a painter. I'm a realist. But I too LOVE Pollock's work!
People who like abstract art are broke Americans trying to look unique. How in the bloody hell are you feeling emotions staring at a canvas with paint spilled all over it like a toddler was playing with it. HOW MATE?!!!!?!
Right
I hate paintings asking me "What do YOU represent?" Especially if they do not represent anything in particular.
They are a visual representation and encapsulation of the vibrational energy of the maker when he/she painted it, mirroring your own vibrational energy. The art of allowing is helpful, but feeling nothing or negative emotions from a piece are also valid insights. Skill is different than representing energy. Although the latter also requires a lot of insight from the artist. It's like mucisians who see colour when they hear music or create music with a colour pattern in mind... the artist tries to convey energy through colour and shapes on canvas.
@@thegardenofeve well, yes, there is abstract music as well. The abstraction offers the ultimate freedom of expressing oneself, no strings attached. By the way, I very much like your answer. My problem with this kind of art is that there is no mimesis in the Aristotelian sense of the word. I need some kind of mimesis. Too much freedom for the artist leaves me with too little freedom to interpret the result.
@@nightrider6136 I can imagine. It can be very uncomfortable when there are no restrictions. It's like when people have total freedom they fear it because it means they have to take responsibility and everything feels uncertain. I don't mean to frame this negatively on you, because I feel much the same. I know that restrictions in life can give us a feeling of comfort and ease, because we have a reference point and boundaries. Very interesting concept and feelings to talk about.
@@nightrider6136 hmm. After some more consideration, would you agree that the mimesis in such abstract art is the energy of the artist and the energy of the witness, instead of previous realist artforms (or even abstract art but with figures) where the mimesis is a representation of what we can see with our eyes? I mean, realism is a representation of what we perceive is outside of us, and the more abstract a work, is the more a representation of what we perceive is inside of us?
@@thegardenofeveah, well, i am not sure there is a good answer to this. However pure 'energy' does not seem enough to count for mimesis. And I am not talking about just realism. Take surrealism, impressionism, Berlin secession, fauvism, expressionism, pop art, even Hieronymus Bosch would do - they all communicate with recognisable shapes and forms. Communication works with recognisable signals. Otherwise you have just colors and sounds. Good enough in themselves but communicating nothing apart from what they are. It is like writing a novel with random words - a very possible piece of art but how many of them would you like to read?
Pollock's drip paintings to me is like when you look up at a your popcorn ceiling and start to see patterns and your brain just imagines a story or a face. When ever I see one of his paintings I get that feeling.
"I'm the shit, ooh
I need a mop to clean the floor, it's too much drip, ooh"
-- Jackson Pollock in the Savage remix
I'd like to issue a challenge, defend Jackson Pollock and weird art like a blank canvas as a finished piece without sounding pretentious.
Because we at heart are children, and throwing random crap against something and calling it art is what children do all the time.
And other children love it.
@@ryancroy children don’t really give af. You’ve failed the challenge. Theres no meaning in the art piece that stands alone. Appreciation towards the history or artist shouldn’t be the thing that makes art meaningful.
@@lordawesometony2764 Yeah, I was reaching.
Can't really defend this crap.
@leaf I think the art piece itself should stand alone and be meaningful by itself. Not that one can’t appreciate the artist or the history of art, but this kind of postmodern concept that anything is art just makes the art piece itself meaningless. I am of the belief that certain rules that one has to adhere to only brings out a greater challenge to human creativity.
I think gatekeeping what is and isn't "true art" is a lot more pretentious than someone painting simply to express themselves and not to impress anyone else.
Hey I hope you see this comment. Because of this I just found my favorite artist. I saw one of this art two years ago in a English class. From that day on, I realized that I was into art. But I never found out what the art or the artists name was, until now. So a big thank you to you.
“I don’t know how this made me feel, I can’t describe it...”
Disappointment
Art is communication. Some people simply cant find the right words to describe their feelings...Thats why they draw or paint. to express those emotions. That is the point of Pullocks Art, That is the point of Abstract Art itself.
The painting simply boasts to its observers: *"I am Simplicity, but you cannot copy Me."*
i believe that the editing and sound design of this video deserves a video about itself
Painting: "what do you represent"
Me: "ambivalence, I guess?"
Well done for including Hilma Af Klint XD awesome summary of modern art!
@Nerdwriter1 : I reserve your videos for late night watching to give my undivided attention... always worth it ! Always my favourite youtube channel.
One of my favourite videos of yours, thanks!
Thats my chilhood in reverse. I started painting 'abstractions' when I was 2 years old and ended up painting 'realisms' by the age of 18. I am serious.
When you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change. Thanks for sharing your feeling for what you see!
Great video to watch before my final art history exam today. 🤣
Good luck
Good luck!!
exam on art? what a joke