7 ms·

I think they couldn't really. If you look into modern artists they are extremelly talented and their unique style that seems like _anyone could do it_ comes in

I think they couldn't really. If you look into modern artists they are extremelly talented and their unique style that seems like _anyone could do it_ comes in later stages in their life. It's a bit like coding, where simple and elegant solutions only come to you after you reach a certain level. People looking into your work might think that the solution is simple enough that even a junior could do it, but it's not the case. It takes another good engineer to spot one. :)

kansface 6y ago
> I think they couldn't really. If you look into modern artists they are extremelly talented and their unique style that seems like _anyone could do it_ comes in later stages in their life. This is incorrect (although I don't know anything about the artist in question). Contemporary art degrees are heavily moving away from teaching craft or even consider it a valid aesthetic or criterion for judgement (along the lines of rejecting the notion of good/bad/better/worse). Was there any identifiable craft involved in this piece? Did the artists remove from circulation the boxes that weren't broken in just the right way? Is the art more interesting to look about than to talk about? Marginally... I find the pile of boxes sorta aesthetically pleasing, but its not clear to me that was even done by the artist (and not the gallery). What part of this piece are you proposing that a total outsider/complete amateur couldn't create on a first pass? The form of the glass looks to be haphazard, (ie, unimportant the artist). The boxes are off the shelf. What else is left?
- cwmartin 6y ago
  > Is the art more interesting to look about than to talk about? That is an interesting perspective. I have always judged art by its aesthetics and its ability to elicit thought / conversation equally. In my view art becomes shallow when it is purely visually appealing with no conceptual backing or purely conceptual with uninteresting visual components.
  - esyir 6y ago
    I'll put it the other way though, if you attribute it to any other artist, would the appeal be greatly reduced? Can the art stand alone and be great on its own merit rather than the borrowed fame of its creator?
tshaddox 6y ago
Coding seems like a bad example, at least for me. I’m a professional coder with several years of experience, but I routinely encounter code or software architectures that very much impress me and make me think “not just any coder could have come up with this, at least without a great deal of thought and effort.”

kansface 6y ago

> I think they couldn't really. If you look into modern artists they are extremelly talented and their unique style that seems like _anyone could do it_ comes in later stages in their life. This is incorrect (although I don't know anything about the artist in question). Contemporary art degrees are heavily moving away from teaching craft or even consider it a valid aesthetic or criterion for judgement (along the lines of rejecting the notion of good/bad/better/worse). Was there any identifiable craft involved in this piece? Did the artists remove from circulation the boxes that weren't broken in just the right way? Is the art more interesting to look about than to talk about? Marginally... I find the pile of boxes sorta aesthetically pleasing, but its not clear to me that was even done by the artist (and not the gallery). What part of this piece are you proposing that a total outsider/complete amateur couldn't create on a first pass? The form of the glass looks to be haphazard, (ie, unimportant the artist). The boxes are off the shelf. What else is left?

cwmartin 6y ago
> Is the art more interesting to look about than to talk about? That is an interesting perspective. I have always judged art by its aesthetics and its ability to elicit thought / conversation equally. In my view art becomes shallow when it is purely visually appealing with no conceptual backing or purely conceptual with uninteresting visual components.
- esyir 6y ago
  I'll put it the other way though, if you attribute it to any other artist, would the appeal be greatly reduced? Can the art stand alone and be great on its own merit rather than the borrowed fame of its creator?

tshaddox 6y ago

Coding seems like a bad example, at least for me. I’m a professional coder with several years of experience, but I routinely encounter code or software architectures that very much impress me and make me think “not just any coder could have come up with this, at least without a great deal of thought and effort.”