AceOfClubs In reply to ??? [2012-07-28 04:04:19 +0000 UTC]

no more labels please. how can you put all these vastly different works into one category? sorry but this article was pointless.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

southstar In reply to ??? [2012-07-28 04:03:17 +0000 UTC]

1. Of course there's room for both. Art encompasses a huge terrain, so why not have political art and apolitical art and anti-political art and neutral-political art?
2. Where there's bad, there's always some good. I see a lot of unoriginality these days, but there's always a really unique counterpart to that(maybe not in equal parts). I think street art is really emerging as an already recognized art.
3. It would depend on the piece. Some I look at I have to stare for a bit to find the meaning and im all "Oh, i get it." Then there are the ones where i say "Oh, hell. This is tots awesome." or "Nuh uh, no way."
4. Again, dependent on the concept.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

EsteIIe In reply to ??? [2012-07-28 03:56:31 +0000 UTC]

Too many big words to understand this lol

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

VH-1 In reply to ??? [2012-07-28 03:55:39 +0000 UTC]

I think we display layers of filters in contemplation and perception in general.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

edshu33 In reply to ??? [2012-07-28 03:51:41 +0000 UTC]

This is neat. I've always been frustrated by artistic dogma. Like, those YBA yuppies who carry around picket signs proclaiming the death of conceptual art, or how certain film critics see schools of thought attached to movies and will decide their opinions based upon their fondness for the fondness of the school of thought.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

catsstealporkchops In reply to ??? [2012-07-28 03:44:18 +0000 UTC]

1. I think there is plenty room for both political and apolitical art. I mean, why shouldn't there be? One pretty much has to have intentional meaning while the another may be based more on aesthetics or technique. Personally, I think the name of 'political' or 'apolitical' is simply that, a name and shouldn't affect whether or not it is art.

2. Mmmm...I don't feel like there's an artistic movement that covers all or most genres of art, but rather popular trends in one or two categories. Like photography for example. Every time I go on facebook, someone has their newest Instagram vintaged photo up on their wall. Sometimes the photos are cool, and sometimes they aren't even done using Instagram, but the vintaged look is definitely popular right now.

3.Occasionally. I try to feel what the artist was feeling while creating a piece. Some art I feel like doesn't really have a meaning, but more was created for other reasons like practicing technique and skill. Though often times I'll just look at it and judge whether or not I like it just by personal taste.

4. Sometimes, not often. I've been trying to develop my art and get it to a point where I'm confident enough to then tell a story with it.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Toyona In reply to ??? [2012-07-28 03:41:12 +0000 UTC]

1) I believe all artist should be able to express themselves freely (it could be in a political manner or otherwise) unless its harming someone else if there is room for them to express freely then there is room for both.

2)No special movement i can sense there...

3)I normally try to decipher the message behind their work. The themes behind their works is one of the big factors of whether i like it or not.

4)For now its mainly techniques...but I definitely plan for much more meaningful art in which there will be what I want to share with the world.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

cpt-plaid In reply to ??? [2012-07-28 03:39:58 +0000 UTC]

I find it interesting to consider there being room for art. While people want to say space is infinite, there is a limit to what a person can encounter.

I do not think an 'ism' is defined by the artist, but the critics and 'experts' trying to organize how art is expressed. I am unaware of an artist producing art with the intent to define a new movement.

While art is a means of communication, it is up to the viewer to interprit it. While I may try to say something, either a reaction to my environment or statement of belief, the meaning of art is in the observer and out of my control.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

seasaidh In reply to ??? [2012-07-28 03:26:21 +0000 UTC]

For some of my artwork, I do enjoy things to have a double meaning. This quality is what I also look for in a lot of art that I favorite. Sometimes it isn't enough to paint a pretty picture, there needs to be a story within the story. The AGE OF INCEPTION!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Gabriellllllll In reply to ??? [2012-07-28 03:25:47 +0000 UTC]

excelente info, gracias

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Gabriellllllll In reply to ??? [2012-07-28 03:25:18 +0000 UTC]

There are always different concepts new in our minds,
there is enough space, enough space for everything we have on our way

to have order, first a mess
I think the most important thing is to keep creating, endlessly showing our human side, for grow,


there are not good or bad, is a mixture of both


I think when an artist is viewing a work of art, is looking for the same, and feeling attraction or disgust according to their experiences and desires

both are important, but sometimes I worry about both, but the best moments is when nothing matters more than the meaning it has for myself, but it is part of the strategy for Growth

I hope you understand, I'm bad in English

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

CatOfManyWhiskers In reply to ??? [2012-07-28 03:21:06 +0000 UTC]

1. Both. The thing is, art has no limits, so to say there's 'only room for one,' either apolitical or political, is to put a containing fence around an otherwise free and malleable being. Actually, without one there wouldn't be the other, to be honest. The two sides to art, political and apolitical, are what help shape it into what it is. So in a way, the two types of art both form art and are formed BY art, if you catch my drift.

2. Ooooh yes, I definitely can see a movement. Not all artists are PART of this movement, but there is one. Actually, it's a lot of little movements really, all flowing in the same general direction, like eddies in an enormous river - each individual making up the whole. And all of these movements are aiming towards one main thing
- rebellion. I've noticed a lot of art rebels against what society's ideals are - body imagery, ways of thinking, sexual orientation (definitely sexual orientation), the recent political stuff going on in the US (I'm sure there's stuff about political issues in other countries as well), and gender position in society (particularly women). Also, there's rebellion AGAINST rebellion, if that makes any sense. There is art, for instance, aimed at trying to lessen the sexual image of the woman's body (or any body for that matter - male, female, whatever), and then there's art that is aimed TOWARD that exact thing. It's weird, but there seems to be kind of a battle going on all over the place of person on person, idea onto idea, opinion onto opinion, almost all of it rebelling against... Something. Society. A person. An idea. Whatever.

3. Honestly... It depends. Sometimes I do try to figure out the meaning or message, the 'suggested idea' within the artwork, particularly in sculptures or anything that focuses on a modern-day ideal/problem/etc. Also I try and find meaning when I see there are a lot of specific details to a piece of artwork (an apple here, an open book there, a broken doll, and so on), because I wonder 'why is that there? What is the point to this one thing in the grand scheme of the picture? Then again, sometimes I don't. Sometimes a picture or sculpture or whatever is beautiful and I like it, or it's cool and I like it. I like chromatic pictures not because they have any specific meaning to me (though they might to the artist), but because they look fun and bright and interesting. I like a good painting of a griffin not because of any symbolism, but because I think it's a well done griffin and it's beautiful. It all depends on the piece in question.

4. Currently I'm working on 'technique and aesthetics,' as you said, but sometimes a little suggstivism slips in all on its own. Sometimes a picture just comes out that I was working on for the sake of just looking nice and instead there's a message printed clear as day (or not) across the paper. I was drawing a dragon once and thought 'hey, holding an orb would be cool,' then I started on the pose and made it cower. OK, why was it cowering? Maybe it's protecting the orb? OK, change that here and there... What is the orb? OK, well, this is what's attacking it... Who are the attackers? Basically I build a story in my mind that leads to a meaning, but again it's never intentional, it's spontaneous.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

FieldsOfFire In reply to ??? [2012-07-28 03:13:05 +0000 UTC]

In my opinion, many of the most famous and influential artists of the 20th century spent their artistic talent on trying to answer political and philosophical questions, and produced some of the stupidest garbage imaginable. Self-consciously focusing on "-isms" as you create can be one of the biggest creativity-killers there is. Not that they don't have their place, but they should be applied after the fact, not before.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

catjudge In reply to FieldsOfFire [2012-07-28 03:20:49 +0000 UTC]

So true >_<

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

SamBasu In reply to ??? [2012-07-28 03:05:33 +0000 UTC]

a1: I think there's enough room for both.
a2: there's is a movement; anything may have both sides.
a3: I usually decide if I like it or not, and sometime it shows some of the artist character.
a4: no I don't transmit any message.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

nothingsp In reply to ??? [2012-07-28 03:05:22 +0000 UTC]

Or you could, y'know, just create and not waste time being a pretentious blowhard about it.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

FicticiousAnimation In reply to nothingsp [2012-07-28 03:09:52 +0000 UTC]

True.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

SIERRAREYNA In reply to ??? [2012-07-28 03:03:25 +0000 UTC]

4. I always concern myself with technique. i strive for detail in every piece! but when i look back at my work some pieces straight off the back i know what im trying to say with it and why im creating it. but other times its not till im done, not till much later that i realize what my subconscious was trying to get out at the time. With some pieces as well i think i know why i have the urge to draw or photograph something, i think i know what my message is or why im doing something, but then as i look back or continue to ponder it i realize i was wrong and see a new, more accurate reason for doing what i did. Also, i believe that there are countless reasons why we create the art we do and there are infinite messages we have to get across and one piece of art work is not limited to one meaning.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

FicticiousAnimation In reply to SIERRAREYNA [2012-07-28 03:11:10 +0000 UTC]

Wow... That is the most artistic thing I have ever heard... But it's not confusing like a lot of art stuff I hear... It makes perfect sense in every possible way.

Very well said! I have a new respect for you!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SIERRAREYNA In reply to FicticiousAnimation [2012-07-29 23:21:34 +0000 UTC]

thank you, that means a lot!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

FicticiousAnimation In reply to SIERRAREYNA [2012-07-30 02:35:28 +0000 UTC]

You're welcome!! I am so happy somebody who I totally respect just replied to me. ^^

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SIERRAREYNA In reply to FicticiousAnimation [2012-07-30 16:28:03 +0000 UTC]

dido! ;]

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

FicticiousAnimation In reply to ??? [2012-07-28 03:02:59 +0000 UTC]

First off, I read the entire thing. This is amazing. I will definitely be taking part in this "suggestivism". But first, I must mix Internet memes with a deeply involved storyline... Which I will... Trust me...

Questions!!
1. I think art should be whatever the artist feels. If the artist wants to give off some political meaning, I encourage it! If the art is apolitical, I encourage that too! An artist should not have to change his/her style or ways just to accommodate "what's popular".

2. I don't really sense any movement, besides the clear separation of actual artists from people who call themselves artists. A real artist is a person who makes art. Somebody who downloads a picture of Sonic the Hedgehog off of the Internet and changes his spines from blue to red is not an artist.

3. If there is a message to be had I try to find it. I usually just try to decide if I like or dislike art though. That's probably because I look at pictures of a single character on a white background most of the time.

4. This goes right back to my last answer. If I feel inspired to put a message, I will. (My Pac-Man deviation, for example.) However, the majority of my art is a single character on a white background.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Shrineheart In reply to ??? [2012-07-28 03:01:01 +0000 UTC]

1) Should art be political or apolitical? Or do you think there’s room enough for both?

Why is this even a question? Of course there's room for both. There's room for everything. It's art. The day artwork stops being political in some corner of it is the day the world ends.

2) Do you sense there being any current “movement” in the arts world today? Is this a good or bad state of things?

Can't really comment as most of the artists I follow are not proffesionals or in the "world at large" of art.

3) Do you try to “figure out” an artist’s intent or message when looking at art, or do you simply decide whether you like or dislike each piece of art?

This is human nature. We seek meaning and a point to things. I can dislike a piece of art and love the message and vice versa. Does this mean I look into the deeper meaning of something that was drawn just to be pretty or unique? Not really. You can generally get an idea if the artist is trying to express a meaning or just draw their favorite character.

4) In your own art, do you try to transmit any sort of message, or do you concern yourself only with technique and aesthetics?

Well it depends on what I'm drawing. If I'm doing a character reference sheet I'm just trying to present the character to you, if I'm doing emotional work then I'm trying to get a message across, if I'm playing around with new techniques it's probably just an effort to make it look pretty. There's such a wide range for most folks, artists really aren't that narrow and most of them don't fit into boxes well unless they're trying to.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

UsernameStolen In reply to ??? [2012-07-28 02:55:54 +0000 UTC]

I think it looks great so far.
But hasn't this concept already been done? Perhaps not the title but the artwork in itself? I know it's rather difficult to come up with something new these days since the world has adopted a "More, more-Faster, faster" ideal.

I love the art work.

Q: Should art be political or apolitical? Or do you think there’s room enough for both?
A: I think there's room for both, there always has been.

Q: Do you sense there being any current “movement” in the arts world today? Is this a good or bad state of things?
A: Yes, mostly digital. Progression is always good because it implements and represents growth.

Q: Do you try to “figure out” an artist’s intent or message when looking at art, or do you simply decide whether you like or dislike each piece of art?
A: A little of both, if I can't figure out their train of thought on a piece I tend to try and at least admire the artistic aspect.

Q: In your own art, do you try to transmit any sort of message, or do you concern yourself only with technique and aesthetics?
A: Always both. I find it's hard to do one without the other. (at least for me)

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

RedHeadLilith In reply to ??? [2012-07-28 02:51:43 +0000 UTC]

1. there’s room enough for both
2. Yes, and I it's bad .
3.Do you try to “figure out” an artist’s intent or message when looking at art, or do you simply decide whether you like or dislike each piece of art?
depends on the art- usually I look at both of them -artist’s intent and visual look.
4.In your own art, do you try to transmit any sort of message, or do you concern yourself only with technique and aesthetics?
both

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Japewrewis In reply to ??? [2012-07-28 02:40:33 +0000 UTC]

My language is spanish, thus
i'll need some time for answer
all these four interesting questions!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

CPereira In reply to ??? [2012-07-28 02:33:48 +0000 UTC]

Every piece of art is up to interpretation. That's what makes it art. What makes it suggestivism? That it's not political? Try again. I'm sure we can come up with a better "ism" for our generation than this.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Nyancho In reply to ??? [2012-07-28 02:31:30 +0000 UTC]

Just another word for postmodern, bourgeois art.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

TheLeopardwerecat In reply to ??? [2012-07-28 02:31:05 +0000 UTC]

How can you call it "new" if it's been around since artists have wanted to draw surreal/absurd things or just whatever the hell they want; which is basically since humans first though it'd be cool to doodle on cave walls and things?

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

fanan-nusayr In reply to ??? [2012-07-28 02:29:04 +0000 UTC]

i do try sometimes to give a masseg in my art and i think movement is a good thing

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

SalvidorMonkey In reply to ??? [2012-07-28 02:29:04 +0000 UTC]

The world is in economic crisis. A new "ism" could be just the stimulus needed to lower the unemployment rate of people who want to make a living writing about art.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

ShellSys10101 In reply to SalvidorMonkey [2012-07-28 02:34:00 +0000 UTC]

Very good!

Shell

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Vueiy-Visarelli In reply to ??? [2012-07-28 02:26:57 +0000 UTC]

1. Both, of course. It's not a matter of "room."

2. If there is a movement, it seems to be towards the shocking or the "new." There's nothing intrinsically wrong with these things, but people often cross lines they shouldn't just in the name of getting a reaction.

3. If the artwork seems to have been done just to be pretty (or illustrate something, or for work, etc.), I usually don't try to figure it out, but if it appears to have a message or symbolism, then I do. There's been some artwork that I've found to be aesthetically displeasing, but I supported the message it sent, and therefore "liked" it, so to speak.

4. For the most part, I just like to make pretty pictures. But for some things, I do go for a specific message, or perhaps a feeling. For example: [link] /selfpromote

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

FicticiousAnimation In reply to Vueiy-Visarelli [2012-07-28 03:04:49 +0000 UTC]

That's almost exactly what I said. XD! Nice statements! I love how you organized your sentences. ^^

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Vueiy-Visarelli In reply to FicticiousAnimation [2012-07-28 04:18:32 +0000 UTC]

lol, thanks!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

FicticiousAnimation In reply to Vueiy-Visarelli [2012-07-28 17:29:19 +0000 UTC]

You're welcome.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

LCextrordinaire In reply to ??? [2012-07-28 02:25:23 +0000 UTC]

lol...

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

RosieA In reply to ??? [2012-07-28 02:20:11 +0000 UTC]

It's just a modern form of DADAism...Nothing really new. XD How interesting.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Spectic In reply to ??? [2012-07-28 02:19:41 +0000 UTC]

This doesn't seem to be a new thing. Artists have always been putting on their canvases the first thing that comes to their heads without necessarily thinking about what it means. A lot of surrealist and abstract art has been created this way.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

tablelander In reply to ??? [2012-07-28 02:16:37 +0000 UTC]

Some of this 'Art' is unnerving--I as a much older artist --I concentrate on My nature photos--trying to show the World My little patch --recently I discovered digital mirroring--it opens up a whole New world to Me & others--some things that I 'see' others don't & what they 'see' I eventually do--but some may 'see' what Their minds want to 'see'--I get all manner of comments--some unnerving in themselves--so I've said before 'each to their own' but the Blood & Guts--displayed in this 'art'-- well leaves Me disturbed--I'll just stick to the natural world Thanks

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

FicticiousAnimation In reply to tablelander [2012-07-28 03:05:40 +0000 UTC]

Well said. ^^

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

tablelander In reply to FicticiousAnimation [2012-07-28 03:33:07 +0000 UTC]

Thanks--I just don't understand Why there has to be so much Blood & death stuff in Art

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

FicticiousAnimation In reply to tablelander [2012-07-28 03:45:15 +0000 UTC]

I am an artist who does some blood and death stuff, but I am starting to lean away from it.

The reason I do bloody is because I can't do it anywhere else. Also because it fascinates me, and I think about it a lot but the only place I can talk about my gore and stuff is through my artwork.

I'm starting to let go of all this bloody stuff because it's been done to death, and it's not fun or original anymore. Everybody does it.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

tablelander In reply to FicticiousAnimation [2012-07-28 03:47:49 +0000 UTC]

I agree--a bit like anime & manga--I don't really understand it either--I'm sure there's a lot more interesting stuff to do that's more original

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

FicticiousAnimation In reply to tablelander [2012-07-28 04:06:54 +0000 UTC]

You are right. I bet there is a lot more stuff to do that is original. ^^

The hard part is being original enough to find something original... LOL!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

tablelander In reply to FicticiousAnimation [2012-07-28 04:18:47 +0000 UTC]

I guess it comes down to this--Browse dA--look in every nook & cranny--& if something comes to mind that You don't see--do it--if You can

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

FicticiousAnimation In reply to tablelander [2012-07-28 17:28:50 +0000 UTC]

THat is good advice. ^^ Thank you.

You are probably more of an artist than I am though, considering I usually do Sonic The Hedgehog fan art.

You should do it.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

tablelander In reply to FicticiousAnimation [2012-07-29 02:53:50 +0000 UTC]

it'd look terrible if I even tried I'll leave that to you--lol

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

FicticiousAnimation In reply to tablelander [2012-07-29 14:37:41 +0000 UTC]

No I bet anything you do is amazing. I have seen your artwork and it's already so unique and original. I have never seen anything like it.

How do you even get those shots? XD! Do you digitally manipulate your photos? XD they're amazing!

I usually make like 3D cartoon characters. Nothing too original or unique yet.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1