Who’s Afraid of Modern Art: Vandalism, Video Games, and Fascism
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 18 май 2019
- A picture lives by companionship, expanding and quickening in the eyes of the sensitive observer. It dies by the same token...how often it must be impaired by the eyes of the unfeeling and the cruelty of the impotent.
Follow me: / yacobg42
Patreon: / jacobgeller
Big thanks to the voices of Zac Frazier (ruclips.net/channel/UCkcV..., GamesD (ruclips.net/channel/UC_r8..., and ChariotRider ( / @chariot_rider )
99% Invisible: The Many Deaths of a Painting: 99percentinvisible.org/episod...
The Barbarism of Representation: www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/1...
The Museum of Modern Art’s channel: / momavideos
Visual Media used: 2:22AM, Depression Quest, Speech by Goebbels (British Pathe), The Power of Art- Mark Rothko (BBC), The Truth about Modern Art, Modern art is still Sh*t (Paul Joseph Watson), Andres Serrano documentary (1989), various ABC news reports, The Return of Red, Yellow, and Blue (Stedelijk Museum), Ron Mueck- Making of (Fondation Cartier pour l'art contemporain), Degenerate Art Exhibition (sveinbjornt), Mark Rothko Exhibit (Jeromet Ryan)
Music used: Just Like You (Gone Girl), All You Are Going to Want to do is Get Back There (The Caretaker), Dies Irae (Giuseppi Verdi), Old piano adventure; the saloon sound (Rick22228), Max Docks, Torture (Max Payne 3), Frolic (Luciano Michelini)
----------------------------------------------
Script available for accessibility upon request 
Игры
I know the music levels get a little dicey at points, sorry about that y'all.
I really enjoyed it. You could say it was a work of... art
I agree with ShootInShark (weird sentence of the day) the loud, overpowering music seemed... correct. I personally felt, small, powerless, an emotion that I find apt when talking about the current rise in fascism, particularly in America, something that I - a 20 something student - feel beyond my personal agency and struggle with. It worked.
This is a nicely done video man, overall very clean and the narration, if not perfect, near perfect. I just wanted to say that control over art is a given in any totalitarian nationalist regime, not an exclusive thing from the right. North Korea comes to my mind as an example of a left regime and Soviet Russia did the same thing. I think it's another way to say "our is good, other is bad"; a basic thing if the rulling class wants to maintain control over its population.
Came here from the Shadow of the Colossus video (made me feel nostalgic, even though I've never played it xD)
9:05 I love the caretaker
@@wp6007 you must be tired... Maybe taking a moment to think about what you love is in your best interest.
I feel like ‘Who’s afraid of Red, Yellow, and Blue?’ Isn’t just a piece of art. It’s a question that was answered in exactly the way the artist expected it to be answered.
its really ironic too
Honestly if I were the artist I would not have wanted it restored. With a title like that, it really seems like some crazy nazi destroying it was actually just the finishing touch that the piece was waiting for
"art"
@@BigHH88 Yes, art? How can you watch this video and still comment shit like this.
@@julesnar1175 There's your answer, they didn't.
shoulda left it up and renamed it "I was afraid of red, yellow, and blue."
Put the guys name and then was afraid
@@communisttrash8590 That would've been perfect
I think that keeping it up with the gashes would’ve made it 1000x more impactful as an art piece
See, that would have been next level
Brilliant
there’s something poetic, in a regrettable way, about the destruction of ‘who’s afraid of red yellow and blue’ demonstrating *exactly* who was afraid of red yellow and blue
Fascists with pathological need to control others
You get arrested for wearing yellow and blue in russia... even spring green and purple now since they aren't so far apart. And red only if it's with black.
I don't see anyone getting arrested for wearing yellow and light blue (and I wear them everyday), but yeah russian government seems to be afraid of them and repainting stadium seats, fences and so on
lemme guess, you think trans women are women?
@@Hadeto_AngelRust What are you on about??
I saw an art that sold for a decent sum that simply had “You could have made this but you didn’t. I did.” scrawled childishly in multicolor on white background. I was like “well played, art person.”
Honestly enjoyable type of art that jabs at anyone who buys it.
At first glance it mocks the haters but closer inspection gives the message that you could make anything, even 1 dot on a painting, and the people will buy it
That’s fucking genius. Godspeed you magnificent bastard
@@Sculpted_stache I said something similar out loud when I saw it…I think it went for like $1300 AND…I kinda wanted it 😂
I think that was CB Hoyo's _Yes You Could Have Also Made This But You Didn't_ (2021)
@Reddy to play which is incorrect, because people are a bunch of picky critics and you have more than enough competition. 😂
I feel like Whose Afraid of Red, Yellow, and Blue shouldn't have been restored. I don't hate the piece, but i believe that the point it tries to get across is even stronger when it is in tatters. In its pristine state is merely asks the question "who is afraid of red yellow and blue" but in a damaged state it tells us exactly who, and instead asks "why are they afraid of red yellow and blue, and what do we do about it"
In other words, the piece was finally finished by its destruction. Honestly, these paintings are closer to games than most interactive art pieces that aren't games.
Art gains additional meaning when it's viewed as and allowed to be dynamic. To some extent i find "vandalism" to be a loaded term
This is a good point. I hadn't considered that.
Couldn't have said it better myself
It’s similar to the Rodin statue outside of the Cleveland Museum of Art. The Weather Underground bombed it, and the museum opted not to restore it as a sort of monument in defiance.
the artist was probably like: " You fell into my trap, vandal. You have made my art, *finally complete.* "
And you're next line will be: I destroyed your painting
@@daviddinhof2305 N-NANI?!
Neonatzi groups are vunerable to psychic damage, and he just cast vicious mockery
@@defensivekobra3873 Maybe that explains why Hitler was interested in the supernatural.
@@corrinflakes9659 this was an dnd joke but _that makes to much sense_
If an artist titles their painting "Who's afraid of red, yellow and blue" and some fearful person can't help but attack it... that piece of art kind of found its fulfillment. It's like a circle has closed. Why, oh why would anyone want to "restore" that image. Leave it the way it is, damn it.
sounds like an invitation for vandalism haha
yeah the art wasnt in the painting itself but the whole kinda thing surrounding it made it art, and it was very informative indeed
@@vanillagorillaog Maybe so, but as would taking the piece down. Given how the restoration was unsuccessful, I think keeping the piece up in its vandalized state only serves to hammer home the message of the piece. What other way is better to show "Who's afraid of red, yellow and blue," than to immortalize the vandal's answer of "me, and people like me"?
Or even better, leave it there, it's like that robot that tried to mop up it's own blood, it starts out efficient and constant, sometimes doing varied movements that gave it personality but as it was kept there it started to rust and stuck to itself, most of the blood started to fog the glass around the exhibit as well as the robot itself
I feel as though leaving the scar on the painting could be taken as validation by the white supremacists who lauded the act of vandalism, as if society accepted their violence. It could be seen by them less as a public shaming, and more as an act of public celebration. So restoring it really is for the best, even if it means leaving the art unfulfilled.
I saw a tiktok about this painting/painter recently. The video was captioned something like, "me and my friends standing in front of art at the museum that we think we could do." One of the paintings was by Newman. And thankfully someone else reacted to that video to tell the story of 'Who's Afraid of Red, Yellow and Blue'.
This kind of attitude makes me so sad. People look at a piece of art and say "I could do that," and rather than trying, they just denigrate the art/artist and end it there.
I saw that tiktok! I'm not really a fan of modern art either but you'll get nowhere without trying to understand things that may irrationally irritate you.
i think i commented "google who Kandinsky is and try to tell me you would be able to do the same" on a similar video talking about how abstract art is primitive once... they never replied that they could. wonder why's that?
Agreed. I can never understand these people. Why does being able to recreate a piece of art make that art meaningless to you? These people are non-artists, but do they not think about how that art applies to artists?
If I were to learn to draw realism, would I start hating on the Mona Lisa? No, I wouldn't. Just because you're on the same skill level as a painting doesn't mean that painting is void to you.
I could draw my profile picture, but I still like ENA!
There’s a huge epidemic of tiktokers being very anti-art and trashing anything that’s not landscapes and portraits. The banana piece broke their brains.
“Art” is a strong word
It feels almost ironic that people were, in fact, afraid of red, yellow, and blue.
But let's be honest here, what is it that people are afraid of? Is it the physical object of painted canvas, or the price?
If people are angry just because of the price (assigned to it by the market) instead of the painting itself then the art isn't doing its job, it becomes pretty much worthless.
I honestly feel like some of the story was intentionally left out. Like, why did people hate it? Just because? I doubt it.
Kriffing_schutta My name Jeff no?
It is the fear of the unknown.
@@Fickji What a psycho
If it was up to me, I'd let the painting on the museum. With the deep cut and everything. It's a solid remark that: Yes. People were afraid of Red, yellow and blue.
To be fair, it's a more interesting piece that actually says something than it originally did.
Lol
It sure has a bit more of an impact in my opinion too.
It just has this sheer registration of irrational anger.
Just like it fascinates me when someone can love something simple, cheap or dull for no reason, be it a toy, a painting or a cartoon.
Seeing someone get so full of anger over a square with 3 colors to a point they'd commit a crime...that's just magnificent.
Melancholic. But magnificent.
The dude didn't gain nothing from this. He could've been arrested over this. He could've been charged millions over this. But he was so angry that he did it regardless. And a lot of people shared that hatred of his and defended him. People thought of it as bravery.
There is a dark anthropological beauty to such tragedy.
@@Tmanowns While I will say it certainly has a new context after the vandalism, the original does say a lot as well. It kind of has to. Something that is "meaningless", that "doesn't say anything" does not create this level of response. It may be hard, if not impossible to put it into words, but it did say one hell of a lot.
Not afraid, disgusted that true talent is ignored in favor of toddler grade “art”.
Painting looks a lot better honestly. The cut has far more passion than the original and an equal, if not greater amount of artistic talent.
the 'degenerate' art wasn't just taken from galleries or 'purchased' as the propaganda states, it was also seized by the police during targeted raids on artists studios, with thousands of pieces being destroyed. you often hear about 'lost art' from world war 2 as if there is a burred bunker somewhere, but the reality is that what wasn't absorbed into private collections of nazi sympathizers, was likely burned. a lot of the artists were also later imprisoned, and even in the face of all that, historians have still recovered dozens of examples of 'illegal' art (aka art not authorized by the nazi's) being made IN the camps, some of which are now on display in the holocaust museum.
This Video Really made me realize why artists are so smug..
they conciously know that they have power over you..
Wether you know it or not..😅
Excellent video, man. I walked into this video with a general disapproval of the idea of “overly simplistic modern art.” I saw most of it as nonsensical, assuming that the people behind it didn’t have any real creative intent. That changed the second I heard the name “who’s afraid of red yellow and blue?” And i knew exactly what it meant.
I gritted my teeth at the mention of fascism since I see people everywhere use it as a distraction in an argument. As soon as you yell out “fascism!” People tend to just stop thinking rationally altogether and pick your side. But the way you explained that you know what fascism is in the first place, the way it works and then how it compare to the ideals of these “politicians” blew me away.
I feel changed after this. It’s awesome
Whenever i see someone actually have an open mind and change their opinion it warms my heart. I was dismissive of some modern art before this video. Its the same thing as the banana people joke about not "being art" the whole point is to be provocative. The initial dismissal of "thats not art" should be followed by the realization of "ooooh thats the point." What isnt art is ai art or stuff cranked out by corpoeations, but even then to an extent it can be.
@@iharpo9292 Oh right, let me put a blank white canvas in a Chicago museum titled “Why white is right.” Very hard to be indirectly provocative.
Also my art sells for $5mil, so I bet aspiring artists would be motivated by that.
Also if 90% of the public complains about my tax-funded art, then they’re all just unknowingly promoting fascism.
Forget that others leftists have also admitted to this art being utter garbage which will be “naturally sorted out over time.” They are fascists too.
@@iharpo9292one of the only AI 'art' pieces i actually consider art was a piece that was a stereotypical pixar style image generated by ai, and then sent to a chinese company that just posterizes images and turns them into one of those 'color by numbers' things, and then was painted in by the artist (a human).
Only fascists get mad when others point out their fascism. You still have a lot of growing to do, dude.
Honestly, same.
Though I disagree on your conclusion of the use of "fascism". Sure, it's been somewhat banalized but it's extremely important to recognise that there's elements from fascism in a lot of areas and it's still the best way to engage with the problem for a lot of people. Like, as a biologist, there's no other reason for shit like eugenics still being assumed truthful in any way, shape or form (see any discussion of the movie The Idiocracy), even though is one of those ideologies that never worked in practice in the history of humanity (like anarchocapitalism, which "coincidentally" has a lot of ideological overlap with eugenics).
I mean
if art is meant to awake some deep feelings in humans, and some dude is loosing his shit over red rectangle, I'd call it succesful
Red rectangle: e̷̫̗̔x̷͙̱̔ì̷̬͉s̵͓̾t̶̥͠ş̴̥̓
Angry monkey brain neurons: *Activates*
if i take a shit on a red sheet of paper and the museum exhibits it as art, wouldnt you wonder for at least a minute who in their right mind would exhibit a literal piece of shit? would it invoke emotions of anger, confusion, awe? i could easily give it several meanings if you want. congratulations mister connoisseur, you just enjoyed a piece of modern art.
@@pugstomper4131 I love seeing how petty modern art haters are lmao
depends on the creator's intentions. if the dude behind the red rectangle actually wanted ppl to get angry and destroy his work, then he's a genius
@@jefftonsman They're right though. The difference between "modern art" and "doing nonsensical shit and putting it on display" is simply an in-group out-group dynamic of art critics and galleries/museums.
People aren’t fascist for not liking modern art, people are fascist for saying other people can’t.
Sorry to think that taking a shit or vomiting on a canva isn't art at all and shouldn't be considered as.
Sorry to think that it's a shame to put under the same label the great artists who transcend humanity by targeting superhumanity in their creation, who spent thousands of hours and days to to reach a divine perfection that was expected by the god(s); with people so dumb that they think that if they produce shit it would be some sort of emancipation or other thing like this that crazy and useless people need, to find a goal to their life.
Art is by essence something that's supposed to bring up human toward superhuman without never reaching it.
Modern art, in most of his forms doesn't check the boxes.
Modern art is just an open eye on humanity downfall and moreover modern art is ugly by definition because modern art is defined by being an opposition to ancient arts, art that was seeking beauty.
Guess I would be a semi facist because I think people shouldn't like modern art, if they are properly brain wired.
Moreover I didn't even mentioned all the bullshit system around modern art today that is more used as way to secure your money when you are wealthy than as a art and humanity transcend thing
@krana's first statement is correct: Art is a visual philosophy. When modern art is glorified in a market where anything speaks against it is deliberately shunned by the ideologically-minded curators, then it is rational and understandable that the only way that point-of view can be heard is through the act of destruction (which can be art itself).
The fascism is pretending that there always was a fair-and-open market.
@@pr0digy76 let me guess, PragerU video?
@@pr0digy76 - It's this obsession with categorisation that makes it an issue.
Like... let's say, for the sake of argument, that someone shitting on a pedestal and screaming at it is officially declared Art. It is now in the same "category" as the Mona Lisa - they are both exactly one (1) Art now.
What actually changes? Specifically, what changes about the Mona Lisa?
There really isn't anything, is there? It's still the same painting(s). It hasn't become lesser by association with the pedestal turd, not least because no one's making that association. To imply that it *could* become lesser by association with the pedestal turd would, if anything, kinda be insulting to the craftsmanship involved in the Mona Lisa.
It's kinda like if someone farts really loudly in the middle of The Rite Of Spring. It might be slightly annoying for, like, a second, but no one's thinking "Well, The Rite Of Spring sucks now". That was true in 1919, and it's equally true 100+ years later, when someone has almost certainly farted into a microphone and called it music by now.
We can take this even further, and compare the artworks that the Nazis paraded as "degenerate" bad art to the artworks that the Nazis exhibited as good art. Are the good artworks tainted by association? I would say, no. One of the best things about (most) art is that, once it's out there, it becomes a moment, an indivisible thing, which can be viewed in countless different ways. We can experience the art completely independently of how someone else experiences it.
That, to me, is why art vandalism is a problem, even if it's against bad art. It robs others of the opportunity to have their own experience of the art. That desire to leave a mark is the desire to make oneself a part of that experience, potentially forever. And... the vandal hasn't earned that. He could just make better art, or art that's more to his liking. But he doesn't.
Cope harder, fascist.
“A man who could also be titled Piss Christ is Paul Joseph Watson” absolutely kills me every time. Some pieces of writing are flawless and this line belongs to that hallowed pantheon
Why are leftists so incredibly retarded?
I question why name of a Christ used to describe such person even if there's "piss" added to it.
This gave me a big reality check. I grew up loving art and doing creative works a ton, but I went to engineering school and time and pressure meant everything else fell to the side to survive. I tried to connect the craft of engineering with other creative efforts. I got laid off over a year ago and couldn't get back into a new job, and even though it shook me I don't remember the last time I felt so liberated. I wound up smothering a core part of my being, and it was killing me. I might be a full time house spouse now, but I have the infinite opportunity to rekindle what I had let break down over the last decade.Thank you.
Whether you end up sharing your art with anyone or not, thank you for the art you will create :)
Yeah as a career scientist who let my art interests/skills atrophy over the past decade or so, I’m working on rekindling that part of me so as to not lose that part of myself. It’s hard fitting in time for both, but trying to figure out a balance
@@Amalingnot if you marry them together
theres an increasing number of modern scientists returning to the old days of merging art and science into their work
The term is obviously about ethnicity, but I still find "white supremacists angry at primary colors" conceptually hilarious.
They don't want any colour other than white, duh.
If you don't make your every single youtube video about race and gender you are not woke enough and if you don't criticise white men, you are literally hitler.
If you're not even a little annoyed by non-paintings like that getting so much funding and attention and space in galleries, you're the kind of gullible pleb that the bourgeois art world makes fun of while smelling each others farts.
As a white man I get irrationally angry at the color magenta. is it pink? is it red? How can I sleep at night without such answers?
@@_wheeler8601 It is the border between Red and Blue and does not exist in the natural light spectrum.
The three basic bodily colors (Cyan, Yellow, Magenta) all exist on the midpoints between the primary spectral colors (Blue, Green, Red) so they all have a spectral wavelength... except for Magenta.
Humans can see light on wavelengths between ca. 400 and 700 nanometers.
Blue Light = 400-500nm
Green Light = 500-600nm
Red Light = 600-700nm
Cyan sits between Blue and Green (ca. 500nm)
Yellow sits between Green and Red (ca. 600nm)
Magenta *would* sit between Red and Blue (ca >400 and
Helms would not survive ten seconds on Deviantart.
Legend says that he finally died as a result of getting linked to e621
@@thrownstair yo just so you know, I googled that and went down a rabbit hole of sites that I never wanted to be on. >:,(
@@Emma-zm1qn Welcome to the internet my friend
The irony is I kinda resent a lot of conceptual art (At least, the kind that makes way too much money for little creativity/effort) because there are people on spaces like Deviantart that're way more interesting and yet struggling to scrape by.
The truest of statements
''He is toxifying whatever water source he's buried closest to'' is so raw
I'm kind of obsessed with the philosophical implications of the vandilization of the painting. no one would do something so childish, so barbaric, so embarrassing, if the painting was purposeless. you cannot feel angry at a painting and then insist that it has no value. it doesn't matter how you feel about what it represents, what matters is that it represents something. there's inherent value in that, that a painting says something substantial that invokes such a strong emotion. and whats the point in destroying the painting? I'm sure the people who were commending the criminal would be furious if you accused them of being afraid of the painting, but they are. they thought of the painting posing a threat, it's existence as some sort of signifier for a worse culture, and, it means it holds some sort of power. it's a symbol to be feared and fought against. they are afraid. they are adhering exactly to the intent of the painting, and are too blinded by ego and elitism to comprehend something so humbling. the vandalized version of the painting works perfectly, probably my favorite piece of modern art.
That's why we lobby for canceling all russian "culture", anyone claiming that art is apolitical is a clown. A book supporting colonization of Caucasus is a piece of propaganda. Lenin statues were created to scare people into submission. People who make those banned all other expression to only leave THEIR impact on us. No piece of russian so-called culture should be allowed to exist.
The were racists who didn't like that the painting represented racial plurality...
Only art people can turn a stupid rectangle of colors into some great philosophical waffling, its stupid, and being stupid to evoke anger isn't art, a child could have made that, a chimpanzee could have, a chimp rolling in dirt and leaving impressions is no more art than sticking a color block on a wall is, same vein as that banana. Just another talentless hack that wants to be special for making nothing.
Says 4 replies, but only shows mine and one other. Why is that?
It applies to every form of vandalism by the way. People can find all the justification to do it but in result we have destroyed pieces of art.
"toxifying whatever water source he's buried close to" is the most savage roast I've ever heard in my life.
And also a fair criticism of modern funeral practices ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Jessica Brauman unless It’s Ghana says goodbye
vintagelovegal He’s just continuing his life’s work!
He was a hero.
I literally read this comment exactly as it was said in the video and i started losing it
The funny thing about Piss Christ is, if you didn't see the title, you'd have no clue how it was made. You'd just be marveling at how this piece of art almost glowed with gold and orange and red, like the afternoon sun. It's only because of its title that you realize it's scatological, and thus, disgusting, deviant, controversial. It's... comical, and kinda poignant, how much these labels change people's perception of the thing that label has been applied to.
I’m Catholic and I thought it would be funny if religious reliquaries had names like that. So instead of the Severed Head of St. Catherine of Siena, it was called ‘Creepy Head in San Domenico.’
@@urthofthenewsun8465 Oh my god that would almost make me convert to catholicism
@Are You Going To Do The 'Ora Ora' Thing? lol fair. still though, it's cool to think about
Funny you mention that, there’s a surrealist artist that I love to death who passed away a decade and a half ago, Zdzlaw Beksinski. He did not add titles to any of his pieces because he did not want it to pervert or distort the viewer’s interpretation of the piece. He just wanted it to be seen as is. If you look at some of his work, it’s exceedingly dark, Eldritch, cosmically horrific, and foreboding, but there’s a beauty to each of the pieces in my opinion. They all have different messages, but I think they are all smaller parts of a larger message. Although, if he were alive, he would probably laugh at that interpretation because he said he thought his art was “humorous.”
@@yeln4tsmusic wow! interesting
I love how much easier it is to explain emotion with a sound (like wind, the ladder rung pings, ect.) than with real words. I could babble for hours and still not be able to tell someone what emotion I'm experiencing, but a clip of the right audio, and suddenly they get it.
how do you know?
Ngl I thought it was an editing error but now I see what you mean
A bit off topic but I have synesthesia and I love that ladder noise so much it feels so right
the phrase “THEY’RE NOT TALKING ABOUT ART” should be a protest slogan, 100%
My dad was banned for life from the Detroit Institute of Arts cause he wanted to touch the surface of a Van Gogh to "feel" the painting.
Art inspires weirdness.
... it sounds like he asked first which I honestly respect...
out of all the paintings I can think of, Van Gogh's work is definitely something I'd want to touch
I would love to feel a Van Gogh. All those ridges and textures
Well, it's detroit.
Can't have shit in detroit
I can see where he's coming from. Perhaps by touching it you could really feel the strokes and lines and perhaps make something out of it
I’m an art purest if it isn’t painted with a mix of blood, shit, and bugs on a cave wall it isn’t art.
Caleb Farrell that’s some modern art too
Hell yeah. Paint a circle with a mixture of animal blood and dirt, ducking worship that shit as the sun. Paint the animals around you and put markings where their vitals are to teach young hunters where to hit them with a spear
dont forget sexual fluids that will give the complete uroboros snake symbol of life and death. ...still i cant take that art forms seriusly maybe i am to childish inside
mammoth do graze...
True art
What kills me is that the same people hating on Piss Christ for being offensive will probably also defend racist comedy on free speech grounds.
One is funny. The other is just cringey edgy fat feminist on the internet stuff 🤡
Hi we don't, you weasel.
@@E_Proxy totally agree. piss christ is terrible 🤡
@@E_Proxy"one is cringey, the other one is cringey"
@@noyes8882 nope
Art is, at the most fundamental level, expression. If you control what is and isn't art, you control what ideas can and can't be expressed.
One of my favorite paintings, Ivan the terrible and his son Ivan, was recently vandalized (2018). It had been vandalized before, in 1913. The funny thing is that Repin (the painter) thought that the first attack had been perpetrated by modernists because of him being a realist (painting in a classic manner). The second attack happened when a drunk guy thought that the painting was historically inaccurate. It's interesting how art can inspire such different reactions.
Michelangelo pieta was vandalized too.
One of my favorite paintings, actually. I'm sad it was attacked.
just went to look tht painting up. wow.
yeah, a real shame about that
The only appropriate way to vandalise that painting is to attack it with a sceptre.
there's just something so insanely hillarious about someone seeing a painting, concluding that it is meaningless and useless and then going on a rampage to destroy said meaningless piece. like, the piece is called "who's afraid of red yellow and blue?", but i think we know exactly who's afraid of red yellow and blue lmao.
Yeah. I mean, if he really thought it was just dumb and tasteless surely he wouldn't care enough to go to the effort of destroying it.
honestly it makes me lose my ass how appropriate it is. i heard the title and i immediately knew, at some point in this video someone is going to be pissed off at that painting, and its just so fuckin funny. dramatic irony is my favorite
The need to see a meaning in things is probably the most dangerous and tragic thing about humans
@@janesullivan692 So, I've had arguments about modern art with family. I don't know much about it, and I don't even have enough exposure to say if I "get" it. However, I really like people expressing themselves in weird ways, and I basically define art as "a thing that makes you feel something."
That is not something my family agrees with, and it's come back to this exact point. Modern art makes them feel angry, and I think that the artist has made a statement by producing something that evokes a response. Refusing to "make a statement" with your art is a statement in and of itself, and they refuse to accept that. It's not just apathy, it's active disdain.
@@TexRex6352 Have you tried not being such a dickish art snob? It works wonders.
And if you don't like a piece of art, you can choose not to look at it. Adults are generally expected to have enough self control that they don't commit crimes.
Show where this art actually hurt someone. How does modern art cause harm in a way that justifies your vitriol?
It's weird, every year I "get" modern art more and more.
because you're growing every year
@@iamcuttlefish god just fucking kill me so i dont have to hear your useless drivel any longer.
@@dangdudedan8756that came out of nowhere. You followed this person
your brain is degrading ;-;
Fr
One of my favorite styles of art or comedy is absurdism, and my only real gripe with modern art is when billionaires use it as a little piggy bank tax write off to store their wealth in
Don't worry, they do that with the old masters too! The paintings "worth the most" (have been sold the most on secondary markets) end up the vaults of Saudi Arabian princes where they're just a form of currency, and will never be shown. I belive the current holder of "worth most" is an obscure Da Vinci- and that sale had nothing to do with the the beauty or skill of the piece, it's just an analogue nft. Also, the "art as currency" trade tends not to involve the artist (there are some exceptions like Damien Hirst, and honestly, hes a scab), and a reinsurance piece is more "stable" as currency, so is actually preferable for trade then anything made in the last 100 years. Artists usually sell their work to collectors, who may keep the work, exhibit the work... or resell it when the Artist hits big and it's worth more. Then it goes to auction, and that tends to be where the shady stuff kicks in (and that's not inherently diffrent then it was 200 years ago). Anyway, the artist makes nothing from the secondary trade- it's not uncommon for artists to get badly exploited in this. (Theres some fun examples of artists retroactively claiming their work isnt art when someone tries to turn a profit from it- Bansky has an inverse copyright thing going on where if you resell it, its officially not provable as a Bansky. Epic and annoying Moderist troll Duchamp (urinal guy) gifted a friend a piece of highly conceptual art, with a letter saying "this is art". When his friend sold it, he made a new "piece" which was basically a letter saying "that piece was never art, the real art is me destroying the concept of my own art". Which is honestly hilarious.
Anyway, that got way off topic, apologies! Also remember most artists are dirt broke idiots doing it bc they love it, not get rich quick scammers. Unfortunately for me.
As if modern art is requirement for that fraud, if they can do that with art they can do it with any art.
In fact making people feel like it is modern art problem would be good way to cover up people who actually do this with everything else, since people are busy with "modern art"
@@eiliscantsleep So much all of this. It makes me a little crazy to see people bring this up like the exact same thing wouldn't happen if everybody just painted hyperrealistic portraits and landscapes. It just happens with whatever people consider to be high-value.
i am going to create a piece of modern art with superficial commentary, sell it off to the highest bidder, and then explode it in the bidder’s face
@@eiliscantsleep Well, that is pretty upsetting as well. Modern art being used as tools for tax evasion isn't made less upsetting by the fact non-modern art is used for the same means.
"A perversion of the German flag" says a lot, considering I, a Latin American, first thought of the Colombian flag turned 90° and never of anything German. It's as if our own backgrounds and thoughts informed our interpretation of the art more than the art itself.
Also I'm a hobbyist artist and getting such a uniform color across such a huge canvas is super hard.
First thing I thought of was basically "wow, that color is even all along the canvas"
@@anselmadelia9747 That part is pretty incredible. If I tried it it'd have all the marks from the brush.
I can do even colors with acrylic paint the trick is painting over but your hand hurts a lot and it takes hours even your back hurts..... Like 8 feet holy smokes....... As a Latina I only saw the Colombian glag as well
I mean, is the UK flag not a perversion of the english, scottish and irish flags?
I'm german and this looks nothing like a german flag, any german flag even. Idk what this man sees because neither the arrangement nor the colours are similar.
I'll be honest, I still don't "get" modern art, but then again other people don't get Expressionism and Impressionism, which are my preferred styles. Welcome to art. It's a reflection of the psyche of feeling and the styles are as numerous as the way we interpret those feelings.
I feel like modern art takes up way too much space in museums though, while stuff made because it looks cool with no other meaning is basically nonexistent in museums. It should be an equal mix of everything instead of the museums simping over modern art so hard.
That's why I don't like modern art, it takes up so much space that could've been used to make museums more fun to walk through instead of the modern art hellscape it is today
@@batfurs3001 Honestly there's only so much of the older art they can use. If people produce, for example, impressionist art that's what will be in museums. If they produce modern art that's what will be there too. Just how it works. Plus old touring art collections are hard and expensive to get for an exhibit. Only way to get more non-Modern art is for more people to produce it. In the art museums I've been too it's usually been a pretty healthy mix.
@@mistythemischievous2013 I'm not talking about modern art as the time period, I'm talking about it as a style and a mindset behind the art. There are so many extremely skilled artists that will never get a spot in a museum because their art isn't artsy enough (ie: digital, made just to be pretty, no meaning other than "it looks cool", etc) and instead it's all just art from people who are in the fine arts sphere, which is mostly modern (style) artists.
It seems that the only realistic art in museums is the old stuff, all the new stuff has to be really weird and out there instead of just being really good. It's very rare to find a landscape painting that doesn't have loads of surreal imagery from recent times in museums, and if you do find it it's usually a past work of someone who now dies modern art.
Museums make it seem like that's the ONLY type of art being produced right now, when that's just not true. Museums are missing out on the entire online art community, just because getting your piece eligible for a spot in one is impossible without connections.
I see it as just people fucking around. But in like, a good way. Like how Adventure Time was mostly the writers fucking around, but it all comes together in one of the most loved American animated shows of all time. Or like if you're an engineer who just tinkers with gears and stuff, and one day you figure out a really cool way to line up gears. It doesn't really serve an objective function, but it was still interesting to make, and fun to watch move.
Modern art more like
Money Laundering
I would like to add something to this video. Art should not have to provide anything to justify its own existence, because it exists by the will of its author. And because every human being doesn't need justification to exist, neither should art. The moment you value art outside of its own existence is when you put a price over someone's existence, when you can put a price of a fellow man's soul. To destroy art is to kill a fragment of a man's soul.
I'm on the fence because I do agree but at the same time there's a limit to how much of my taxes I'd be okay with going to art. Of course, that level of tolerance expands the more trust is in the organisation. If more people did what Jacob does for example, I'd pay to keep them afloat
What a nothing take
I return to this video every once in a while. When I first came across it and listened to it I considered myself a fairly egalitarian person. I was conservative and libertarian and disliked modern art, though not with a desire to persecute it or it's creators. In 2014 I was a teenager and sort of just as a social thing I found myself supporting GamerGate while not really grasping any real implications. It was politics as a fandom, essentially. When I first watched this video I was in my early 20s only listening as i was driving a semi truck on some winding country road past some state prison in the midwest, the state I can't quite remember. I do however remember how at that moment the threads were getting tied together and drawn together with fascism and gamergate, my ears perked up. I listened intently probably paying less attention to the road than I should have been as some things I'd noticed in my own experience started to make sense. After the video ended I just sort of drove in silence for a while thinking about it. Staring out over the grassy hills of whatever state I was in thousands of miles from home and for the first time really pondering the real world implications of the ideological cohorts I had surrounded myself with for most of my life seeing these vehemently anti-modern art stances and never really understanding what the actual implications were. After some weeks and months as I saw perspectives which seemed somewhat authoritarian towards art or racist in general which were often posed as jokes, I started poking and proding the people I knew into speaking somewhat more earnestly about their views on things. Eventually I found that a significant amount of the libertarians I had come to see as my online friend group ultimately had the goal of enforcing what is essentially fascistic views on race and culture not through the strong arm of the state but the coercive capacity of the capital, barring necessary financial and commercial services to those seen as culturally and ideologically subversive or racially undesirable. I think that may have been the first time I truly realized the complexities of fascism's ability to be a cultural and ideological parasite disguising itself as anything it can aside from it's honest form it manifested as in the early 20th century. It may not have been the first step I took from my proximity to the far right, but it was an influential one. Thank you for making this video.
I want to thank you deeply for sharing this story. It shows how important this kind of work is!
I had the complete opposite curve. I was a socialist in my youth and hated everything conservative. Then I started really thinking about the world and the people around me. I saw the authoritarian and facistic undertones of my comrades. The sheer hatred of everyone with a differing opinion than them, all the way to wanting to kille them. I saw their barely veiled racism when colored people voiced differing opinions about socialism they would be ostracised and called all sorts of racist names. I started to think and read more. As I started to think about things logically and reasonably most of my socialist opinions were found to just be envy and rage at people who were resposible and got up every morning. I was the problem. I was projecting my weakness and inadequacies on others. I eventually left them becouse of death threats I got from them for not abiding to the reinging orthodoxy. I am glad I found myself far more libertarian and loving. People shouldn't be called a Nazi becouse they have differing opinions than you do! It was a great moment in my life. I can love other people again. I do not have to hate my fellow men in the name of Marx. I finally realized the ugliness and sheer laziness of modern art as well. Creating something beautiful takes time, effort and discipline. I am so happy that I was realesed from those shackles that forced me to look at something ugly and call it beautiful. I can finally appreciate art again for its beauty instead of performative clapping and adoration becouse it is expected by my fellow comrades. I was finally liberated from the shackles of facism and I am so happy. I was sad to read about your slide to the reverse my friend. That hurt. You do not have to believe the same things I do but I hope you get out of trap that so many people make. Those who disagree with you must be facists.
It is really important to share stuff like this even when negatively portraying our past selves to others. I was raised by a conservative and was influenced by many conservative creators online. I just so happened to also follow many liberal creators as well, and was eventually swayed over as I was able to more effectively form my own thoughts and opinions as I grew up. Today I'm far more conscious of the political implications of content I watch and have unfollowed the conservatives. Thank you for sharing!
@beanspobbles6704 there's less and less of a difference these days. A lot of what back then was exclusively neo-Nazi rhetoric is now mainstream and repeated by my parents. The difference is when my parents say "globalists" they don't explicitly think Jews, unlike the person they're listening to online. I came from a fairly mainstream libertarian conservative background. The problem is there's a lot of extremely far right undercurrents in mainstream conservatism and has been for a very long time. The mid-late 20th century was an assortment of conservatives saying things that your average person would hear as "cutting spending to tighten the budget" or "ensuring the constitutional authority of states is respected" but made in such a way as to hurt minorities more. For a long time mainstream conservatives have tried to appeal to the far right as they're a necessary voter block for them to win, however the far right has become the most powerful cultural force in American conservatism and a very powerful political force now as well, with open fascists such as Laura Loomer having won primaries and even getting praise from extremely powerful cultural figures like Trump. Mainstream conservatives celebrated when a fascist who supports Mussolini won in Italy recently. Look at Florida criminalizing treating your child having a medical condition they find icky, or Texas who's AG has said he wants to enforce their laws against sodomy, or Justice Thomas who has said that the SCOTUS ruling that made it unconstitutional to ban gay sex was going too far and should be repealed. There's an aesthetic difference between the alt right and the mainstream right, but the mainstream is going farther and farther towards the far right lately, to the point my extremely libertarian parents are somehow like a blatant authoritarian like DeSantis.
@beanspobbles6704 Not parents, but THE STATE arresting people for pursuing the recommended medical treatment plan for their child's medical condition exclusively because of a moral or emotional opposition entirely opposed to current empirical evidence is certainly authoritarian at the very least. Many medical treatments can cause reproductive issues temporarily or permanently, so why is this SPECIFIC medical treatment the one being sought to be banned? It's a tyrannical desire to police others' lives and cause them to suffer in real material ways to appease your own emotional discomfort with learning you may have been wrong. Reality itself must warp to suit your emotions, and the state must warp to that new emotions based reality. There's a reason the far right always needs to constantly discredit reality, whether it be by calling scientists Jewish, or globalists, or Satanists, or whatever. Typically these attacks are on the perceived character discrediting their claims, not factual conflicts with the body of evidence.
It specifically makes me sad when people say "this isn't art because I could do this." We've locked ourselves out of something so fundamentally human. We've been doing art since we lived in caves. But today the powers that be have convinced us that we have to have talent to be creative. It's so incredibly sad.
"Yes, you could have *made* this, but thought to bother to?"
What makes me...frustrated, angry, sad, disappointed is when people say something to the effect of "it's not art because I wouldn't hang it in my living room." As if all communication should be aesthetic, and specifically left in the background until someone else wants to notice it. As if the only reason someone would create something is for other people to like the way it looks.
@@youtubeuniversity3638 no, and maybe it shouldn't exist because of that - a completely valid opinion
Creativity is a human trait, a human advantage. It's not exclusive to only a random few.
@@heartnsoulintodeglocc9975 Agreed. I find "You didn't think of it" an inherently dumb argument. It doesn't make a banana taped to a wall art to me.
"Who's afraid of red yellow and blue?" is one of my favorite art pieces because it was murdered and it's like YEAH! We found out who was afraid of red yellow and blue and it turns out it was a lot of people!
anger does not equal fear
ishit realbad
Fear is not equal to anger, yes. But fear _leads_ to anger.
@@ishitrealbad3039 all anger is the natural progression of fear.
@@skydroid3141 but does it need to come from fear?
@@ariezon you don't destroy with hatred that which you have no reason to fear
I generally dislike Modern Art pieces with a fiery passion. I still think of them as Art. It equally infuriates me when people vandalize it.
Beware: The comment section below is currently debating money laundering
Exactly. You don’t have to like art for it to still be art. I don’t like some of modern art pieces, but they’re still art and have a right to exist
This is what the concept of free speech is about - we need more people who hate what people are saying while defending their right to say it.
I just dont want it to be sold for thousands
@@everythingnothing2978 Are you at all involved with the sale or purchase of the art in this hypothetical scenario? If not, why on earth do you think that your opinion on the value of this art matters? Edit: To rephrase my question - why do you care what other people want to spend on art? Why do want others to spend something other than "thousands" on these art pieces?
@@erich1394 money laundering is bad
In my experience, I haven't really vibed with modern art pieces through a screen, but in the room with them they have a power and presence that can't be captured in any other way. They demand your attention, it's potent, and it's so much more enjoyable.
Its almost like in a almost empty room with something vibrant to catch your eye.
It isn't because they're powerful, it's because everything they're around is bland
@@stealthbrawleryeah, I guess. The point of a museum is to draw attention to the art so that the audience can take it in fully. For most it doesn't matter why they feel that the art is powerful, just that it gives those emotions. And it's not like a beige wall is doing more of the heavy lifting for the artistic experience than a giant painted canvas. If you still don't enjoy it, that's fine; It's all subjective and there's a lot of art out there
@@stealthbrawlerEh, I think if you put it up side by side with more traditional art, it would still strike you.
2:22 A.M. seems like it was inspired by LSD Dream Simulator, which in my opinion was way ahead of its time.
THAT WAS THE NAME OF THAT GAME!! LSD DREAM SIMULATOR!!! THANK YOU!!!
@@miku4977 :)
Holy shit! I'm the 222nd like.
*Emulator
Also Yume Nikki! At least when it comes to having a sort of nonsensical, dreamy, potentially creepy feeling and the concept of exploring vastly different abstract areas.
When I was starting off in college, and saw a really ugly painting that was something like a Pollock mixed with a Matisse that was incredibly unflattering: I just wondered "why did you even put this on a canvas?"
I even said out loud when a professor walked up to me and asked "what do you think?" and I said " I don't get why, I mean, its awful"
He then replied "For something so bad, you sure seem to have been staring at it for a while" and I look at the clock on the wall to see that I had been staring at it for a solid 20 minutes.
I had a sort of epiphany at that point about what the purpose or it was, and that it had succeeded as art, be it for whatever reason, and I looked at all art in a new light.
I mean you can see tragedies for a long time, doesn't mean that it's good
@@fcomolineiro7596 it wasn't intended to be good or beautiful, but it shocked the viewer made him reflect on "why?" He questioned art as a whole and the intent behind the painting, he engaged with it and came out wiser, not all art is meant to be pleasing. "Good art should comfort the disturbed, and disturb the comfortable"
@@luizgdc4096 sorry I mean good in the legal sense, like you shouldn't make art of illegal stuff
@@fcomolineiro7596 Says who?
Is a painting.
I could draw a picture of me stealing your car right now, would that warrant getting me arrested?
@@Homodemon art is an extremely variated medium, but if you want an example of what I meant (since you seems to be unable to think of one) photography
Coming here after 2 years and I can say it. This video changed my life. Single-handedly got me out of the alt-right pipeline. Thank you Jacob
If you found yourself in a self described "alt-right pipeline" and got out because of this shit video, then I'd say you're simply a gullible person who's easily persuaded by half baked pseudo intellectual nonsense on the internet.
@@swamp1138 Someone's offended that they couldn't ever do this much research on anything in their lives."urr durr video bad I don't like so it's definetly the worst thing in life". Get a grip of your life, kid. If you want to look intellectual, at least propose some discussion on what's your view. Although, I don't think you'd like to discuss anything, that might just upset you a little too much.
@@swamp1138 and, of course, one like on your comment right after you commented it. Strange, isn't it?
@@mensatico Sounds like you're the offended one here. You were so upset, you had to post two separate comments complaining about my response and crafted a conspiracy because someone liked my comment. Pretty pathetic, also kind of hypocritical because your whining consisted of everything you accused mine of having. Next time, do try and construct a comment that displays it was written by someone who has an IQ number bigger than their shoe size. I've got faith in you 😘
@@swamp1138 lol you got ratioed. lol u just mad a guy escaped supporting fascists
know this is an older video but i always come back to it. on people saying abstract painting isnt painting because "it doesnt take skill", i dont have talent. I dont have skill, i have been trying to do traditional and digital art from a young age, and never catch on. I started abstract when my art teacher had us paint, surprise, abstract. i found that more than trying to draw and image out of my head, and find shapes within real objects, abstract let me express myself. I struggle with medical problems and barely paint because of fatigue. but im still working on a few pieces that i had promised as gifts. I hope i can paint more
Hey, same! I also have medical problems and fatigue and I WISH I could paint abstracts, (no place to store paints n canvasses rn in my tiny place) because it DOES seem more possible for me, just like you said! I feel like I might be able to make stuff I actually LIKE if i could paint abstract - trying to do realism makes my inner critic extra-loud, seeing the differences to real life. But in abstract, there IS nothing to compare it to IRL, so I can be more accepting of the result, and of myself.
I hope you can keep doing paintings, and know that at least one other disabled art-loving person is cheering you on! :)
a cool thing about depression quest is how it plays with the statuses at the bottom. you inherently want to change them, to get medicated, to go to therapy. but since you’ve been robbed of your agency, your best bet at doing so is to lash out in a desperate attempt to get somebody, anybody, to notice that you aren’t okay and need serious help. and when they express concern, your only choice is to dismiss them, because you don’t want to be a burden. brilliant.
As someone who has been struggling with depression for about 15 years now, it's incredibly realistic. I don't want to hurt anyone by ending it, but I don't have the energy to stay alive. So I simply trudge through the days. The interactions in Depression Quest are interactions I have genuinely had irl. I change the topic, I lie about my current mental health situation, but most of all, I get angry and lash out at my loved ones in a desperate attempt to get help. They've noticed and tried to help me. It has so far not helped. I at least have something to look forward to. They try their best.
Tbh i haven't played the game but I'm going to give my opinion regardless
I think something like an invisible energy meter which might deplete or be refilled via certain actions which aren't always intuitive
As someone w depression, it can be tempting to say im too tired to go out and take a nap during the middle of the day, but I know its far better to be social and get vitamin d (which is why Seasonal Affective Disorder is a thing)
I feel that something like that would make the game feel more thoughtful and less shallow or self indulgent
@@frankfelerski1043 eh, to each their own. i feel like having more strategic and player-empowering game mechanics could take away from the overall ideas and message portrayed by the game as a work of art.
also like... i could just force myself to go out and do something like a social commitment despite not feeling up to it, but for me it's up to random chance whether that goes well and how i feel about it and in general both during and after.
and i don't think it's fair to imply that staying home and taking a nap is exactly self-indulgent. personally, every time i flake out on someone and abandon plans last-minute i feel an overwhelming sense of guilt and disappointment towards myself.
depression is incredibly complex, and practically every person suffering from depression has their own unique experience that isn't exactly the same as anyone else's.
I feel as if "who's afraid of red, yellow, and blue" wasn't complete, until it was vandalized. Now, it says a story. It says that someone was afraid of red, yellow, and blue or atleast what it stands for. I feel as if the vandalized painting should've been redrawn or still be shown, the color fits so well for what had been done to it
@@slappy8941 And for what reason is that? What did he do other than express himself - what crime did he commit?
You seem to think that this person isn't an artist, that what they have made, crafted, brought into this world through their own creativity and effort isn't "art" - how so? What is it which makes a simple painting of a landscape "art", which invalidates this piece? What is *"art",* if you really think about it, other than the meaning or the thoughts behind it? If you just draw something - would that be art? Or would it just be a drawing?
What is "art"? The cambridge definition of art is "the making of objects, images, music, etc. that are beautiful or that express feelings" - what about "who's afraid of red, yellow, and blue" doesn't make it art - and then what about its painter, it's creator, doesn't make them an artist? Art is art even if you don't like it. But what do *you* think art is?
@@slappy8941 Don't cut yourself on the edge hun
@@slappy8941 You're literally triggered over a shitpost. Get over yourself and stop being a baby.
@Ori Windsor so @Slappy is the art? He's part of the exhibition. He is what the artist intended to happen?
Slappy we found the guy Who's Afraid Of Red Yellow And Blue
the irony of someone physically attacking a painting called "Who's Afraid of Red Yellow and Blue" though. Like, I wouldn't wanna be the guy to jump up and say "ME! I am so afraid of primary colours I brought a KNIFE!"
The best part about Piss Christ is that he could have called it like "holy suspension" or something. But he was like "nah, I'm not gonna beat around the bush. It's Christ in my piss"
unapologetically based
The idea that art needs to "contribute to" society is something that would hinder a lot of artists.
What is art?
Everything is art.
Nothing is art.
Art is Art.
@@Axius27 thank you for this
Sometimes i wonder what art will be in the future? Will people be so scared of art that they will ban it? Will they be able to? In a optmistical sense what would our next artistic movement be like?
@@altobonifacio8936 I imagine that it will simultaneously be groundbreaking and so obvious that people wonder why no one thought of it earlier.
Like why would anyone be an artist if you had to be received well by society anyway, a more objective view, when art is subjective
"Art has become a business."
*laughs as a fine art student who studied art history because art, at least as we think of it today, has for the most of part of it's existence always been a business*
Explain
@@jx8148 Well art has always been a business when you think about it. Even in antiquity statues adorning temples or rich households were commissioned from artists. Same goes later on in medieval times and all through history from there on.
The idea of the "artist making art for art's sake" is VERY recent. Art was always either made for the Church or was a luxury, from illuminated manuscript to official portraits of high ranking individual.
To say that art as a business is a modern invention, or is caused by modern art is viewing the history of art through a very skewed and narrow point of view that sees past artworks as purely works of passions. They weren't, most of the art in museums that the average person would consider "classical" art what either done as a commission or with the intent to be sold at a fair price to those who could afford it. That's why the idea of the starving artist is so damaging today.
And like, of course artists were passionate about what they were doing. But passion isn't going to get food on the table or help you pay for supplies and this still rings true today (( aka the whole "working for exposure" mentality )).
But we have to understand that art being so readily available and affordable to us is a recent thing, and even then it is still considered a "luxury".
Art for art sake, or for the passion of it came when art was made to be an affordable hobby. Being passionate about art doesn't mean you need to be successful at it to get food on the table nowadays unless you make art you career.
It's also very dismissive of modern art to call it purely business oriented. If you study the history of art, you can see it came from a shift from experimenting with the figurative vs realism. It was about pushing art to the next level, seeing what else beside realism could be done. So now characters in an artwork were painting to try a give an impression of the person vs a 1:1 reproduction of them to put it simply.
And from there more experimentation was done, playing with colors, simplifying shapes, playing with symbols and so on.
So while I can understand why some people don't "get" or enjoy modern art, to call it easy and too commercial is grossly misrepresenting the history behind it and the art movements that led to it, and ignoring the fact that art had almost always a transactional aspect to it.
I hope that helped to clarify what I meant!
@@CherriWhitewing yes, I love you
Any craft is always backed by a business, especially if money is involved. Thats why most top artists were entrepreneurs or business savvy. The renaissance artists just got lucky because the church and the medici family were literally accepting anyone (at least that wasnt involved in an outrageous style movement) for comissions
@@megasocky This this this!!!
I used to have the feeling that modern art was kinda dumb until one day I was in a museum and I saw a piece that I don't remember what it was called but it was two pieces of sheet metal bolted together to make one big flat grey piece and I thought it was kinda pointless until I read the description that explained that the artist was a wheelchair user and that the world is often inaccessible to her without things like those sheets of metal. It was like "oh I get it now" and I've had more of an appreciation for art that I might not initially consider art since then.
Recently, I had an essay to write for a college class. Our prompts were to discuss either representation or censorship in a piece of media, and I decided to look more into Robert Mapplethorpe and Jesse Helms’s response to his photography. In doing research, I quickly learned that Helms consistently brought up Mapplethorpe even after he died in 1989. At one point, he even said “This Mapplethorpe fellow was an acknowledged homosexual. He's dead now, but the homosexual theme goes throughout his work.”
Later on, I was reading about some of the other legislation Helms wrote and tried to pass, and there were a lot of bills and amendments he wrote that limited and even outright banned different federal institutions from producing educational materials about HIV/AIDS. At one point, him and another senator from California passed a comic made made by the Gay Men’s Health Crisis of New York (which is a private organization) around the senate before a bill about HIV/AIDS education was to be voted on. One of the groups he often fought with was made of mothers whose children had died from AIDS, and he responded to one of their letters about his attitude towards AIDS patients by saying he wished her son “had not played Russian roulette in his sexual activity.”
Mapplethorpe himself died of AIDS complications. This hasn’t been about what makes “good art” for a *LONG* time. This video has me inspired to make stuff specifically to make folks like Helms uncomfortable, and honestly, that’s about as magical as it gets
So “Who is Afraid of Red, Yellow, and Blue?” a group of painting with literally nothing to it but a certain simple composition and a simple question it wanted to ask made a certain group of people so afraid and so angry to the point they torn a lot of them up? Thus giving the painting a crap ton more meaning to it.
Art is truly an amazing field.
I also ADORE the gash given to the art. Somehow it feels like it makes the painting more visceral and striking.
Why afraid? When my cat tears apart a mouse, is it afraid of the mouse?
@@megatennepster3833
More? It's literally the only remotely interesting thing about it. A painting has to be particularly lame to be improved by being torn.
@@MrCmon113 don’t care
@@MrCmon113 Interesting comparison, I think I learned everything I may want of you.
The ruined art piece is shockingly effective in looking.. gory. The overpowering red being destroyed feels jarring.
I kind of wish it was kept as-is instead of restoring it… poorly.
@@SirSoliloquy i agree. should've just left the destroyed painting up, as is
I feel like it has more meaning when destroyed. It anwsers the question it poses: Who's Afraid Of Red, Yellow And Blue? Apparently, the guy who cut this painting
@@nataliaborys1554 Or he just thought it was a dumb painting taking up space where actual art could go.
Weirdly, it adds to the art, as a question that has been answered
People claiming we need objective standards to art, that art itself should be objective, that certain art must be destroyed for being harmful to art in general, and that art must exist within an objective meritocracy are dangerous to art as a whole. Art is about ultra subjective human experiences, and itself should be whatever it wants. I don’t like modern art, but I respect people who do and respect the artists. I also see the art as incredibly valuable, being a blank canvas in its simplicity for others to project their own emotions onto. Plus, the fact I don’t like it doesn’t mean it somehow lessens the value of the art I do like, and it definitely doesn’t mean it should be destroyed. To define what art is and isn’t is to actively harm it. There is no wrong way to art. More art is always better, as long as it’s not stealing people’s jobs and is absolutely soulless (looking at you AI art)
I love how society loses it over a simple color palette and rectangles
I've visited the Holocaust museum in Washington D.C. two times, once with my middle school and once again just with my family. At the end of what is traditionally a museum, after you've walked through six floors detailing the most horrific crimes of humankind, how they started, and how they ended, after you've brushed past countless faces of the dead to whom you feel you owe it to to read every word in the building, you step out into this completely white, sunlight room. You go down a crooked, spiral staircase and there are a few benches so you can sit and look at the art, which is these white, geometric sculptures. They're done by Ellsworth Kelly, who made a lot of art similar to Newman. Apparently, the structure is done to play with sunlight and shadows across the white room.
The first time I saw it, as a mass of 12 and 13-year-olds being mournfully shoved along by teachers, I gave it a passing glance of mostly confusion. Why'd they put it there? After everything we'd just seen- most of our eyes red- why modern art?
The second time I saw it, just three years later, I somehow caught the room alone. My parents were a few paces behind me, and I stepped out of the dark hallway into the all-white room and down the crooked staircase and sat on one of the white benches. It was completely silent, though somehow not eerily like it had been in the earlier rooms- the ones with the shoes, with the hair. I stared at the sculpture and felt the overwhelming urge to burst into tears all over again.
I still don't get modern art. Most of it that I see in museums, even when I'm trying, hit's me with nothing. But my god, when it does, it works. And in the context of anti-fascism you presented, the modern art at the holocaust museum hits me in post all over again.
Great video. I've attempted to binge your stuff but everything overwhelms me a little emotionally so I have to take it slow. But you do great work.
Nazi art was pretty bland as well, but not as bad as conceptual art.
@@MrCmon113 Do you really feel that that is an appropriate response to her comment? Honestly, think before you comment things - that is widely insensitive.
@@blueowl718 i don't get how it was insensitive. please explain to me i like learning sometimes
nazis fucking hated modern art or any art that has multiple interpretations and makes you feel anything. they loved only bland normal sceneries
An anti masker at are school ducked the holocaust museum trip be cause he didn’t want to deal with the museums Tyranical mask mandate
I can't help but feel like "who's afraid of red yellow and blue?" was made whit the intention for it to get vandalized. The name is just way too fitting.
Yeah, visual art isn’t just about the piece itself, it’s about people reaction to that piece.
Tbh the cuts add to the pieces, it's an evolution.
🇷🇴🇷🇴🇷🇴
Would not be surprised if the author hired a guy to vandalize it. Classic victimism from self-indulgent pricks.
@@fernandofaria2872 think you missed the point of the video my friend
I‘m still amazed at the fact that the Nazi were so disgusted with the Bauhaus that they closed it yet it still became the (probably) most influential artschool of the last 100 years
Rothko's art pieces and the game 2:22 am are just things of all time. They don't try to be something more than they are but they still illicit emotional reactions and it shows some uniqueness to how people can make a game or art piece or both in one that allows this sort of thing to happen. To be honest it's great but no other statement can really describe Rothko's work for me rather than "Art work of all time"
do you want me to explain rothko to you?
When I first saw the title of the painting I thought it was silly because who would be afraid of something so innocent and simple?
And then it turned out there was a huge group of people genuinely afraid of it, so I guess you win again art.
"I guess you win again art" is something I want on a shirt.
@@Argusthecat "I guess you win again art" is what im saying every time I fail to finish some art I want to make
Even if I don't find something appealing in an art piece, I just shrug and move on. To rail against it, to hate it, to pour all that energy into something just seems to show how small these people are, and how small their worlds are. All that time and thought wasted on something that made them upset.
"Calm down, son. It's just a drawing"
@@kushanblackrazor6614 "Surreal Art is mediocre and only the classic geniuses deserve to be there"
Art is pretty cool, you might feel like oh this is just colors but then someone looses it and cuts it to shreds
For artwork that is "bland and mediocre" as another commenter put it sure inspired some intense feelings in that one dude. I ask you: is that what "bland" and "mediocre" is capable of?
I'm fine with art in general let it exist my grip Is with how much some of it costs like I don't get why a blob of blue ink is worth 1.3 million? Objectively tho it's a nice piece of art and it'd be something cool to have in your home I just don't get why it costs so much?
modern art is that bad
@@hoopschoop3339 Is that a statement or a question?
@@GigaWh4tt statement
I have no idea why RUclips recommended this to me now, 4 years after release, but I'm glad it did. Incredible work
this is one of the most life changing ive seen, ive been watching it over and over for the past 4 years. no other video essay ive seen has had such a big impact on me as an artist. as a queer Jewish artist, this has inspired me to go forward and make the art i want, i dont care what fascist loser doesnt like it, i will make what makes me feel. thank you for making this, and thank you for all of the wonderful videos youve made
Do you post your art anywhere
The irony of Hitler being rejected from art school because people didn't think his art was good enough, only for his regime to call art degenerate for not fitting specific ideals...
Omg, I forgot he was an artist
Imagine an alternate reality where we learned about Hitler in art class instead of History.
The difference is AH was actually a good artist.
@Tony Benn (Real) You definitely haven't looked at his artwork if you're saying that. He didn't get into the art school because "something was off" in his art, he didn't get in because he wasn't making the type of bullcrap abstract art that this video is defending. He was rejected for being too proper, too precise, and too traditional. I suggest you look up what artworks qualified for an artist to get into that school, and then look at the work of AH. They told him that he should do architectural drawings, not paintings.
@@SweetArmadillo361
Guy was unable to paint humans. The criticism was certainly valid.
"People Fear what they can't understand, and Hate what they can't conquer"
Sunquad who said this
@@TheF0xskibidbopmmdada Andrew Smith
Sunquad ok
If art needs to be explained it is not good art. Good art should make humans complete by conveying the higher virtues that are within us instead of appealing to merely our lower instincts.
@@thorsten8790 Yeah, I agree. Though I still understand Jacobs points, and respect them.
I love this. When I was in middle school I was one of those really anti modern art guys, I shared many opinions against modern art that were expressed by people in your video. I remember being at Rothko chapel sitting at that pond, and enjoying the pond. But why I generally hated the modern art I saw on that trip was because I was in a very small and aggressively leftist school at the time. I felt extremely pressured by my teachers and especially the other student to enjoy/appreciate the art or be put into a lesser social class. I was one of, if not the lowest income family at that school by the way. I hated modern art not because of the art, but because of its social framing. The way it was used to establish a social hierarchy in my social environment. I hated the lack of objectivity in modern art because I hated how the social group who was associated with the art would degrade me along non objective(often false) and abstract socially determined criteria. And that's the thing about art, it gets so caught up in the social/cultural that it can be hard to just look at the art for what it is. Before you even get a chance someone is telling you how to react with the threat of some kind of punishment for being deviant to their assessment, even if that is exactly the opposite of what the artist would/ would've want(ed).
Now Ive grown up, lived in healthier social circles and I currently enjoy a lot of modern and abstract art very deeply.
A good example for why art shouldn't be judged by how hard it is to make is memes. They usually don't take much time to make but still can make you feel strong emotions anyway
Creators:
Make art people love.
But also consider making art people hate.
forums.coronalabs.com/topic/76464-job-offer-game-tbs-br-mmorpg-tcg-c-s-get-rich-easy-job/
I will remember that for the future.
Meaning:being hideo kojima
It’s very enjoyable to get a reaction out of people no matter how deep you bury that feeling
The Man Who Speaks In a way yeah could be lol
playing a ''The Caretaker'' song into the middle of the video really activated my flight or fight response
I know right! Shit startled me so bad I almost fell over.
What’s The Caretaker? Is it like a movie or something
Portable Memes they’re an artist that’s most known for a series of 6 albums that are an interpretation of the stages of dementia. It’s some heavy shit. The series is called “everywhere at the end of time”.
Do you know which song it is? I don't think it's from EATEOT.
@@beelzebubonice9182 i don't know which song it is :/ but it does have the caretaker's vibe
This , funnily enough , made me understand and appreciate modern art . What point does art stop becoming art ? More importantly , who gets to say that ? I cant explain how hard it would be to make what looks so easy .
I love your take on this. I think of your "more importantly, who gets a say in what is and isn't art?" all the time. Thank you for this, (as much as the video is amazing), your comment is the reason I have a new take and view on art.
@@ame1ia_h it's amazing to know my comment had an effect on you ! To say something that resonates with someone is my dream . Words are art in itself and to make a point that sticks like art does is wonderful . :^)
@Casperlasperdasper. Thank you and you're welcome!! You have such a powerful way with words 🩷
I remember a few years ago when I was somewhat in the alt-right pipeline, I got vaguely frustrated at some of the modern art in this video. I tried multiple times to write out a comment about feeling like the art was worthless without sounding fascist-y, but repeatedly failing. And at a certain point, I stopped and really thought about where my opinions on art and value came from.
This video really helped me question a lot of the beliefs I had inherited, and I can't be more appreciative of it. I've since started letting myself indulge in the sort of fuzzy feelings and thoughts that are brought through more abstract art. And as an aspiring game developer, with some wonky neurodivergency, the non traditional work this video defends has helped broaden my ideas and expression.
Thank you, truly
And he rejected truth out of fear of sounding "fascist-y" 😂
@@ijon-y4549 its not about sounding like a member of a publicly disliked group, it's about not relating to the potentially dangerous philosophy of that said group.
@@get_that_money664 the philosphy of disliking things that are ugly and lack aestethic value? That is not a fascist trait, that is normal. Might as well call Geller a Nazi because he and Shitlet both drank water.
While this video isn't one of the things that got me out, I got out of there too. Glad so many of us managed to escape that pipeline.
"This art is just a single colour on a canvas! It's disgusting and makes me feel sick!"
Bruh don't go home, your walls are all painted single colours too
Yeah, but you don't call it art, nobody calls you an artist and your friends don't have to pay to look at it.
It's not art.
@@samuelskogqvist5565 How can something not be art. What is art defined as in your book?
Recommended viewing: ruclips.net/video/XmxIK9p0SNM/видео.html
@@GamingOS Stop trying to sound smart because "me think long time"
@@samuelskogqvist5565 Ok. I'll dumb it down for you next time.
They really shouldn't have tried to restore Red Yellow and Blue. They should have left it up with the tears in it, next to a sign explaining how this piece was vandalized, and the text in bold "Who's Afraid of Red Yellow and Blue?"
i thought this too
@@protectedcharmshey bud
But nobody is afraid. You people keep saying that, like someone is afraid. This is evidence they are repulsed by it, not scared 😂
i LOVE how you used the caretakers music for this particular video. the caretaker is such an experimental artist that created so much fear, sorrow, and nostalgia for me. his work is similar to Whos Afraid of Red, Yellow, and Blue in that it’s initially upsetting or frustrating. the caretakers work is well,,, Work to listen to, but leyland’s work is an obsession for me. i see it EVERYWHERE, and its created the strongest amount of fear i’ve ever experienced from an art piece. in fact, its insane how recognizable leylands work is to me now because of that specific fear it now strikes in my gut after allowing myself to *feel* it
great pick!
The Nazi "Degenerate Art museum" definitely seems like something that inspired the 2 minutes hate from 1984
Owen Mellors-Bourne holy moly I never realized that
Sometimes showing what you want people to fear and telling them they should works better than just banning it outright
@@zawarudo3582 yea its called just being sincere in your opinion, calling it what you think it is. degenerate in this case
@@dutch1641 - There's a difference between sharing your opinion and forcing it upon others as objective fact.
@@kyransawhill6650 strange how this society seems to force a lot of clearly non scientific bullshit upon people like how we deny human genetical groups and differences.
migration and crime statistics getting you imprisoned and, you know what no why even try and talk with you people anymore
It's interesting watching this a couple of years later, when so many of the same figures who were then frothing about the importance of "objective" quality in art, the importance of talent, and the terribleness of art for profit... are now shilling insipid NFTs to their gullible followers.
Hmm not to defend NFTs or anything like that (I neither own nor intend to own any), but I kinda see the opposite there. Where before people had problems with the objective quality of modern art, now people have problems with the objective quality of the NFT of GIFs or other digital art or whatever. It seems like, in much the same way as with modern art, people are now saying things like "oh a procedurally generated NFT of a monkey gif can't be considered art"...
It's kinda funny, really. It feels like the eternal "the music of my youth was better" that every generation says.
Again, I'm not defending NFTs here, and the topic is obviously more complex, just pointing out something I am noticing.
@@edumazieri - I would say that the crucial difference is that NFTs are almost purposefully meaningful. The images are randomly generated pap, and what's bought and sold is entirely the concept of ownership. If they were invented to explicitly satirise the use of the art market for money laundering/tax dodging purposes, I'd be impressed. But they weren't.
@@FTZPLTC For sure there are differences but maybe not as many as we might think.
You mentioned those people who trying to convince others to buy NFTs... but thats basically the same as what art dealers and critics do, with classical and modern art, isnt it? They go and say "this is gonna be worth a lot" and people buy it, and then, well, it now is sort of "worth a lot"... its not very different at all, at least not in that way.
I think if we just look at the situation right now, where we have all these crypto bros and weird overvalued monkeys and whatever it looks like a big bag of crap.
But maybe getting past that, NFTs could be something interesting, right?
I mean, it would allow digital artists to sell their work like physical artists can, and not only that but the buyers could own it while ALSO allowing other people to appreciate it, which means the art piece is not locked away in some basement, it can be owned AND shared. Its a different kind of ownership, more open, that if used well, could be a very interesting thing for artists and art patrons.
Just well, dont take this as me trying to get you to buy overvalued procedurally generated images, you really shouldn't. Definitely stay away from it. Lets just not let our annoyance at the crypto bros and all the bullshit blind us to the possibilities of new technologies, be it this one, or others that may come from it.
@@edumazieri i find nfts arent art for they arent meant to,they are more of a piramid scheme
Nah, it's the opposite. people who cares about the objective quality of an object are the ones who call out NFT because they are 'objectively' useless.
I used to hate modern art, but this video changed my mind. It makes me really happy to know that its possible to change someones mind on RUclips.
As someone who has draged themself out of depression I find depression quest a beautiful and accurate portrail
"a man who could also be titled "piss christ" is paul joseph watson" remains one of my favourite lines to this day
I lost my shit when he said that
In theory, everyone is piss christ, we all turn water in to piss.
oh so geller is a liberal? no wonder he defends modern art
@@uwnbaw “I didn’t watch the video” self report
@@uwnbaw except I actually watched the video. With you there’s only two options: either you didn’t watch the video, or you did but didn’t pay attention in the slightest. If you don’t want assumptions to be made, then tell me which one it is.
One of my favorite paintings of all time is an Ad Reinhardt piece I saw at the NGA when I was a kid. At first glance, it looks like an entirely black canvas, but the more you look at it, you start to realize that there's actually a few squares scattered inside it that are a slightly different shade. Look a little longer, and you realize that those squares contain squares, all nearly the same color, but not quite. I sat there staring at it for the better part of an hour, and even when it was time to go, there were still new colors and shapes emerging from it.
The belief that modern art doesn't take skill or can't evoke awe is total bunk. I can't imagine how much time, skill, and effort it took to get the shades exactly right, and it was so impactful that I still remember how it made me feel over a decade later.
some of it is like that, but other pieces are genuinely just splatters on white or similar.
But to some people, maybe they saw something in the splatters you didn't, just like many people wouldn't notice the differently shaded black squares.
And even if it "is just a splatter", to many people (including me) art is so many different things. If we just faithfully replicated technically perfect old masters, what would the point be?
And sure, you can put that technical proficiency to different uses, but doesn't that in itself indicate there is more to art than just technical ability alone?
Whether that is emotion, context, posing challenging questions like "what is art, and who gets to decide", "what is good art, or tasteful art, or meaningful art and who gets to decide" etc.
And there is no objective scale to measure "technical proficiency" on, let alone correlate it with "good art" and sometimes really simplistic images can be incredibly powerful even if they are "less technically demanding" in one sense.
Look at graphic novels, very different to still life paintings of fruit, but to many, far more awe-inspiring and impactful.
I don't think most people admiring modern art are deluding themselves about what it actually is, they just see art as wider and more rich and interesting than "who can make the most technically difficult painting".
For me, I look for art that makes me feel things, amongst other traits. Others like it to challenge them or challenge widely held views or do something new and original or just provoke thought. Others primarily like the asethetics. And some value technical ability or imagination or, I don't know, use of colour or symbolism or whatever.
Art has also often been used as a critique of power/the elites, as well as in service to them. Many modern art pieces were actually created to critique elitist attitudes, which is pretty cool.
Who are you to say which group is right and wrong? I bet most of us are a mixture, and unless you truly believe art is objective, it's pretty hard to definitively say any of those groups are objectively wrong.
I apologise, I'll edit this down later, I'm just very passionate about it despite not being an art historian or anything :)
@@r-pupz7032 i mean yeah, i didnt mean it isnt meaningful or it isnt art. but as far as im aware it takes no effort and therefoer the meaning comes solely from interpretation. idk how it's fair to profit off of some meaning that random people though of
The comments on this video are a goldmine. So many interesting takes and perspectives. I usually find myself reading a few comments on a video and then getting bored not long after, but I've been sitting here for a while just reading different takes and it's great. Just thought I'd share.
I know this video has been up for years before the one I'm gonna mention, but the start of this beginning with "Who's Afraid of Red, Yellow, and Blue" being destroyed reminded me of Rhystic Studies's recent video on Carly Mazur's art and what I think is one of the greatest responses to the people who hate on modern art with the response "I could do that":
"'I could do that' is reactionary muck; an elementary view of the world. 'I could do that' is the rallying cry of the dense and insecure."
2:22 am is depression if depression were a game: random numbness and an implied lack of meaning--while still being meaningful in the sense of numbness/suffering
It has meaning by existing. In the way that being devoid has no intrisic meaning.
@@thismans1405 This is an interesting way to explain meaning. Thank you
OCD, executive functions failure, no reason not to!
The use of Everywhere at the End of Time is so genius. That music is ENTIRELY context, just like the Red, Yellow, and Blue paintings. To write down what the notes of the melodies to those songs and then play them on an instrument would strip it of its entire meaning. The notes, the melody, the music isn’t special, only the music in its context is special in the way that that piece is.
It's actually from An Empty Bliss Beyond This World; they're both by the same person and have similar meanings, though, so it would be easy to get tracks from the two albums confused.
@@derpi94 i just looked up the album after i saw this comment and holy shit that was an Experience, thank you so much internet stranger
Heavily disagree. Music played in a different context will take on a different meaning and can be just as special as the original.
@@weirdofromhalo Good example, SadSvit - Касети. Cassettes, is a melancholy underground lo-fi rock song about daydreaming and wishing to sleep forever under the sound of cassette tapes... it used in a video edited and posted by a hero who survived the siege of Azovstal Steelworks.
Author said that he never intended for the song to be about war (it was written before the full scale invasion), but it absolutely fit the mood and got a new meaning.
See, "cassetes" is what we call cluster bombs. The combined amount of explosives dropped by russians on Mariupol was higher than Hiroshima. The city ended up more destroyed.
Music absolutely can change based on context. Remember the film Apocalypse Now? They used Richard Wagner, known for his Nazi views and being Hitler's favorite composer, during a helicopter raid... most people didn't get the link and instead, reinterpreted "I love the smell of napalm in the morning" as something cool and badass.
So careful with symbolism. Might get people missing the metaphor of stars in milky way looking like a great river with the Blue Danube during Space Odyssey. Might end up glorifying absolute scum like Wagner.
Every once in a while, whether it's because I see a comment claiming "modern/contemporary art isn't art!" or otherwise, I come back to this video. I might even link it to that person making the comment, in the hopes that I might educate them in the opposite direction from the way they're currently going (not 100% guaranteed, but one can try). I also think that because of this particular video, I have come to appreciate art in general, including modern or contemporary art, making me think about what art is to us humans
Oh yes, educate us oh enlightened one! Show us how a duct taped banana is truly a piece of beauty!
What a joke.
@@NastyArchive-qk7wr Oh look, a racial slur for a username! How original! Did your government assigned KKK wizard give it to you because you lack creativity enough for anything better?
Hey, so I know I’m really late to the party, but I really wanted to comment on this video. First of all, thank you so much for creating this. As someone who used to consider themself an artist, it has always felt really grating to me when I hear people talk about modern art like it’s worthless. In my local museum, there are empty display cases with a note that explains how the staff is reevaluating how much of their collection was made by white people and how they want to represent the variety in art and creators. There’s dozens of oil paintings of forests or fruits, but none of it gives us anything new. I saw a series of geometric paintings the last time I was there, the kind you might assume was really easy to make, and I found them infinitely more striking than all the works that just upheld the status quo. Don’t get me wrong, I love detailed paintings of nature, but they usually don’t say very much when compared with a piece that was delicately crafted to make you uncomfortable. I think it’s almost poetic how all the recently passed anti-trans legislation has been happening at the same time as this AI art fiasco. It’s like our autonomy and ownership of what we make of ourself will never be protected if it isn’t actively maintaining this conservative ideology. Art theft doesn’t matter until someone fucks with a fancy old painting. You know what I mean? Forgive me if I can’t find the words to get the idea across. It’s devastating to see how many people want to define what makes “good” art as a means of devaluing the creations of marginalized groups and enforcing conformity.
@@beanspobbles6704 Christianity doesn't have a rough history, its STILL rough for a lot of people. Ask anyone on the LGBT+ demographic for experiences with the Christian church, and I guarantee you the vast majority will have horrible stories of the people around them trying to repress and "fix" them. Many Christian communities STILL attempt things like conversion therapy. At this point making jokes about priests being sexual predators and diddling kids is considered low hanging fruit due to how prevalent it is, and for the church to cover it up and do nothing about it, then we have ultra Christian politicians turning around trying to claim Trans people are the groomers, not saying a word about these predator priests. No one can debase Christianity more than Christians already have.
And when was this "age of equality" supposed to start? For as far as I know homophobia, transphobia, misogyny and systematic racism is still alive and well. Gay marriage isn't even a decade old, and while Trans people are taking the brunt of the current culture war, homosexual people are still facing persecution and discrimination. Equality only exists if you choose to ignore all the marginalized people currently screaming out about the injustices they face. The reason people of color don't get blasted as much as white people for expressing pride in their ethnicity is because anyone not white in the western world has come from a heritage of degradation, disadvantage and active, systematic, contempt. And then when people are given a platform to talk about all these things, white people unused to such criticism perceive it as a direct and personal attack.
There is such a divide in your country cause anyone who questions the status quo is straw-manned and dehumanized, anyone even slightly progressive is heaped with accusations of being soft, sensitive and "woke". All because they don't fit into you're narrow framework of what is and isn't acceptable.
@@beanspobbles6704Taking down white people art and showcasing marginilized group's art is not the same as the video's example of the nazis destroying or taking anything they didn't like. We're trying to correct an eternity of one group, white Christian men, controlling every little thing they can, art included. You don't like art from white people being taken down or confederate statues being removed because you think it's some sort of personal slight against you for being white, but it's not. It's about righting the so many many many wrongs of those racist white people who were (and still very much are) in power.
i imagine, as jacob explains art to people in person, he makes sound effects to go along with it.
"oh, this piece? it makes me feel like FWOOSH"
it makes me feel like 3:41
"This sculpture be like; ~pchoo~, y'know?"
This comment, while brilliant, has 69 likes. I'm afraid that I cannot willingly like your comment, as this feat is a rare one. And so, I write you this message. Leaving you at 69 likes whilst showing my apppreciation of this comment.
@@spacetoast8206 come back, you can do it now
I fell asleep watching a video about people dying on a mountain pass.
I wake up watching a video on who hates art.
Ngl not dissapointed.
Let me guess a Dylatov Pass video. maybe the one by Lemmino?
@@sully1492 Yeah that one
@@PAGuy-jf4vi so the peaple watching this know quality. This guy is probably good then.
@@PAGuy-jf4vi I liked that video :(
Actually I see it once in a while
Bro you just accidentally stumbled on a great channel
i almost cant believe how beautifully WIAORYB? was cut up. In general Its a nicely balanced composition and you can see the true expresion of emotion. If i was Newman i would have gladly accepted the addition and kept it that way.
I don't think a single video I ever watched has affected me the way this one has. I watched this when it first came out and still think about it. I watched this maybe 5 times since it came out and every viewing keeps the subject in my mind.
This video not only got me into art but it got me back into gaming again. It lit some sort of fire in me. This intense desire to experience everything games and music and every other art form had to offer. I've replayed old games that I love only to come away with a different impact now. I'm so thankful that I experienced this video. I still to this day don't understand why this video triggered this with me but I'm sure glad it did.
Artist: For this piece, I will demonstrate how something as simple as three colors can make people afraid.
Vandal: That's such a stupid idea! I hate it so much, I will destroy it in a fit of rage!
Today I learned that fascists don't know what irony is.
You just learned that today?
@@xww6849 better late then never 😁
Concept: that guy’s mugshot, framed and hung on a wall, titled “this cunt’s afraid of red, yellow, and blue”
Fascist?
For this piece I will shit in on a pedestal, but you can't dislike it. Because if you do you have fallen into my trap. And statistically if one of you hates it, you have fallen into a trap to prove something.
“Surprise it’s fucking fascism” is my new favorite phrase
Everyone should screen record the clip so that it comes complete with Dies Irae just BLASTING
Everything I don't like = fascism
@@tubeguy4066 Feeling that 'modern art' is degenerate or devient or feeling that it degrades the culture is a massive red flag for fascism. Not liking 'modern art' doesn't equal fascist, it depends on why you don't like it. Fascists usually believe that art should serve the state, the culture, and the race and if art doesn't really do that then it isn't art to them, they perceive it as malicious or as an attempt to make a quick buck without contributing to society.
@@tubeguy4066 if the shoe fits
@@praisethesun7255 Then you're facist because you fit in the category.
This may be one of the best video essays I've ever seen based on how endlessly rewatchable it is. I watch it several times a year. Definitely changed my view of modern art.
My response to "I can paint -that-" types of criticisms is this: Go to an art supply store and get art making. No one is stopping you from painting (wallet contents pending) or creating art other than yourself.
"If you think you can paint that, you should use it as an invitation to try"
I make art everyday, specialising in abstract art and I think "I can paint that" is an entirely valid criticism to make when the art being critiqued is a canvas covered in a block colour. Such artwork has been executed countless times. I attend a lot of exhibitions and am always excited to see new ideas. But anyone who gets a block colour canvas exhibited, they are just taking up a very well known 'space' that is always there. It's such an overly played and easy to play card. I've never seen an underground exhibition that exhibits this kind of art because all the involved artists already know that it's such a waste of an exhibition. They have something to share where there is self-expression, instead of something that is absurd to call solely yours.
The "I can paint that" criticism would work especially with a 'piece' of music that is nothing but silence. Of course you could make that. You open up music software and render it with nothing in it at all. Perhaps this kind of art is clever the first time you see it but it gets old quick because it's so simple that you will see it again and again. But if you regularly consume, discuss and contribute to art, especially if you find yourself invested in extremely niche genres, you will know what art is capable of and how deep it can get. I am not even talking about classical art. The art I have in mind involves abstract, conceptual, modern art etc. With block colour canvases, there are only so many variations you can produce until it ceases to be the uninspired concept it is and moves onto something more.
A game of chess will reach a state that has not seen before after about 5-20 moves. Blank canvas art is like 1st move chess. Make some more moves. Art should be about what you can bring to the table, how you can stir up the scene. Underground art celebrates an infinitely large capacity of combinations, it progresses and interacts with its audience. Practically blank canvas art attracts such a masturbatory crowd. Sure there is discussion about this art but its like a tape played on loop.
@@ssclewssyour argument is sound, however i think its interesting that modern art assimilates itself alongside all other art movements as artists copy one another, and copycats spring up in accordance to their influence (thinking of jackson pollock)
@@ssclewss This is an interesting perspective, I appreciate you sharing.
To me though, (not an artist) I still see value in those more abstract or “simple” works you’re talking about, not everyone is where you’re at with consumption and understanding of art, so something you have seen a thousand times can be someone else’s first, and both of you could try to interpret the painting and likely have completely different answers.
The beauty in those works to me lies in just how vague it is thus forcing the viewer to consider potential meaning through their own limited perspective and experiences, and have their own personal relationship to it. The painting could have had no actual meaning behind it and yet the human brain gave it some, from the eye of the beholder.
I am an artist. I paint digitally, or I draw, and I occasionally paint with oil.
I generally dislike modern art. Mostly BECAUSE of this "I could do this". But that's only because for me, the sentence doesn't end there. My full argument would be
"I could paint this. So what does this painting, which in most technical terms is the same as mine, have to be displayed and sold for thousands if not millions, which mine doesn't have?"
It feels unfair. It doesn't incite to try. It discourages.
"Who's afraid of red, yellow and blue?" Well the guy that slashed it, obviously.
That "guy" was a bull. He wasn't afreid of red, yellow, and blue. Hd hates red.
@@GuyUWishUWere Bulls are colorbling tho
Or he does like it. Fear and hatred are different
Doesn't mean that he was wrong.
@@michaflak1370 he literally broke the law
Hey man i just saw this video and i really used to think modern art was pretty shitty, and i still dont understand it but you really changed my mind, thanks for that
Yeah I'm in the same boat
@@sinon7000 welcome bro
same
For a lot of modern art, to realize and accept the message it's trying to get across IS understanding it (to some extent).
I think its still shitty but i couldn't care less what art people make
He thinks the way he made this made it harder to watch?! This had my full attention the whole way through!! It was incredible! Informative, entertaining, funny, and so thought-provoking.
You know, I've never been a fan of Modern Art. Not in the sense that I want it gone, it's just never appealed to my aesthetics or really spoken to me in any way. But then again, there are lots of things that are very aesthetically pleasing to me or I find great meaning in which seem meaningless to other people.
So... yeah, modern art may not speak to me personally, but as long as it speaks to SOMEBODY it has value, because the world is infinitely better if there are more people different to me than exactly like me, and that goes for everyone.
I may not appreciate Modern Art personally, but I DO appreciate its value to others, and that's why I'll fight to defend its existence. No other reason is needed.