4 ms·

I think the success of some naïve art is the audacity of the person making it. "I could have done that" "Yes, you could, but you didn't" http://2.bp.blogspot

• burkaman 10y ago
  This explanation of modern art never makes any sense. "I could have done that" "Yes, you could, but you didn't" "Yeah, exactly, why would I? Why would anyone? Why do you like this? Why did you pay for it?" Somebody who doesn't understand the point of a piece of art is not going to be impressed by the bravery of the artist for publishing it.
• danenania 10y ago
  I don't think it's just audacity--there are people all over the world doing unique, audacious, amazing things every day, and an incredibly small percentage get much attention at all. The people getting lots of attention are, with few exceptions, either leveraging an influential personal network that was built up over a period of years, working very hard at marketing and promotion, and/or spending money to get that attention. As far as I can tell, this seems to be as true in the art world as it is in tech. "Yes, you could, but you didn't." should really be: "Yes, you could, but no one would pay any attention because you don't know the right people, and even if you did, you don't know how to frame a few colored squares on a giant canvas as artistically important."
• Bakary 10y ago
  Since there is a saturation of media and different art forms I don't think any piece can even be audacious anymore.