3 ms·

> Neither being colorful nor precise photographic representation were the point of Impressionism either. I didn't claim that photographic representation was th

by ericmay 19d ago

> Neither being colorful nor precise photographic representation were the point of Impressionism either. I didn't claim that photographic representation was the point. Colorful for the sake of colorful wasn't the point either, but impressionists artists (since that's what we're talking about) utilized color to a far more expert extent and then you can see that in the artwork. This is in part due to the poor medium, and in part due to the inability for the artist to do anything technically worthwhile with light and color. There's nothing realistic about Balloon Girl for example when compared to Renoir's painting of Two Sisters. It's kind of like a silhouette or something. There really isn't anything there that would separate it from everyday graffiti or something like that. Take a look: https://www.artic.edu/artworks/14655/two-sisters-on-the-terrace https://www.artic.edu/artworks/14655/two-sisters-on-the-terr... Here you can see the masterful use of color and very precise paint strokes to illustrate different forms of lightning and how the colors interplay with each other. The Banksy piece is kind of like, idk how to describe it in comparison without being too offensive. Even the girl's face in the Banksy work looks a little like a girl ogre or like he is a try hard trying to make some political point or something. It's really jarring and weird to look at. When folks are like "omg this is art, it speaks to me" I'm like, did you have an aneurysm? > I would need you to explain in what sense you think it is euro centric as I have no idea how that is applicable here. Happy to, the outline of the girl is western. It's not an asian girl, for example. You can clearly see that. The use of a heart balloon is arguably a European interpretation. Not that I think that's necessarily a bad thing I guess, I do think European art prior to the wars was the best that has been created but others may think differently. > Again how do you feel concrete admits of less detail than plywood or wood or cloth, which is what most older painters used? It absorbs paint differently. Can you identify an example where concrete is used paint something such as the Mona Lisa or perhaps something that Renoir created as I mentioned above? > I am glad we could get down to tacks and admit neither of us are artists or art scholars and both our opinions are equally irrelevant on this topic. I'm still confused as to why you are asking me to justify my thoughts here. It's just my opinion and if you believe art is subjective you simply have to accept my opinion and that it's just as valid as yours might be. There isn't any possible substance to debate unless you want to also argue there is objective criteria in which we can evaluate art. Is that your position?

hardbass 19d ago
We know nothing of any priming or not that had been used by Banksy. Plywood and wood also are not good mediums for paint but many painters primed it with gesso first. Unless you have verified information how the concrete was prepared and how it admits of less possible detail than the other media you like (and list what media you think your favorite paintings were) then its bs to say. And size is its own scale, at the scale of his paintings almost any medium admits of very high detail. Pre-WW1 had already abandoned representational styles to a much larger extent than Banksy ever did, eg Cubism and Futurism so you are bullshitting. I don't see much difference in detail level between the painting you gave and the Banksy painting. Muted colors is a stylistic choice. You didn't tell me why charcoal is or isn't a valid medium. Charcoal has even less color.
- ericmay 19d ago
  > You didn't tell me why charcoal is or isn't a valid medium. Charcoal has even less color. I don't have to or care to answer the question? > and list what media you think your favorite paintings were I don't have to give you anything other than "no it's not as good". Art is subjective. Balloon Girl is one of the worst pieces of art I've ever seen and anyone off the street could make something that lame and pointless. > Pre-WW1 had already abandoned representational styles to a much larger extent than Banksy ever did, eg Cubism and Futurism so you are bullshitting. No you are bullshitting
  - hardbass 18d ago
    You can't answer that question because it punctures your stupid and absurd crap. You could easily look up Cubism and Futurism and what era they peaked in even if you didn't know, but you won't because you will have to admit you were spewing bullshit if you did.

by ericmay 19d ago

hardbass 19d ago

We know nothing of any priming or not that had been used by Banksy. Plywood and wood also are not good mediums for paint but many painters primed it with gesso first. Unless you have verified information how the concrete was prepared and how it admits of less possible detail than the other media you like (and list what media you think your favorite paintings were) then its bs to say. And size is its own scale, at the scale of his paintings almost any medium admits of very high detail. Pre-WW1 had already abandoned representational styles to a much larger extent than Banksy ever did, eg Cubism and Futurism so you are bullshitting. I don't see much difference in detail level between the painting you gave and the Banksy painting. Muted colors is a stylistic choice. You didn't tell me why charcoal is or isn't a valid medium. Charcoal has even less color.

ericmay 19d ago
> You didn't tell me why charcoal is or isn't a valid medium. Charcoal has even less color. I don't have to or care to answer the question? > and list what media you think your favorite paintings were I don't have to give you anything other than "no it's not as good". Art is subjective. Balloon Girl is one of the worst pieces of art I've ever seen and anyone off the street could make something that lame and pointless. > Pre-WW1 had already abandoned representational styles to a much larger extent than Banksy ever did, eg Cubism and Futurism so you are bullshitting. No you are bullshitting
- hardbass 18d ago
  You can't answer that question because it punctures your stupid and absurd crap. You could easily look up Cubism and Futurism and what era they peaked in even if you didn't know, but you won't because you will have to admit you were spewing bullshit if you did.