5 ms·

An interpretation of art for the analytical mind

25 points by dblock 11y ago

fitzwatermellow 11y ago
It's just randomized, right? Or have I been misreading Caillebotte's "Paris Street; Rainy Day" (1876-1877)[1] as "High Impressionism" when all along it's really been "An Abstraction of Classicism" ;) [1] http://www.artic.edu/aic/collections/citi/images/standard/WebLarge/WebImg_000281/215300_3365286.jpg http://www.artic.edu/aic/collections/citi/images/standard/We...
angdis 11y ago
Why can't folks take a joke anymore?
werber 11y ago
A portrait of Jesus being crucified from the 16th century is apparently a contemplation for kitsch and fetishism and Olympia is a cogitation for evocative postmodernism?
mfoy_ 11y ago
I spent my first minute trying to click everything and anything to no avail. It's worth mentioning that refreshing the page loads another image and description in a random combination.
lackbeard 11y ago
This is a reflection for priggishness and humorlessness.
yiyus 11y ago
"This is another piece of art" would be as useful as the interpretations in this site.
calibraxis 11y ago
How does this work? It doesn't appear interactive, the title doesn't match the painting (though has similarities to the actual piece), and the text on the right seems like a total joke based on the painting industry's practice of teaching artists how to use impressive-sounding gibberish so rich patrons look smart and the uninitiated feel unintelligent.
- yarrel 11y ago
  The language is "Artbollocks" or "International Art English", but it does match the content of the picture. Despite being randomly generated. ;-) http://www.eyemagazine.com/opinion/article/agenda-artspeak http://www.eyemagazine.com/opinion/article/agenda-artspeak http://www.canopycanopycanopy.com/contents/international_art_english http://www.canopycanopycanopy.com/contents/international_art...
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- beat 11y ago
  The exact same criticism applies to software engineering or the startup community. It's only "impressive-sounding gibberish" if you don't understand what it means. Or, as someone once eloquently described modern physics, "It looks like ancient Greek to anyone but another physicist or an ancient Greek". The interesting part, to me, isn't the "gibberish", but rather the hostile, arrogant reaction to its existence. Rather than saying "Huh, I really don't understand the inner language of this sophisticated subject with a deep history", people react with "Wow, those jerks with their inner language are just faking it to act better than us". And it's not just fine art - it's true of just about any complex ideas with deep communities. You'll see outsiders say the same about startups, rap, poetry, whatever.
  - anthay 11y ago
    I assume the point of physics is to understand nature and communicate that understanding to others, who will need sufficient interest and background knowledge to understand what is being communicated. I don't personally understand physics beyond the basics, but I'm prepared to believe physicists are not talking bollocks to each other. I can see the concrete results of their applied knowledge in my everyday life. On the other hand, I can't help feeling that art language is deliberately obscure and elitist and its purpose is not designed to communicate objective truth because there is no objective truth to communicate. Perhaps the emperor does have clothes and I'm just too ignorant to see them.
    - 11y ago
wfo 11y ago
So someone has a database of art phrases and madlibs them together next to pieces of art? Are we supposed to feel superior to people who create art now? I don't. Why is it that people who claim to be 'analytical' always just use it as an excuse to claim anything they don't understand is meaningless?
- mcphage 11y ago
  Well, obviously us tech people are the only ones who can understand things. Everyone else is just banging rocks together.
dblock 11y ago
The code to this is https://github.com/kiranw/HackingArts-2015 https://github.com/kiranw/HackingArts-2015

25 points by dblock 11y ago

It's just randomized, right? Or have I been misreading Caillebotte's "Paris Street; Rainy Day" (1876-1877)[1] as "High Impressionism" when all along it's really been "An Abstraction of Classicism" ;) [1] http://www.artic.edu/aic/collections/citi/images/standard/WebLarge/WebImg_000281/215300_3365286.jpg http://www.artic.edu/aic/collections/citi/images/standard/We...

angdis 11y ago

Why can't folks take a joke anymore?

werber 11y ago

A portrait of Jesus being crucified from the 16th century is apparently a contemplation for kitsch and fetishism and Olympia is a cogitation for evocative postmodernism?

mfoy_ 11y ago

I spent my first minute trying to click everything and anything to no avail. It's worth mentioning that refreshing the page loads another image and description in a random combination.

lackbeard 11y ago

This is a reflection for priggishness and humorlessness.

yiyus 11y ago

"This is another piece of art" would be as useful as the interpretations in this site.

calibraxis 11y ago

How does this work? It doesn't appear interactive, the title doesn't match the painting (though has similarities to the actual piece), and the text on the right seems like a total joke based on the painting industry's practice of teaching artists how to use impressive-sounding gibberish so rich patrons look smart and the uninitiated feel unintelligent.

yarrel 11y ago
The language is "Artbollocks" or "International Art English", but it does match the content of the picture. Despite being randomly generated. ;-) http://www.eyemagazine.com/opinion/article/agenda-artspeak http://www.eyemagazine.com/opinion/article/agenda-artspeak http://www.canopycanopycanopy.com/contents/international_art_english http://www.canopycanopycanopy.com/contents/international_art...
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
beat 11y ago
The exact same criticism applies to software engineering or the startup community. It's only "impressive-sounding gibberish" if you don't understand what it means. Or, as someone once eloquently described modern physics, "It looks like ancient Greek to anyone but another physicist or an ancient Greek". The interesting part, to me, isn't the "gibberish", but rather the hostile, arrogant reaction to its existence. Rather than saying "Huh, I really don't understand the inner language of this sophisticated subject with a deep history", people react with "Wow, those jerks with their inner language are just faking it to act better than us". And it's not just fine art - it's true of just about any complex ideas with deep communities. You'll see outsiders say the same about startups, rap, poetry, whatever.
- anthay 11y ago
  I assume the point of physics is to understand nature and communicate that understanding to others, who will need sufficient interest and background knowledge to understand what is being communicated. I don't personally understand physics beyond the basics, but I'm prepared to believe physicists are not talking bollocks to each other. I can see the concrete results of their applied knowledge in my everyday life. On the other hand, I can't help feeling that art language is deliberately obscure and elitist and its purpose is not designed to communicate objective truth because there is no objective truth to communicate. Perhaps the emperor does have clothes and I'm just too ignorant to see them.
  - 11y ago

wfo 11y ago

So someone has a database of art phrases and madlibs them together next to pieces of art? Are we supposed to feel superior to people who create art now? I don't. Why is it that people who claim to be 'analytical' always just use it as an excuse to claim anything they don't understand is meaningless?

mcphage 11y ago
Well, obviously us tech people are the only ones who can understand things. Everyone else is just banging rocks together.

dblock 11y ago

The code to this is https://github.com/kiranw/HackingArts-2015 https://github.com/kiranw/HackingArts-2015