TigerAgam [2012-08-01 03:53:20 +0000 UTC]

1.I don't think it matters since art isn't exclusive in itself. It's a form of expression, it's a tool. It can be whatever the individual artist wants it to be.

2.I don't feel like there is a dominant movement but I do feel like there is somewhat of a rediscovery of what all art can be. It's not just one technique that's okay, anything you can think of is possible (relatively speaking). I think it's a good thing; it makes art less boring and less exclusive to an elite.

3.Both. I usually express my reaction to the piece first then try to figure out the artist intent.

4.It depends what my message is. Sometimes I'm just practicing technique and other times I want to tell a story or a message.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Silverheartme [2012-08-01 03:44:46 +0000 UTC]

1)) Art can be anything that expresses something. On a topic you agree or don't agree with, or something that you like. It doesn't matter what it is. Every piece of art expresses something, some just love for art or creativity. There's a reason that a blank space isn't art. It doesn't express anything, it doesn't tell a story.

2)) There is no giant movement that is going to make every newscast in the world say "And artists all over the world and doing [insert-some-form-of-art-here]", but there are small movements like fan-bases or movements in individuals.

3)) Both.

4)) Right now I'm focusing on technique, but once I get that down I'll move on to portraying what I want to. When I put my opinion out there, I want to have it be something I'm proud of. My best work, that just gets better.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

S---y [2012-08-01 03:24:50 +0000 UTC]

1. Both: political, apolitical, and whatever it wants to be.

2. There isn't one single movement, because we are leaving the age of centralized mass media. Now, we all move the way we want, each as individuals, each exploring and developing our own local movements. Millions of micro movements, no one single big movement.

3. I experience the art. I feel it. I let it say what it has to say. Only after that do I contemplate what the artist meant by it, because I find that if I try to hard to guess what the artists meant, I'll miss it, but if I just let the art speak to me, I'll understand better what the artists meant, and more importantly I'll understand what the art means to me.

4. I prefer surrealism, so I neither concern myself with the meaning nor the aesthetics. I practice and contemplate art, and then when something wishes to express itself, I let it express itself, and my practice of aesthetics allows me to be a clearer medium through which the art may express the meaning it wishes to express to us.

This "suggestivism" thing seems to just be a description of the creative process. Then again, we could be using more conscious technique rather than the modern visceral approach that's so common today. It seems a bit broad though. Like a less strict form of surrealism.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

ErisDulig [2012-08-01 03:14:06 +0000 UTC]

"Create without lust for result" - Liber Al vel Legis

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

ErisDulig [2012-08-01 03:13:14 +0000 UTC]

By definition, one's muse would determine if the work is political or not. Thus, there must necessarily be room for both.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

MercilessInk [2012-08-01 03:10:27 +0000 UTC]

This actually helps explain my own pieces because I never dreamed this would be a genre or movement. I always did what I wanted, even if there was no message a hidden meaning or thought is still embedded in everything I make. I think in suggestivism there is room for both political and apolitical. As long as you're not thinking too hard on your theme. It should be whatever comes to you. There's never an art piece that I don't try to decipher for meanings. Every artist creates for a reason, I think it comes from something inside. I really enjoyed this article

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

SONIC-GOKUVERDUDE456 [2012-08-01 01:39:11 +0000 UTC]

1. Why not both? Great art transcends borders of time, politics, and ideology and tells about human nature. An example would be Willem de Kooning's "Woman" series that, along with being an important series of AbEx works, is a parody of how men see women with exxaggerated breasts and legs and eyes as well as a tribute (or possibly a horror story) to femininity, seen in how fearsome looking the women are (a biography of de Kooning used the term "bitch protector goddess", appropriate IMO). This is the apolitical message that reveals itself to the viewer, the political message is one that is true to the times of creation. The paintings could be seen as a parody of the sex cult surrounding Marilyn Monroe, Jayne Mansfield, and the other sex bombs of the time, as well as the porno market that rose as the power of the US did.

2. Stuckism, Superflat, and Altermodern are three that I know of and enjoy/agree with, but there are few other than those. Movements naturally organize themselves, as seen in the apparent rise in works/sentiments that could be considered "altermodern/metamodern". It is not a bad thing that there are none.

3. I decide whether I enjoy it and then analyze it. The fact that I hate it could be the intended effect the artist was going for, desiring to create a work that is unattractive to create a narrative.

4. Both. I start with several messages in mind that I try to hide so the work isn't completely explicit. However, more narratives arise as I work. At the same time, I try to use the aesthetics of the work to help transmit or contribute to the message/layering of messages.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Hope2Fly [2012-08-01 00:46:13 +0000 UTC]

1.) There's room for both, art is whatever the artist want and whatever it is interpreted to mean.

2.) Yes I think there is a kind of "movement" happening. Young people (including myself) are discovering that art isn't just dusty paintings or little doodles, it's a way of expression. Now this seems incredibly obvious, but in today's high pressure society teens and other young people need a form of expression, and this is one of the many ways to do that. Now what goes along with all that is we are seeing an increase of macabre and "horror" (for lack of a better word) than any time before.
I would classify this as a movement of some kind.

3.) I do both, basic drawings without to much of a meaning I decide immediately if I like it or not, but I try and figure out the meaning first. Knowing the meaning and message of a piece adds a whole other dimension to it.

4.) I do both, at the moment I'm just working on improving my technique but I have a few pieces with real meaning, and quite a few planned that have quite a bit of meaning and depth to them.



Overall I like the style and the article as well, but I really don't like the constant need to label everything.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

pickl2 [2012-08-01 00:43:20 +0000 UTC]

1. Depends, but i think there can room for both.
2. Yes, where...i have no earthly idea...
3. I try to do both...most of the time.
4. Usually both, but i lean more towards expressing my self.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

shadow9393 [2012-07-31 23:40:16 +0000 UTC]

1.there's room for both
2.yes,a good thing because people are using present items in art and it's amazing,it's up-to-date artwork
3.i try to figure it out but if i can't i just dislike or like
4.sometimes both

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

silkchicken [2012-07-31 23:04:43 +0000 UTC]

I didn't read but two paragraphs and look at all the pictures. That is awesome art.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

roboj8 [2012-07-31 22:59:45 +0000 UTC]

Art is freedom of expression, what ever you intend to express whether it be political, apolitical, nonsense or simply what your seeing present tense. The problem with people who try to interpret art is their seeing past what is actually infront of them. They try to find some deeper meaning when sometimes the answers are much more simpler like if you like it or not. If you see a picture of a girl sitting on a railing staring off a bridge at night. Are you assuming she's gonna jump? Is she simply thinking? Forget the meanings behind the art and sometimes take it at face value. It captures our attention and thus it moves us in what ever what we interpret regardless of what anyone else says.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

roren001 [2012-07-31 22:29:47 +0000 UTC]

Too many isms, too many snub nosed art aficionado trying to label everything, so they sound like they know what their talking about. Nothing kills a style of art faster, but like it was stated there is no conformity to one style, perhaps putting a label on it will help people. Oh well the art work posted is very beautiful.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Shadowyrn [2012-07-31 21:37:01 +0000 UTC]

I find that life, like these paintings shows the true and unjust nature in the world yet shows what can be in anyone's mind.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Emberae [2012-07-31 21:31:02 +0000 UTC]

There is room for art to be political and apolitical. Just like in life, reading, anything that we apply ourselves to. Nothing can fall into a straight black and white category or divvied up.

I would think that all my art has been suggestivism. No One can read my mind, so a lot of what I draw winds up suggesting my feelings in one way or another.

Trying to figure out what exactly what an artist is saying is almost impossible unless they are there or have an explanation under the piece. We can insinuate and try to defer, but that doesn't always mean we are correct. Dissecting the meaning of pieces is often though of the highest form, but I choose to let it exist, and do it's emotional and aesthetic work on me. I hardly know what my own feelings are half the time, How am I to feel more at ease when picking someone else apart.

I Don't necessarily try to transmit a message, but there are trinkets spread around with daily thoughts, political atmospheres, emotional down fallings. Everything. If I were to try and explain to others (and sometimes I do), It seems a bit convoluted and crowded. Although, I am getting better at editing, and letting one theme become more present in a piece.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Rightfield [2012-07-31 21:27:42 +0000 UTC]

"Art is a Hammer, not a Mirror" - John Grierson

1. There is enough room for both.
2. There is only movement if people want change. Look at pop music today. It hasn't changed since the 60s. We still have the same boring chord changes and lyrics that make me cringe. I thought sex was a done subject. We still don't have No.1s openly talking about mass homicide, suicide or rape. If the world is to change we need to embrace what we find awkward as a society. Sex is no longer an awkward subject since we are subjected to it in music videos. Try turning off the volume. Soft porn show.
3. Art is a Hammer. I like what hits me or makes me think of the state of my mind. There is nothing too trivial which I can't reference to myself. True, certain works don't remind me of myself, but then again I don't like certain foods, so... As for an artist's true intent. If it is justified and the artwork isn't adolescent wank then it is good. Always make your true intent know, artists. USE THAT HAMMER!!

4. My own art is a reflection of me and often has no place for aesthetic or technique. Where this matters like in my photography I will strive to get the best results using aesthetic and technique.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Makaylafashion [2012-07-31 21:12:38 +0000 UTC]

These drawings are amazing!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Makaylafashion [2012-07-31 21:11:51 +0000 UTC]

These drawings are amazing!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Pdelfan [2012-07-31 21:05:08 +0000 UTC]

Great category! I really like these drawings.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Soul-Bell-M [2012-07-31 20:50:59 +0000 UTC]

Re: question 1, I think there's room for both for the reason that I believe that art is as a mirror which reflects the multiplicity of the human condition, so that the political, religious, psychological and other facets of human existence may each be given as much attention as they need, as the artists see fit.

And as for question 4, I mainly concern myself with aesthetics and technique, because I think the message should be innate, automatic - that's what keeps it pure. As well, it is for this reason why my subject matter isn't always very specific. Occasionally I do let the message take precedence though.

Ps. Suggestivism just sounds like Surrealism minus the political element, if you as me...

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

donnasueb [2012-07-31 20:28:03 +0000 UTC]

Is it possible that the artist intent is to make the viewer ask "What the ......heck is that all about!" ?

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

CrowDancing [2012-07-31 19:48:37 +0000 UTC]

As for those questions.

1. Art should be both and everything in between.

2. The only movement I've sensed recently is an obsession with past movements. Either people want to embrace them or they want to move away from.

3. I first decide if I am attracted in any way by it (like is a different thing) and try to define what it makes me thing and feel, thus forming my own opinion of the intent. Then I will wonder what the artist's intent is.

4. In some of my art there is a message I am trying to transmit. I also am very interested in the emotional reaction my pictures impart on me and others.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Twinelens [2012-07-31 19:20:24 +0000 UTC]

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.
Art for me means transmitting feeling and thoughts in unconventional ways. That way we can send new messages we couldn't before, or send old messages in new ways - stressing or adding certain aspects. So if a feeling is transmitted, it's best not to search for "text message", but if the art demands the search for a political phrase or problem you should. Of course if you want to interpret the "right" way, you need to know how the artist wants his/her language to be read... The artist may tell... Often we can also get this information from his/her a historical/political/general background.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Dantes-X [2012-07-31 18:01:54 +0000 UTC]

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

>> Art should be almost anything it wants to be. To say it should be this or that would put chains on art itself and thats what it is clearly not about.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

sonozakiimion [2012-07-31 17:52:46 +0000 UTC]

I just use technique and aesthetics, I need tou grow up a lot yet to be like one of those, but I have that in mind!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

SalvidorMonkey [2012-07-31 17:15:03 +0000 UTC]

Just when I think I have left my last comment on "Suggestivism" something keeps making me hungry for scrambled eggs. I was riffling through my copy of 'The collected Wisdom of Alley Oop' (Latin Edition), when I was struck by this passage: "Ergo cumma sum ipso facto rintintin..." Which seemed to me to be the perfect expression of the vagueness of Post Modern irregularity superseded by the redundant plumbing of Suggestivist superfluous plumbing. This reminds me of a story. I went to the market and bought a carton of eggs, when I got home and opened the carton, there were no freaking eggs in there.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Rainbow-Addict [2012-07-31 17:13:20 +0000 UTC]

I don't think art 'should' be anything. Art is defined simply by its constant need to redefine itself. Art critics are greatly needed, but so are the outsiders who say the art critics are bunk (and they are a horridly under-appreciated lot) because even an infant has feelings and a growing individuality, as well as his/her own expanding, personal understanding of art. Art is for every single person; it's the artists', critics' and etc...s' job to remind everyone else to keep looking and thinking and listening and tasting and feeling.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

walnutpooh [2012-07-31 16:32:45 +0000 UTC]

AYN RANDIST IS THE REAL SUGGESTivISM gOD

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

martyT13 [2012-07-31 15:43:22 +0000 UTC]

FUCKEN FUCKED UP

This life really fucken sucks ya know,
They say the fucken good, will outweigh fucking the bad,
To me that opinion, is pretty fucken sad...

My whole fucken life, has been so fucked up,
Its a motherfucken wonder,
I don't step in front a fucking truck...

But like a fucken idiot, I keep fucken hanging on,
Fucking hoping someday, I'll sing my fucking song...

Fucking time keeps slipping by, Its been to fucken long,
I'll fucken probably give up, before to fucken long...

I climb the fucking ladder, another fucken rung,
And fucken fall right back down,
To where I fucking started from...

The only fucken break, that I can fucken get,
Is in motherfucking half, and that's a bunch of fucking shit...

I'm a worthless fuck, I have no fucking luck,
If you fucking hang around me, you might want to fucken duck,
Or get out the fucken way, of that fucking on coming truck...

So fucking don't get caught up, in my fucked up luck,
Or your life too, will start to really fucking suck...

My heart is fucken black, from so much fucken pain,
My soul is fucken covered, with a giant fucking stain...

Through all this fucken shit, I have found no fucken gain,
I slowly fucken wither, away to the fucken end,
I have one fucking last thing, to motherfucking say,
And that's fuck you too, any fucken way...


Martin Lee Teel

FUCKEN FUCKED UP

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

frostpelt [2012-07-31 15:40:35 +0000 UTC]

1 Art is a free form of creativity that allows anyone to create and imagine. It can be whatever the creator intends it to be, be it political or not.
3 A little of both. Mostly, whether the fact that I like the piece of art is based upon the intent/message, but the way it's represented does hold an impact on my opinion.
4 In music, I try to convey a message. For sketches, I focus more on technique.

Well-said!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

t-chan [2012-07-31 14:44:19 +0000 UTC]

I wonder if this is like trying to paint or render a dream, where images are pulled together from the subconscious... might be a fascinating exercise

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SRudy [2012-07-31 11:57:55 +0000 UTC]

1- I guess there's a room for both, art is not only about techniques and skills, it's about delivering an opinion or a message, whether it's a painting or a photograph…
2- Nowadays artists are not being limited to one style of art, we're in the digital era, and just how traditional art produced art styles I believe digital will do. There is a movement out there…
3- Of course I do try to understand what's behind a painting, an artwork without a message is like a body without a soul.
4- I try my best to express the messages behind my artworks.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

oneyedog [2012-07-31 11:37:07 +0000 UTC]

1- Firstly you would have to define what art is before you can decide wether it should be political or not. Is art an illustration for a children's book, or is it something that stands in an art gallery. There are so many genres that exist in-between and outside these two that I think you would offend some people if you were to clarify only one as art. I don't want my children reading children's books that have overtly political messages. Furthermore I don't think art should force anything on the viewer. For art to be political it probably is saying something outright.

2- in our post modern environment there are so many micro narratives that are explored by different people. There is no overarching story that artists are concerned with. Why would something that intrigues me as a middle class South African, have any meaning for a poor person living in Beijing?That is a broad example, but in this day and age peoples beliefs within the same social structure are vastly different, and so what is understood by one is not understood by another. You can never say wether the state of things is good or bad. It is the way things are, if you think it is bad that is because you have a personal issue with it. In the future people won't look bad and say the state of art was bad. We never look back and say "Oh well, Art Deco was crap because the state of things was bad."

3- You can't live on either extreme. You have to look for a meaning, and enjoy something aesthetically. The aesthetic should always follow the narrative. If you only look at something for the story, then you miss the aesthetic, and if you only look at the aesthetic, you miss the story. You don't watch a film only for the pretty pictures. If you look at a work and you think it is meaningless ask why is it so? Nothing can be meaningless, the modernists tried it and failed.

4- A musician can not only have technique, they also need to have artistic expression, or else the music is dead. Any art form is the balance between craft and creativity. You can not have the one without the other. If you think you can be an artist without putting in the time you are mistaken. Conceptual art often doesn't look like it has been crafted, but this is far from the truth. The amount of research and thinking that goes into something that the untrained eye thinks is a piece of trash, is more than goes into a lot of art.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Lawleitspuppy [2012-07-31 09:04:52 +0000 UTC]

Excellent. Yes.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0