4 ms·

This is such a techbro opinion. You know Picasso mastered "typical" art before he engaged in the abstract forms, right? That's what makes him special.

umvi 4y ago
And? That would be like if Chris Lattner got bored of making compilers and languages so he started making bizarre ML-generated creations and everyone started worshiping it because "he previously mastered typical programming, so anything bizarre or abstract he churns out now is automatically special!"
- tiagod 4y ago
  Art and Engineering are not the same.
  - ekianjo 4y ago
    I thought we were not supposed to define art
yupper32 4y ago
IMO thinking Picasso is special is more "tech bro" than not. Specially crypto-bros. Every time I see someone defending art like this and its value, it reads exactly like people defending crypto.
robonerd 4y ago
> Picasso mastered "typical" art before he engaged in the abstract forms, right? That's what makes him special. So in a hypothetical future where memory of Picasso's 'typical art' mastery has been lost, that which makes Picasso special will also be lost? > This is such a techbro opinion Scoffing at Picasso and (particularly) Pollock seems very mainstream in the working classes (and has been for as long as that art has existed.) It's not a "tech" thing.
IgorPartola 4y ago
I disagree and I think it’s a legitimate question. Are you impressed by the artist or the art they produced? How much can a piece of art stand on its own without the context of the artist and their journey, perspective, evolution? https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-duchamps-urinal-changed-art-forever https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-duchamps-urina... is a fun read :)
- geoka9 4y ago
  > How much can a piece of art stand on its own without the context of the artist and their journey, perspective, evolution? I was recently taught that some art is not meant to stand on its own, out of context in which it was created.
dshpala 4y ago
No, I didn't know. But why should I care about that when the "art piece" I'm seeing at the moment doesn't impress me?

umvi 4y ago

And? That would be like if Chris Lattner got bored of making compilers and languages so he started making bizarre ML-generated creations and everyone started worshiping it because "he previously mastered typical programming, so anything bizarre or abstract he churns out now is automatically special!"

tiagod 4y ago
Art and Engineering are not the same.
- ekianjo 4y ago
  I thought we were not supposed to define art

yupper32 4y ago

IMO thinking Picasso is special is more "tech bro" than not. Specially crypto-bros. Every time I see someone defending art like this and its value, it reads exactly like people defending crypto.

robonerd 4y ago

> Picasso mastered "typical" art before he engaged in the abstract forms, right? That's what makes him special. So in a hypothetical future where memory of Picasso's 'typical art' mastery has been lost, that which makes Picasso special will also be lost? > This is such a techbro opinion Scoffing at Picasso and (particularly) Pollock seems very mainstream in the working classes (and has been for as long as that art has existed.) It's not a "tech" thing.

IgorPartola 4y ago

I disagree and I think it’s a legitimate question. Are you impressed by the artist or the art they produced? How much can a piece of art stand on its own without the context of the artist and their journey, perspective, evolution? https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-duchamps-urinal-changed-art-forever https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-duchamps-urina... is a fun read :)

geoka9 4y ago
> How much can a piece of art stand on its own without the context of the artist and their journey, perspective, evolution? I was recently taught that some art is not meant to stand on its own, out of context in which it was created.

dshpala 4y ago

No, I didn't know. But why should I care about that when the "art piece" I'm seeing at the moment doesn't impress me?