4 ms·

Valid reasons for hating on art? This honestly feels like the author is trying to justify being a negative person instead. I don't disagree with providing feed

Valid reasons for hating on art? This honestly feels like the author is trying to justify being a negative person instead. I don't disagree with providing feedback, but to "hate on" something is very different than providing feedback or constructive criticism. And of all things, more so art than anything else. Art is someone's personal expression. To "hate on" it is implicitly an attempt to invalidate that person's expression, if that were even possible. Are you being a judge of what someone should or shouldn't be expressing? Per the author's "not my cup of tea" comment, I do believe that is actually a better approach. Because you are simply expressing that it's not something that you connect with/enjoy/appreciate/etc. and making your comments about yourself. When you "hate on" someone's art, you're completely missing the fact that your strong feelings are _yours_ and that the artist's expression is completely independent of that (whether others share your sentiment towards the work or not).

tomjen3 4y ago
Art done well may not be my cup of tea, but it is entirely fair to hate on something if it is just called art by a lazy person. Smearing colors on a paper is what kids do. Adults should be able to produce something that is actually something. Art that does not give the intended feeling, idea, or understanding is not worth the name art.
- volleygman180 4y ago
  I still think that is a subjective take. Who defines "lazy" and since when can art not be lazy? Should the process by which art was created have any bearing on how the final expressed form is experienced? The banana duct-taped to the wall could be considered "art by a lazy person", yet at the same time, it was actually a very authentic expression (in this case, an expression that was more along the lines of satire). The "artist" was having an internal experience that he chose to express as a banana on the wall with a piece of duct tape. The artistic expression was a social statement, a joke, a protest. And that's ok.
  - tomjen3 4y ago
    I think there is an exception to satire because good satire has to take on the form of what it mocks, and therefore you can't make an epic painting. The hard work of satire is figuring out the best way possible to make the satire.

tomjen3 4y ago

Art done well may not be my cup of tea, but it is entirely fair to hate on something if it is just called art by a lazy person. Smearing colors on a paper is what kids do. Adults should be able to produce something that is actually something. Art that does not give the intended feeling, idea, or understanding is not worth the name art.

volleygman180 4y ago
I still think that is a subjective take. Who defines "lazy" and since when can art not be lazy? Should the process by which art was created have any bearing on how the final expressed form is experienced? The banana duct-taped to the wall could be considered "art by a lazy person", yet at the same time, it was actually a very authentic expression (in this case, an expression that was more along the lines of satire). The "artist" was having an internal experience that he chose to express as a banana on the wall with a piece of duct tape. The artistic expression was a social statement, a joke, a protest. And that's ok.
- tomjen3 4y ago
  I think there is an exception to satire because good satire has to take on the form of what it mocks, and therefore you can't make an epic painting. The hard work of satire is figuring out the best way possible to make the satire.