Mars-Walker In reply to ??? [2012-07-29 02:35:51 +0000 UTC]

This. It is odd to see otherwise intelligent thinkers advocate something so counterproductive. Oh well, not that we need to let them dictate what we're supposed to think.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

JadoaEsraOhn In reply to Mars-Walker [2012-07-29 20:14:14 +0000 UTC]

Well... not necessarily COUNTERproductive. Just nonproductive. A meteor in space is irrelevant to earth, and its existance is not counterproductive to earth. Nonproductive, I guess. If that's a word.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Mars-Walker In reply to JadoaEsraOhn [2012-07-31 00:43:28 +0000 UTC]

Well put. I just personally do not appreciate some of the mindsets out there that smack of pointlessness and nihilism. The author probably did not intend to mean this, but his description (to me) implies something of a disconnect in the artist, where it is now deemed too difficult for one to place meaning in their own work. By extension, place meaning in themselves. I think my bias stems from a strong personal conviction that art ought to be about telling stories. To not tell stories of some sort, and leave the onus entirely upon the viewer, feels shallow in my mind.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Photopathica In reply to ??? [2012-07-27 03:45:23 +0000 UTC]

1: I don't think art "should" be anything. Or "shouldn't".
Art is true freedom.

2: I don't care.

3: It's all about the impact it has on me. If i like/dislike it, If i think it shows skill, emotion, intellect etc. If it speaks to me, or if it passes me by and I don't even notice it.

4: Depends on my mediums. I'm a photographer, painter and drawer.
When it comes to photography, I generally try to transmit the beauty that I saw.
When it comes to painting/drawing, it's all about getting something out of my head, whatever that might be. I rarely think about messages and such, and so I rarely do conceptual or such.
I do emotions.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

furya21 In reply to ??? [2012-07-27 03:44:42 +0000 UTC]

Art should just express whatever is happening, with yourself, with society, with the world, with your cat, anything.

My art is, and always has been in a way, about life and discovery. I create pictures and comics to commemorate important events, friendships, love, hate, ideas, and lessons. When I look back on my art, it's like looking at an old picture of me. Art shouldn't just be aesthetics, but a window into what life was and what it could be.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

knittingknots In reply to ??? [2012-07-27 03:36:58 +0000 UTC]

1. Art should be either as political or apolitical, as the artist wants it to be. I have been guilty of doing both, myself.

2. I'm not really tuned in enough to answer this one, except, perhaps, on the development of a handful of literature genres....

3. First I tend to look at it to see if I like it, and then I look at or for meaning, sometimes...I find that an interesting intellectual game.

4. My art is mostly literature; sometimes I have a "real" (i.e., didactic) message, sometimes I don't.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Rekalnus In reply to ??? [2012-07-27 03:25:38 +0000 UTC]

1. Room for both, but it is helpful to know which is which before viewing- there are some days when I really don't want to deal w/politics.

2. The only movement I sense is that there are a lot more artists sharing a lot more through the internet. Tell Fella' - "mission accomplished" then.

3. Both. BUT - If I comment, I don't always comment on both, because if I didn't properly get the message, am worried it could offend the artist.

4. Both. And I hope to always do so.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Xadrea In reply to ??? [2012-07-27 03:20:32 +0000 UTC]

very insightful i wonder if this will come up in my upcoming post-modern arthistory class? i think there's a need for both political and apolitical art, a healthy balance of both makes everything interesting and fun in my opinion. i think that the current era wer're in historically and artistically speaking will need another decade or so before we can put a name to all that's going on, the movements of the 80s and 90s are still being totally figured out so it could be a while before anything can be said about this new millenium and century i like to try and "figure out" what's going on if it isn't immediately apparent, or if i can't find a reference to something specific. i do have a current series about emotions and suppression of them going on right now, but in the past, i was mostly concerned with aesthetics and techniques

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

meebub In reply to ??? [2012-07-27 03:08:43 +0000 UTC]

I think there's room for both. I also think about the fact that artists scream their names and messages around where most don't hear, some still do, and it opens your eyes a bit wider.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Imaginary--Thoughts In reply to ??? [2012-07-27 02:43:26 +0000 UTC]

1. I believe there is room for both. It would be very jarring if all art HAD to be political, but it would also be hard to give a political message powerfully without art.

2. I feel like people have access to such a wonderful history in art today that each person can be influenced by several different movements at once. There certainly will be followers of certain movements at any given moment, but a lot of artists don't seem to be strictly following only one.

3. If a piece of art has any kind of emotional impact on me, I do try to figure out where it's coming from. This is especially important with political messages.

4. This depends on whether I'm doing it for practice or because the idea has been stuck in my head and I feel like it's important. In practice art, I mainly aim for an emotion or mood than a message.


As for the article, I am totally lost as to what suggestivism is supposed to be. It confuses me. If the idea is that it's art which doesn't follow any other major art movements, I'm voting against giving that a name = P Because we never know if thousands of years ago this period of time will be considered to have some cohesive movement we aren't currently aware of and then the definition of the name sort of clashes with it being a definite movement, like modernism's name implying it is modern even though eventually we'll move past it and it won't be modern anymore, or.. okay, I confused myself.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

aliceferox In reply to ??? [2012-07-27 02:33:26 +0000 UTC]

I like this ism. I've been trying to express exactly this in my theory courses but never put it into words that I've ever been satisfied with. This has given me some direction.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

RainyhawaiiV2 In reply to ??? [2012-07-27 02:31:46 +0000 UTC]

Apolitical
Not sure
Depends/Some - most times
Yes

^ Helpful?

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

binarystep In reply to ??? [2012-07-27 02:15:03 +0000 UTC]

Some of these artworks are terrifying.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Hedish In reply to ??? [2012-07-27 02:09:20 +0000 UTC]

1. Should art be political or apolitical? Or do you think there’s room enough for both?
There's always room for both
2.Do you sense there being any current “movement” in the arts world today? Is this a good or bad state of things?
I think there will always be something new going on (now or just around the corner), if there ever is a day where there isn't it will be a very sad day
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?
personally I dont think you can ever really figure out whats going on, because half the time the person who made it doesn't fully understand whats going on, and even if they say they do I dont believe them. So I think if it catches you fancy in anyway at all you will be able to get something from it
4.In your own art, do you try to transmit any sort of message, or do you concern yourself only with technique and aesthetics?
Non of the above. I concern myself with getting the idea out of my head and on paper, and seeing as I never fully understand the idea because it is forever changing and I hate doing as told e.g technique, I focus on enjoying the time spent on it.
...wonder if any of that makes sence

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

lyssagal In reply to ??? [2012-07-27 02:04:03 +0000 UTC]

1. Should art be political or apolitical? Or do you think there’s room enough for both?
A: Art should be whatever the artist want their art to be. It doesn't mean it will sell, but it is their own choice in doing so.

2. Do you sense there being any current “movement” in the arts world today? Is this a good or bad state of things?
A: I wish their was a 'movement' in the art world. There are so many 'proclaimed artists' now with internet at their fingertips, it is hard to sort through what is 'good' and what is '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?
A: I try to figure out the piece of art when I first look at it. Some have deep meaning. It can only be fully understand until the artist goes into detail about the piece. Someone can say, "Yes that is a two objects, so what?" But once the artist tells the story and mindset behind each object, is when the piece of art comes to life.

4. In your own art, do you try to transmit any sort of message, or do you concern yourself only with technique and aesthetics?
A. I tend to usually only go by technique, and hope that in the end the whole feeling behind the image is depicted once I am finished.

Btw, beautiful art choices.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

MARX77 In reply to ??? [2012-07-27 02:02:59 +0000 UTC]

Man, that journal skin is a work of art!
You lucky admin$.

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

marioluevanos In reply to MARX77 [2012-07-27 02:37:04 +0000 UTC]

Thank u sir

Also, you can do the same with your Premium Membership, just a skin. I'll show u how if you have questions.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

MARX77 In reply to marioluevanos [2012-07-27 02:42:56 +0000 UTC]

Teach me, O wise one!
By note?

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

lyssagal In reply to MARX77 [2012-07-27 02:06:26 +0000 UTC]

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

DanteSangreal In reply to ??? [2012-07-27 02:01:25 +0000 UTC]

Figured I weigh in early...
1) the short answer is yes... Art exists in the world to reflect what is both beautiful and ugly and to confront and challenge both...
2) I think pop-art is still a huge driving force in art today..
3) I look for the moment in art... when I see it I know I like it... when I don't I don't..
4) I don't consciously try to transmit any message.. I display what I find... the moment I've captured.. it is your job as the viewer to interpret the moment...

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

SerketXXI In reply to ??? [2012-07-27 01:59:50 +0000 UTC]

1.Should art be political or apolitical? Or do you think there’s room enough for both?
-No I didn't know about political or something. And there's a no room for it.

2.Do you sense there being any current “movement” in the arts world today? Is this a good or bad state of things?
-There's something about it, sometimes, many artists are have any sense like that, they using a movement to make art are have any sense about it.

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?
-I search many arts and when I looked any arts are have senses for me, so I just fav it and using a inspirations.

4.In your own art, do you try to transmit any sort of message, or do you concern yourself only with technique and aesthetics?
-I think I will try to make artworks better and try to coloring a new style.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

knittywitty In reply to ??? [2012-07-27 01:57:02 +0000 UTC]

Why are most of them gory or creepy?

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

RoCueto In reply to knittywitty [2012-07-29 01:58:12 +0000 UTC]

Because hipsters.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Cookiedough41 In reply to knittywitty [2012-07-28 00:04:39 +0000 UTC]

why not? ^_^

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

knittywitty In reply to Cookiedough41 [2012-07-28 00:23:03 +0000 UTC]

Well, surely there's more to Suggestivism than depicting gore? Or is that the point?

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

ChristopherDavies In reply to ??? [2012-07-27 01:50:11 +0000 UTC]

You lost me.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

GawrilaGhul In reply to ??? [2012-07-27 01:42:39 +0000 UTC]

1.) Art should always try to destroy the world it is forced to somehow exist within.
It can be done in a political, apolitical, or combined way of these.

2.) I think that artists all around the world finally seem to come together in a way and build up a movement that is NOT defining itself by just being completely powerless, just because it is made of ART.
I think this is a good thing!

3.) I simply decide whether it is good or not good to look at a gallery.
This is always GOOD, because it is always COMMON SENSE!

4.) "Technique" and "Aesthetics" should NEVER be mentioned in the same sentence whatsoever.
The short answer is NO.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Wowza-Wowzers In reply to ??? [2012-07-27 01:40:22 +0000 UTC]

3. Well, depending on the kind of art to me. I sort of look for the message on if the artist is trying to send a message to me.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

IBinked In reply to ??? [2012-07-27 01:40:22 +0000 UTC]

1. It should be both.

2. Not so much a 'movement' as a more subtle, simple 'recognition' of the values of art itself among more generations.

3. Generally I just decide whether I like it or not, and that decision is based on if it pleases me aesthetically, if I can connect with an immediately apparent theme, or if it interests me in its complexity.

4. Currently I try to do a little of both, though I feel as if I am always striving to improve in technique and making my art "quality" rather than conveying any personal messages through it.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

CassidyPeterson In reply to ??? [2012-07-27 01:39:08 +0000 UTC]

1. There's plenty of room for both.

2. Nope, but I don't pay attention to the sort of art that generally has movements, just memes.

3. I tend to be very literal-minded. If the artist's intent/message isn't made clear, I won't see it. And it often doesn't matter. With few exceptions, I can still appreciate art with a message I oppose if the art itself is done well. It just happens that most art with messages that matter to me don't get portrayed very well, whether I agree with the message or not.

4. I like colors!

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

Vueiy-Visarelli In reply to CassidyPeterson [2012-07-28 02:31:03 +0000 UTC]

4.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

syrupneko In reply to CassidyPeterson [2012-07-27 21:45:20 +0000 UTC]

lololol. I love your answer to #4.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

J0anna3 In reply to syrupneko [2012-07-27 23:37:37 +0000 UTC]

Haha that's amazing.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

byKarenRenee In reply to ??? [2012-07-27 01:38:12 +0000 UTC]

1. Art is a compiled reflection of both the artist and the viewer. Since people are both political and apolitical, it isn't surprising that art is both as well ... sometimes in the same image.

3. I look for what the artist has tried to convey, but often it's doubtful that I "get it," and that's okay. I don't always understand people right off when conversing either, but that's where communication comes in. Art, by virtue of being disconnected from the artist, in a sense, is more easily re-framed into new ideas; but this is usually a good thing. The more ideas that grow out of a work the better the art, IMO.

4. I draw from where I am, without expecting others to understand the result. But it's surprising how often people know what the image means ... the emotional state and even the idea conveyed when the work is done. It's a marvelous mystery. But it's more fun when I get to talk the image over with someone and learn a new perspective ... suddenly the work is larger than I knew! It feels like planting a seed, then seeing it grow.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Someguyfromcrowd In reply to ??? [2012-07-27 01:34:46 +0000 UTC]

I prefer Ism-ism, really.

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

JadoaEsraOhn In reply to Someguyfromcrowd [2012-07-29 20:06:46 +0000 UTC]

XD Wait, ism-ism? A code of beliefs that codes of beliefs exist? Shouldn't all people who subscribe to isms also subscribe to ism-ism? I like this idea.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Someguyfromcrowd In reply to JadoaEsraOhn [2012-07-29 21:17:15 +0000 UTC]

Yeah, it's something like that. It's the idea that things can have an idea. Very self-reinforcing.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Vueiy-Visarelli In reply to Someguyfromcrowd [2012-07-28 02:29:56 +0000 UTC]

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

ashesto In reply to ??? [2012-07-27 01:32:57 +0000 UTC]

1. I agree with `lost-angle . Art is what you think art is. There is no universally applicable definition of art, and therefore nothing that art should be.

2. The "arts" today cover such a wide range of media, now that we have digital arts, filmmaking, animation, as well as all the traditional forms of art. It's difficult to identify any overlying trends or movements when there is just so much art, and I think that's as it should be - the more ways we have to create art, the more difficult it will become to unify them all under a single "movement." It just means there's too much art and too much diversity for it to conform to a set path.

3. I often will connect elements within an artwork that seem to fit a theme or create a message, but I am never quite able to connect entire pieces together. When I encounter truly great art, I get a different impression every time I look at it. It's difficult to find a meaning when my worldview and perspective regarding an artwork are constantly changing.

4. As a developing artist, I am first focusing on developing my technique. Hopefully once I have progressed, I will be able to incorporate meaning into my work.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

prosaix In reply to ??? [2012-07-27 01:31:17 +0000 UTC]

2. Yeah, people do stupid things then call it art... And these 'modern art' exhibitions aren't really that 'artsy'...

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

ink-pencil In reply to ??? [2012-07-27 01:30:01 +0000 UTC]

sounds legit

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

co-kie In reply to ??? [2012-07-27 01:28:17 +0000 UTC]

Beautiful selection!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

HimitsuUK In reply to co-kie [2012-07-28 10:42:18 +0000 UTC]

I agree

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Rhyn-Art In reply to ??? [2012-07-27 01:27:07 +0000 UTC]

yup did not like any of those art pieces

👍: 0 ⏩: 3

yourbigbrowneyes In reply to Rhyn-Art [2012-07-28 04:45:53 +0000 UTC]

very rude and childish thing to say. the internet is not a toy for you to abuse your power/right of speech while you sit behind a screen, practically anonymous. if you have nothing nice to say (or even constructive criticism), please refrain from having the need to say it. this article never asked for the opinion of the pieces of work displayed.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Rhyn-Art In reply to yourbigbrowneyes [2012-07-28 14:41:41 +0000 UTC]

your very rude yourself, everyone has the right to preach what is said otherwize there would never be change, by you saying im not allowed to write negative comments at all is like saying i have no right in life at all, I am against suggestivism because there is no need for it its absolute rubish, its just another way of saying surrealism and also I think these artwork are bad because they do not show passion nor creativity and especially for an intro for a movement.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

yourbigbrowneyes In reply to Rhyn-Art [2012-07-31 05:07:38 +0000 UTC]

I'd like you to please put into quotations anything that I said that was rude before I even continue to read you're message - you're trying to, as some say, "put words in my mouth." And I firmly believe in not writing negative comments on people's work. Why not make it constructive, cheer them on, and tell them what they could do better?! And better yet, don't post your opinion on this article/thread (as we're making a big scene on here as well) and go to the artists wall to post comments. As I've replied to the others, say online what you would in real life, I doubt most people online would have half the balls to do that. We get carried away with our supposedly anonymous masks called our "online profiles." That is the adult thing to do. So, as to what you're saying, you'd be the type of person to go to someone's gallery (in real life of course), tell them their work is awful, then walk out. I doubt it.

Now, in your reply, you're giving me your honest opinion on suggestivism. Perfect! That's what people want to see - talking about the topic at hand, just as this article was asking for your opinion on it - which I'm all for! But as soon as you go ahead and bash people's work, trying to make some sort of joke out of it, that's where I draw the line. I'm sure you're a passionate artist that wants to see growth, and what growth would you get out of negative, hurtful comments? Nothing. So be constructive. That's all I was saying. By the way, I also agree with you that suggestivism is not a category. I believe it blends over into surrealism and just seems like an unnecessary, confusing category. There, you judged me too fast.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Rhyn-Art In reply to yourbigbrowneyes [2012-07-31 14:34:53 +0000 UTC]

I dont judge anyone without thinking about why i do it, and yes only negatie comments can make people doubt their work so they move their thoughts into a new hemisphere of working, sounds crazy but some people can grow from that, my tutors when I was in collage NEVER prased me, never said well done and kept pushing me to do the things I did not want to do... lets just say they pushed me from the womb I was born in and awoke to see the world in a really really crazy and confusing place, questioning everything, you can say "well you think because you went through that, you can make everyone else feel the same" but It would not spark a discussion from me, I dont hate anyone, and if anyone is offended with what I say then they will have to ask me why their work sucks, im sure if your a real artist you wouldnt give up a fight and get offended by other artists

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

yourbigbrowneyes In reply to Rhyn-Art [2012-07-31 15:41:59 +0000 UTC]

Exactly. I have teachers and profs who are always stone faced about my work and everyone else's in the class. You are right, its not just praise that can make you grow. Profs don't give praise because once they do, you will (consciously or subconsciously) not try as hard and be more slack. That stone face is supposed to motivate you to do better (although in the end you'll never get praise from them anyway, lol). For me though, I don't know if I'm more fragile, if it's a girl thing, or whatever the hell it is, I find the community on dA currently to be a bit more hostile. I don't think I could handle it like you could with geting negative comments (I know, it's not a good trait for me as an artist to have). I like posting my work to art groups on facebook or tumblr because people will write paragraphs upon paragraphs as to how I can improve, tips, references, everything, and I'm growing A LOT from that. At dA I'm not seeing any relationships between amateur to professional or amateur to amateur even! I just noticed people are too competitive and that many artists who want some serious growth don't rely on deviantart as their main platform. Don't get me wrong - I love dA for many reasons, these are newer opinions I've made from talking to others during livestreams about how it's so hard to find criticism, help, and support from those on dA and it has become more like a Photobucket, y' know?

I appreciates your thoughts and agree more with you than you think.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Rhyn-Art In reply to yourbigbrowneyes [2012-07-31 16:20:11 +0000 UTC]

if you want I can crit you but it would be a hard crit, thats the way i do things, its not meant to hurt or upset anyone its to push, after all deviantart if full of kids or rich photographers showing off their worksand not replying to any messages

👍: 0 ⏩: 0