Military Review

Modern Art. Historical parallels

A spokesman for the Krasnodar branch of the Trade Union of Citizens of Russia Yevgeny Popov decided to figure out what modern art is like it was before. And what came of it.
The result was a wonderful article in the Krasnodar newspaper 1 + 1.

Modern Art. Historical parallels

“If you can’t draw, it still doesn’t talk about your genius.”
Salvador Dalli

"Caution! Contemporary Art ”- it is a good idea to hang such a sign at museums and exhibitions. Most modern art has become an instrument of politics, it has become a business, but what's worse is no longer art. Gallery owners, for example, M. Gelman, often combine “artists” and political consultants (!). The works of such “masters” are propagandizing, provoking, annoying most of the society. A situation has arisen where the mediocrity, immorality, and often the brainlessness of the author can be successfully hidden in the word “modern”, by sticking “art” to it. And yet, what are the tasks of art? Why create great masterpieces and disgusting crafts?

In order to understand the problems of art, it is worth referring to the experience of the “golden age of Russian culture”. This century is rich in great artists, writers, musicians, but also rich in free-thinkers, revolutionaries and political circles. All this could not affect the art.

I propose to draw your attention first to the writers. So how exactly among the writers and philosophers were actively discussed the goals and objectives of art. As we know, in the middle of the XIX century, the Russian intelligentsia was practically split into two camps: Slavophiles and Westerners. It is worth noting a great similarity with these realities. After all, today the liberals are opposed by statesmen.
The cultural environment, especially the literati as its part, existed mainly in one of two currents, with a different view on the goals and objectives of art. It should be noted that some division was among the artists, however, due to its inherent features, it did not stand out so clearly.

The first trend was represented by the supporters of "pure art" A. Druzhinin, V. Botkin, A. Fet, A. Maikov, F. Tyutchev. The main postulate for them was the thesis “art for art's sake”.

The second trend was represented by supporters of “critical realism” (natural school) N. Chernyshevsky, N. Nekrasov, I. Turgenev, A. Herzen, V. Dahl. The main postulate of this trend was a critical attitude towards reality.

In both currents there were both Westerners and Slavophiles, for example, V. Botkin was a Westerner, and V. Dahl was a Slavophile. Nevertheless, it is worth noting that those who "professed" critical realism mainly consisted of Westerners, and representatives of pure art mainly consisted of Slavophiles. In addition, there were more bright representatives of Westernism than representatives of Slavophilism.

Now briefly about both currents.

Theory of Pure Art

The basis of this theory is the assertion about the independence of art from politics and social demands, about a certain self-determination of artistic creativity. That is, in fact, about "art for the sake of art." This theory affirms the self-sufficiency of artistic creativity, the independence of art from politics, ideology, and pressing social problems, proclaiming the creation of beauty as the highest goal of art, and not moral or social preaching.

What did his apologists understand by the purity of art?

Our contemporary, a well-known philologist and literary critic BF Egorov, wrote about A.V. Druzhinin in this way:

“The author (ie, Druzhinin is my edit) contrasts Pushkin as an ideally harmonious and“ bright ”writer to the Gogol school (the natural school is my edit) in literature, which supposedly accentuates only the dirty and dark sides of life. Druzhinin contrasts this school and related criticism, from Belinsky to Chernyshevsky, allegedly as a defender of “didactic” art to “free”, “artistic”, which rely not on the topic of the day, but on “eternal” values ​​and goals ”.

Pure, according to Druzhinin, is, first of all, spiritually filled art, strong in the ways of self-expression. The position of supporters of "pure art" was not to separate art from life, but to protect its truly creative principles, poetic originality and the purity of its ideals.

That is, ultimately, we get:

1. Art as an end in itself
2. Refusal to preach
3. The object of attention - the eternal values ​​(beauty, aesthetics, love, etc.)

Theory of critical realism

The most common features on the basis of which the writer was considered to belong to the Natural School (Gogol School) were the following: socially significant topics, a critical attitude to social reality, the realism of artistic expression.
V.Chernyshevsky and N.Nekrasov attributed themselves to the Westerners, critical of the autocracy and serfdom. In their literature grew those who later will fight for land for the peasants and for factories for the workers. With all the desire to contribute to the formation of Russian society, the Westerners looked at Russia through the eyes of "enlightened" Europe. It was a time bomb. From the outside, everything looked rather convincing and overwhelmingly accusatory.

Remember, Nekrasov wrote:

Go to the fire for the honor of the motherland,
For the conviction, for the love ...
Go and perish flawlessly.
You will not die for nothing: the case is solid,
When blood flows under him ...

Now we already know that half a century later "blood flowed" and died, admittedly, also flawlessly. But all this later, in 1917.

“There is no science for science, no art for art - everything exists for society, for the ennui of a person ...”, said Nekrasov.

At the same time, N. Chernyshevsky in his work “The Aesthetic Relationship of Art to Reality” singled out three tasks of art: reproduction, explanation, sentence. His critique was based on this. For example, he sharply condemned the plays of A.N. Ostrovsky, “Do not Sit in Your Sleigh” and “Poverty is not a vice” for the absence of an accusatory “sentence” of Russian life (Sovremennik, 1854, No. 5).

As a result, the representatives of this trend, we see:

1. Art as a means
2. Public sermon
3. The object of attention - the dark side (drunkenness, corruption, laziness, godlessness, etc.)

Chimera of modern liberal art

Interestingly, art as a means directed, in particular, against the elite of Russia in the 19th century, was used only by those who considered art to be critical of social reality, and representatives of the “pure art” movement, oddly enough, were engaged in creating masterpieces of Russian literature. .

“Critical attitude” to social reality, in spite of the entire genius of the authors, strongly hit the main pillars of Russian statehood. It is not surprising that the revolutionary democrat N. Chernyshevsky and the Russian diplomat F. Tyutchev were so different in their understanding of art.

But the most curious thing is how contemporary art has something in common with these trends. It may seem that today there is some critical realism, but this is not quite so.

At present, a liberal culture chimera, a pseudo art, is being created in a liberal environment. It absorbed all the dark sides of the two directions of the XIX century. Freedom and the slogan "art for art" is taken to justify unbridledness, the absence of any moral guidelines and the prohibition of censorship. This frank blasphemy is overwhelmed with radical critical realism, that is, by sucking out all the most vile manifestations of reality. In the end, the viewer appears such a Frankenstein, a symbiosis of licentiousness and dirt. There is no room for constructive criticism or manifestations of the beautiful. Modern pseudo art is on a different plane.

Remember the Soviet feature film fairy tale "The Kingdom of Crooked Mirrors"? There, the ugly seemed beautiful, and the beautiful ugly. Here and here. A pseudo-artist must create something truly disgusting and the worse the better. Such is the inverted principle.

Comparing modern pseudo art with the currents of the XIX century, it is worth noting the following differences:

1) Is all the same means. But when reproaches go in the direction of authors that they provoke, propagate (that is, use art as a means), then art immediately shrinks and becomes an end in itself. Nothing serious, they tell us, just the author's vision. They did not want to offend anyone. The authors are very flexible. Justified by either free art or criticism, as is more convenient.

2) Public preaching has become different. She turned over and became an anti-sermon, a tandem of propaganda and provocation. Low-lying phenomena at the level of instincts are promoted. Provocation does not offer anything, not even criticism. Here, the term "trolling" is more appropriate. There is no Nekrasov's "sanctification of man", but only a "sentence." Protecting propaganda, we are told about free "pure" art, defending provocations, we are told about criticism. Notice, by blaspheming, the authors suggest that we reflect on the place of the church in modern society and its problems, humiliating veterans, suggest reflecting on the cruelty and senselessness of war, etc. Will remove such an "artist" pants in the theater and offer to reflect on the freedom of the individual. Neither give nor take - performance!

3) The subject of attention is either the lowest sides of the society, or its spiritual space. If the lowest, such as LGBT, they are promoted, if spiritual space, then there is a provocation. These are dances on the ambo, and cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed.

My firm conviction that for the most part “pure art” under conditions of wild capitalism and liberal values ​​will certainly become a political technology and will serve politics and the capital behind it.

Under the pseudo-art in this article is understood a significant part of contemporary art, which is beyond the limits of aesthetics. Of course, there will always be a place for real creators, extolling those same eternal values, but this is more likely to be an exception.

About censorship as a countermeasure

Speaking about censorship, as a means of combating pseudo art, Tyutchev's opinion is interesting (article “On censorship in Russia”, November 1857 of the year):

“... as the mental activity becomes more free, and the literary movement develops, does not the necessity and usefulness of the higher leadership of printing become felt more day by day? One censorship, no matter how it operates, is far from satisfying the requirements of the current position of things. Censorship serves as a restriction, not a guide. And in our literature, as in everything else, we should be talking, rather, not about suppression, but about direction. A powerful, intelligent, self-confident direction is the screaming demand of the country and the slogan of our whole modern situation.

Often they complain about the spirit of rebelliousness and obstinacy that distinguishes the people of the new generation. There is a significant misunderstanding in such an accusation. It is quite obvious that in no other epoch so many energetic minds were left out of business, forced by inaction. But these same minds, among whom opponents of the Power are recruited, are very often disposed to ally with her as soon as she expresses a readiness to lead them and involve them in her active and determined activities. ”

Here Tyutchev touched two very important aspects at once. The first is that restriction measures alone are not enough, we need a direction, a powerful alternative. Secondly, the Russian authorities apparently lost the information struggle of the 19th century, lost control over the intelligentsia, failed to engage them in interaction.

What to do?

So said Chernyshevsky. We also ask ourselves this question. What should society do, and rather even the state in order to level this problem. And in my, purely subjective view, there should be several directions here:

At first, in such a crisis situation of political political rampant, a point restriction and close attention to the work of some of them is an inevitable necessity.

Secondlyso that our modern art does not immerse us in the seven circles of hell, but really makes us think, it is necessary to raise the level of culture and education. Remarkable ground for pseudo-art is the low intellectual level of individual members of the artistic community.

Thirdly, it is necessary to create an alternative trend in contemporary art that would oppose itself to the values ​​of pseudo art. The basis of such a trend may lie: a dialectical union of the truth of "pure art" and the art of preaching traditional values. In essence, pure art can form a subcurrent, the core of an alternative course. There is no fundamental contradiction. Both trends can exist in the same school. It is important not to lose “energetic minds”, to find a common language and to set the vector of common work.

With all this, I would like to note that the power of capital in one way or another will have a serious impact on contemporary art. We all know very well how in the "enlightened world" for a lot of money works are sold. For example, at the auction of the Sotheby's auction house, the Walking Man sculpture by Alberto Giacometti went away for 65 million pounds. But, in the conditions of the market, we will have to accept this.

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site:

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Vanek
    Vanek 1 March 2013 07: 38
    Citizens are new settlers!
    Introduce the culture! Hang dry plaster mats!
    No modernism! No abstractionism! Saves the walls from moisture, you from rheumatism!
    1. bask
      bask 1 March 2013 07: 52
      Quote:] Contemporary art. [/ quote

      1. Vanek
        Vanek 1 March 2013 08: 41
        Mona Lisa. I never understood. Baba and baba. I took my family on an excursion. Well, there are pictures of him, da Vinci. All sorts of inventions. Well copies of course, but still interesting. And looking at his genius, the question arose: - And if he lived in our time, today? They might not have flown out of the galaxy, but they would definitely have got to Mars.
        1. bask
          bask 1 March 2013 10: 39
          Quote: Vanek

          Mona Lisa. I never understood. Baba and Baba

          You personally did not understand this. And people from all over the world have been admiring for 500 years !!!!
          But I like Russian art, classical artists of the 19th and 20th centuries.

          Quote: Vanek
          Trying to his genius, the question arose: - And if he lived in our time, today? Beyond the galaxies

          1. The cat
            The cat 1 March 2013 19: 11
            Quote: bask

            and there was also a good school in the USSR, but unfortunately you did not study there.
        2. serge
          serge 1 March 2013 16: 14
          As for the Mona Lisa. This is a very special picture. Whichever side you come to her, this damn girl looks in your direction. Well, if you look at the Louvre, and not at a reproduction. I was personally impressed, and my wife even called this picture devilish. So this is not just a woman pictured.
        3. serge
          serge 1 March 2013 16: 51
          It is strange that Tyutchev's article refers to pure art. Tyutchev, my God, how many political poems.

          "Moscow and the city of Petrov, and the Konstantinov city -
          Here are the kingdoms of the Russian treasured capital ...
          But where is the limit to him and where are his boundaries - ... "

          "They shout, they threaten:
          "Here we will press the Slavs against the wall!"
          Well, no matter how they break off
          In his perky onslaught!

          Yes, there is a wall - a big wall, -
          And it’s not difficult to press you against her.
          Yes, what good is it for them?
          Here, here's what is hard to guess.

          Terrible that wall is springy
          Though granite rock, -
          The sixth of the earth
          She walked around for a long time ... "

          "Russia doesn’t understand,
          No yardstick to measure:
          She has a special become -
          You can only believe in Russia. "

          "Resound the bells and whistles,
          And the whole East will agree to them!
          He calls you and wakes you up; -
          Get up, take heart, take up arms!

          Put on your chest in the armor of faith,
          And with God, the giant sovereign! ..
          O Russia, great is the day ahead,
          Ecumenical day and Orthodox! "

          "Blessed is he who has visited this world
          In his moments, fatal!
          He was summoned by the all-good,
          As an interlocutor for a feast. "

          Tyutchev cut the liberals back in the XNUMXth century:

          "Waste labor - no, you can't understand them, -
          The more liberal, the vulgar.
          Civilization is a fetish for them,
          But their idea is not available to them.

          As you bow down before her, gentlemen,
          You do not scream recognition of Europe.
          In her eyes, you will always
          Not servants of enlightenment, but slaves. "

          It is difficult to find a more politicized poet and person in general than he was
          Tyutchev. He was a real man and a patriot, but the object of his attention was not the dark sides of life, but the lofty ideals of Russia, homeland and faith.
    2. hommer
      hommer 1 March 2013 07: 54
      Five points, dear Vanek for comment! laughing

      Quote from the article:. A wonderful ground for pseudo-art is the low intellectual level of individual representatives of the art community.

      This is the final diagnosis for pseudo-creators.
    3. opkozak
      opkozak 1 March 2013 11: 13
      NATO is going crazy. Take a look at Harlem Shake performed by the Norwegian Army. 39,652,251views on YouTube 01.03.13/11.00/XNUMX at XNUMX.
      1. Chicot 1
        Chicot 1 1 March 2013 14: 59
        opkozak - "NATO is going crazy"...

        It could be called easier - "Goblin reserve"...
      2. lilit.193
        lilit.193 April 18 2013 16: 03
        And is that a normal army? fool
  2. Alexander Romanov
    Alexander Romanov 1 March 2013 07: 43
    I don’t like modern art, and it’s hard to call it that. The first schizo to parody everything modern was Malevich’s Black Square. He could only draw crap and give it off as a masterpiece ......... and the most interesting thing is that many agreed with him It’s hard to imagine how many lunatics are there in this world with a perverted fantasy. To any question -What is it, answer-I see the world so laughing
    I didn’t read the article. Forgive the author winked
    1. Vanek
      Vanek 1 March 2013 07: 49
      Quote: Alexander Romanov
      contemporary art

      Looking at the first picture in the article, the question involuntarily arises:

      - And where is it, art then?

      Alexander hi
      1. Alexander Romanov
        Alexander Romanov 1 March 2013 07: 56
        Quote: Vanek
        Where is it, art?

        Hello Ivan! Yes, this is a tricky business, to shove crap to a rich sucker who will bring home a "masterpiece" and will bend the show-off, in front of the same suckers like himself laughing
        1. hommer
          hommer 1 March 2013 08: 04
          Quote: Alexander Romanov
          cram rich sucker

          No wonder the Serdyukovskaya passion, the vast majority of paintings were fakes.

          Drum Stradivari, dombra Guarneri, harp Amati ... What else will come up for them? laughing
      2. Vanek
        Vanek 1 March 2013 08: 06
        Quote: Vanek
        - And where is it, art then?

        There is even an African-American in a stupor. Like: - Cho for garbage? Yes Yes. You look at him.
        1. Fox
          Fox 1 March 2013 08: 23
          Quote: Vanek
          There is even an African American

          Well, why do you, dear Negro, call an African American.? What did he do to you?
      3. Kaa
        Kaa 1 March 2013 10: 04
        Quote: Vanek
        the question involuntarily arises:
        - And where is it, art then?

        " Remember the Soviet film-tale "Kingdom of Crooked Mirrors"? There, the ugly seemed beautiful, and the beautiful ugly. So here it is"And I also remember a fairy tale about the king's new dress, when everyone, for the sake of an important person, admired the nonexistent, the people silently approved of it, until one boy said," And the king is a goal! "Someone sees something brilliant in" Black and red squares "? I - no. But everyone tacitly approves, because the West imposes an opinion, evaluating this mockery of elementary logic in millions of dollars. That's all they keep silent, according to the principle" maybe, I alone do not understand what. " in art.
      4. bask
        bask 1 March 2013 10: 50
        Quote: Vanek
        And where is it, art is

        Vanya again. This is not, art ,, NECRO-DEGENERATIVE OIL.
        And all this was invented by Zionists from the United States, to fool people around the world.
        It’s a pity to sell, in the literal sense of the word, for hundreds of thousands of $$$$$$ /
        So that people do not distinguish light from darkness, truth from lies. Beautiful ART FROM abomination and perversions.
    2. riding
      riding 1 March 2013 08: 24
      Moreover, Malevich perfectly understood that a black square is like a black hole, in which there is nothing of art. In the last years of his life, he himself returned to the mainstream of realistic art, but the initiator of Suprematism now remember and honor him. He opened the way for other perverts from art.
      1. Kaa
        Kaa 1 March 2013 10: 33
        Quote: koni
        He opened the way for other perverts from art.

        And not only from art. In Soviet times, there was such a diagnosis - "sluggish schizophrenia", this is when the brow slowly "goes on", without chasing devils and other violence. Here Dali, Chagall - they were specifically schizophrenics, and the author of the famous "Sunflowers" - even cut off his ear, so he died in a psychiatric hospital - but now all the others (crazy people and not so much) impose their distorted worldview in literature and art, as the only true ... There was even a symptom like this, graphomania was called, after treatment it usually disappeared. But this is "punitive psychiatry" !!!! This is inhumane! Is it more humane to impose an abnormal perception of reality on STILL NORMAL PEOPLE? And then we still wonder where so many maniacs, psychos, sexual preoccupations come from. Previously, even art councils and editorial boards weeded out this nonsense - but now? negative
    3. Vladimir_61
      Vladimir_61 1 March 2013 10: 44
      Quote: Alexander Romanov
      I do not like modern art, and it is difficult to call it that.

      One of the components of the degeneration process, kindly provided by the "enlightened" West.
    4. Skavron
      Skavron 1 March 2013 11: 20
      Quote: Alexander Romanov
      I didn’t read the article. Forgive the author

  3. riding
    riding 1 March 2013 07: 51
    There is a lot of controversy in this article. The masterpieces of the representatives of "pure art" in no way surpassed critical realism. And where to attribute Tolstoy, Dostoevsky (who himself ranked himself among the people of the soil)? And Nekrasov is larger than Tyutchev.
    And the popularity of modern pseudo-art is an eructation of a modern society of consumers who, from indigestion, have already ceased to perceive the beautiful, have become deaf and blind.
    1. Vladimirets
      Vladimirets 1 March 2013 08: 10
      Quote: koni
      And the popularity of modern pseudo-art is an eructation of a modern society of consumers who, from indigestion, have already ceased to perceive the beautiful, have become deaf and blind.

      They did not stop understanding the beautiful, they did not understand it. It’s just now that it has become fashionable to admire any moronic crap, groaning and gasping like the others. If you don’t gasp and gasp at the sight of a cut ass in a frame, then you don’t understand anything in art, and this is a bad man. As a result, like a fairy tale about the naked king.
  4. predator.3
    predator.3 1 March 2013 08: 12
    I never understood the work of Picasso and Dali, some scribbles and nonsense, and for these "arts" they lay out hundreds of millions of dollars, I wonder if they at least once in their life tried to paint a picture in the style of Flemish masters?
    1. Roman Dmitriev
      Roman Dmitriev 1 March 2013 09: 40
      The joke remembered: Picasso was robbed in Paris. He comes to the police, the investigator as an artist suggested that he draw a portrait of the robber. According to this picture were arrested: 7 men; 5 women; 4 refrigerators and 1 tram. lol
    2. bask
      bask 1 March 2013 10: 55
      Quote: predator.3
      in Picasso and Dali

      This is called the simple word Schizophrenia.

  5. Fox
    Fox 1 March 2013 08: 18
    Quote: predator.3
    I never understood the work of Picasso and Dali

    it's you, dear, you just don't know how to look at this "creature". just add LSD ... smile
    1. predator.3
      predator.3 1 March 2013 09: 43
      Quote: Fox
      it's you, dear, you just don't know how to look at this "creature". just add LSD ...

      This type, there are no beautiful women, but there is little vodka! wassat
  6. Edge_kmv
    Edge_kmv 1 March 2013 08: 36
    For me, there are so many modern artists of the Darmoedy who simply do not want to work.
    Like Mayakovsky
    Do you like roses?
    and I have shit on them!
    the country needs locomotives,
    the country needs metal!
    1. alex13-61
      alex13-61 1 March 2013 11: 46
      Do you like roses
      And I piss on them,
      The country needs tractors
      ACS brands ...
  7. zao74
    zao74 1 March 2013 09: 55
    What kind of society, such and art ...
  8. valokordin
    valokordin 1 March 2013 09: 58
    Well, not a single word about socialist realism, but still realism, whatever it may be, should express art that is understandable to a normal person. How great works of artists look, I will not list them quite a lot, including ours, Vasiliev, Glazunov.
    1. bask
      bask 1 March 2013 11: 03
      The state .and min.Cultures should support young artists. Classical school.

  9. dmb
    dmb 1 March 2013 11: 19
    "And we ourselves are soldiers and our jokes are soldiers." This is not me at all to belittle the high rank of soldiers, but to those commentators who categorically row everyone under the same brush. The fact that "Madonna", a female creature, was actually not concealed by the author himself. But what the hapless commentator hoped to see is hard to say. Even less clear is the position of fellow citizens, who are angry with those who pay big money for Malevich and Chagall. First, they pay their money, and if it is your money, then take it away from them. Secondly, the concept of benefit to these gentlemen, who most likely does not understand anything in art, know no worse than our nouveau riches. And finally, don't like it, don't look. Another question is that Gelman is really a scoundrel and a provocateur, that exhibitions of so-called contemporary art should not contradict the morality and ethics of the society where they are held. But for this, alas, we need censorship and art councils. And many of those who rightly spit at Gelman themselves do not know what they want. They do not want Soviet censorship, because it allegedly strangled them, and then only religious censorship remains, and this is even worse. I can recall what the Taliban did with the world heritage-monuments of Buddha, or what the Synod did with L. Tolstoy. And I myself don't like Malevich and Chagall, K. Vasiliev and Glazunov and Shilov are closer and more understandable to me.
    1. Son
      Son 1 March 2013 14: 33
      So what happens ..? Contradict yourself ... Censorship, religions - they don't want ... They either don't have their own moral principles, or don't want to adhere to them. "Gelman and K" - do what they want and, as a consequence, impose their "art - degradation" ... So who or what will educate society ..? Man will come to perfection himself ..? Hardly ... With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the majority is degrading (limited to the former USSR) ... We need a shepherd. Let it be either religion or the "Moral Code of the Builder of Communism."
      I read a collection of articles by L. Tolstoy, those to which you refer ... Yes, for an intellectual there are reasonable thoughts ... But, their units (intellectuals) ... And what for the others ..? God forbid, the ideas of L. Tolstoy - to the masses ...
      1. dmb
        dmb 1 March 2013 18: 31
        Actually, I did not mention specific works of Tolstoy. And I said that with Tolstoy no one was even going to discuss, including intellectuals of which there are many among the clergy. excommunicated and all short. I will not say anything about the Taliban or the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia there, all discussions about the faith there usually end with a cut off of the heads. I’m just for Soviet censorship. For by and large, after the excesses of the initial stage as a whole, it performed a positive role. One of the facts confirming this in my opinion is an example from an entertaining movie. Films with Louis de Funes, have always been an event on our screen, and buying their state paid in gold. In the era of the beginning of democracy, they bought the rest of the films with his participation. And then it became clear that the state did not spend gold on weak films. It can be considered censorship. but it can be considered a filter against trash.
  10. Skavron
    Skavron 1 March 2013 11: 28
    Once, graduate students (future psychologists) were given 10 pictures, on 5 of them were pictures of the mentally ill, on the other 5 "masterpieces" costing more than one hundred thousand dollars and asked to determine where the pictures of patients were. Should the result be announced? )))))
    All students were in shock.
  11. Son
    Son 1 March 2013 11: 37
    "In fact, pure art can form a sub-flow, the core of an alternative movement. There is no fundamental contradiction here. Both tendencies can exist within the same school."

    In my opinion, from this "sub-stream" - everything will return to normal ... Investing in them enemy (I'm not afraid of this word) "giants" and setting them tasks. I don’t understand why be ashamed ..? There is an information war, feed - yours, push - strangers ("sub-flow") ..! Money must be invested in them ... This is the intelligentsia (writers, artists, etc.) in words proud, will pretend that they are not fit for power ... SchA ..! Will be missed!
    An example is Ukraine ... With Yushchenko’s coming to power, a brilliant operation was carried out to introduce, in most mass media, the bourgeois painters from Western Ukraine ... As a result, the general pressure of the current government.
    Only control and feeding for them, you can "soft power".
    For the sample, the trends of the media in Ukraine, I give the link-http: //
  12. alex13-61
    alex13-61 1 March 2013 11: 42
    Even Arkady Averchenko, a hundred years ago, did a good job on this topic .... He has a cool story about how he invited such a "creator" to dinner and made him try his own similar creations, only culinary ...
    1. Son
      Son 1 March 2013 11: 57
      I. Glazunov, to the question: - "Do you like Malevich's works ..?" He answered with a question: - "Oh, would you like him to paint a portrait of your mother ..?"
  13. Bosk
    Bosk 1 March 2013 13: 25
    Somehow, my friend was going to bring his son to an exhibition of modern art .... well, we told him something like that, from an oak tree, he crashed into the gentle psyche of a child ... so he answered that it wakes up for educational purposes .. .Let they say he will see what people who have smoked and drunk are doing ... some seven years have passed and his son grew up quite a bit, and as long as he still did not sit down on cigarettes and alcohol ...
    1. Son
      Son 1 March 2013 14: 11
      Dad, turned out to be the right man ... He took the child to study the enemy, and accordingly explained and as a result of the upbringing, the Man grew ... Respect for your friend ...
  14. Chicot 1
    Chicot 1 1 March 2013 14: 49
    "Contemporary art" ... What a phrase! .. And it reeks of unwashed amateurism ...

    I will be brief and rather harsh in my assessment. I have the right, because a simple and average man in the street, and not some crazy critic on "masterpieces" - Contemporary art, and culture in general (with the rarest exceptions !!!) is a daub and nonsense, a low-grade product of a perverted (read "creative") consciousness.
    And his place is not in museum halls, but in the exposition of the Kunskamera. Yes, and then show it all art people need it very rarely and very little so as not to cause severe mental disorder in future generations ... We can take it. We have been immunized since normal school ...
    1. bask
      bask 1 March 2013 17: 37
      Quote: Chicot 1
      We can stand it. We have immunity since the time

  15. zmey
    zmey 1 March 2013 15: 29
    Malevich is not original before him for 100 years one French psychopath artist painted a similar h..ynyu only rectangular. The black rectangle was called like - "A terrible massacre of blacks on a dark night near a coal mine" wassat
    99% of the so-called "Modern Art" is the uttermost degenerative moronism of a schizophrenic psychopath with an unrecognized genius complex. IMHO.
    Attempts of mediocrity to suck in his daub, passing off as a masterpiece, morons for decent money. Only business!
    But to critics who recognize this shit as a masterpiece - you need to forcibly give out condoms and knock out brains !?
  16. Cpa
    Cpa 1 March 2013 19: 05
    When you see the masterpieces of modern art, you remember children's nightmares, maybe there is some kind of secret property, but this secret is akin to horror films.
  17. The cat
    The cat 1 March 2013 19: 24
    Why did everyone foam so much? Does someone make you buy or hang houses on the wall? Well, like someone, you what? Or envy artists? Everyone earns as he can.
    1. Bosk
      Bosk 1 March 2013 19: 59
      No one is jealous ... it infuriates the way the so-called art is being promoted, for example, I am a fan of classical music and I don’t understand how to put an alternative above classical music, and judging by the press, this is already happening and I personally don’t like it.
      1. The cat
        The cat 1 March 2013 21: 11
        Quote: Bosk
        No one is jealous ... it infuriates the way the so-called art is being promoted, for example, I am a fan of classical music and I don’t understand how to put an alternative above classical music, and judging by the press, this is already happening and I personally don’t like it.

        And no one puts an alternative above. Look at the price tags of paintings. Classic will be more expensive. Money is a pretty accurate measure of art.
        1. Bosk
          Bosk 2 March 2013 21: 37
          How much did Aivazovsky draw his own ... at least a shaft ?, and Mlevich?
    2. Misantrop
      Misantrop 1 March 2013 20: 14
      Quote: Elgato
      Everyone earns as he can.
      Selling drugs is also a way to make money. After all, no one forces you to inject and eat pills.
      And such "art" is the same drug for the brain. When ONLY money becomes the measure of the value of art, an art critic is reborn into a PR manager.
  18. Son
    Son 2 March 2013 08: 29
    PEOPLE, here on the forum I met "familiar faces" from the Ukrainian "Internet-scrubber" ... Discussions with them are useless. It's easier to ignore ... As an example: - there is a download site (www.EX.UA), if a film appears where the opinion about the USSR, Stalin, Russia, Putin is expressed in a positive perspective - pops up (Elgato - see above) - regular "troll". Don't get involved in an argument, it has less advertising ..
  19. dark_65
    dark_65 2 March 2013 19: 57
    And here is this toad. Poses in front of the photographer, but the monkey is smarter. It’s at least painted, and this same belly, most importantly, I was there.
    1. Misantrop
      Misantrop 2 March 2013 23: 46
      Quote: dark_65
      this toad is standing in front of the photographer, posing, and the monkey is smarter
      By the way, yes, the monkey painted even has a more intelligent face (now he specifically looked) lol