art is everywhere…

a controversy


“modern art” is very controversial

you realize this when you create alot of it


I just had lunch with a math professor that I interpret for

I explained to him that I’m trying to get rid of my paintings

so I offered him one.

his reply was,

“oh no no thats ok, I find it hard to appreciate art like that”


I didn’t take offense at all, he was perfectly honest, which I like

but!!!! I have two questions to ask regarding that statement.

1) what is “art like that?” What makes some art “modern”?

and 2) why is it such a love or hate relationship?



some people love it, and others. . . have a hard time finding the art value in it.

will this remain just one of those mysteries?

like nessie

or roswell?


30 responses

  1. Bjork. Great idea. I watched some of her crazy videos and they are always inspiring. And as far as that man saying no thanks to art- the he’ll with him. Never turn down art. Someone is bound to live it. I’ll trade art with you anyway sugar. We could be art penpals or do a collab if you want. Email me.

    April 5, 2011 at 4:04 pm

    • Bjork is a genius, and I’m happy you agree that someone is “bound to live it” thats very well stated

      April 5, 2011 at 4:50 pm

  2. Bro, lame man. I appreciate your art man. You inspired me to be more open to your style:o)

    But you already know that. haha

    April 5, 2011 at 5:47 pm

    • I love the way u morphed ur traditional style with more modernness, its cool to see whats in ur head

      April 5, 2011 at 8:18 pm

      • aww thanks! That really means a lot to me, especially the fact that you noticed because that’s what I actually try to do. I believe it’s important to introduce old school with the new kids, ya know? hehe danx:o)

        April 5, 2011 at 9:03 pm

      • PS: I wish I could’ve seen that painting in person:(

        April 5, 2011 at 9:04 pm

  3. its in some government office in ohio lol, a secretary of a senator or something bought it out of my sisters starbucks, so!!!! its prolly findable if u wanna go see it lols
    its really big

    April 5, 2011 at 9:07 pm

    • hahaha! Wow! Nice:D! I wish to go!

      April 5, 2011 at 9:39 pm

  4. Love the story of secretary buying it in sturbucks. Such a modern fairytale.
    About modern art… It’s love and hate because people don’t understand it so they are afraid of it. Most people have been thought that art is something serious so the idea that you just let your emotions react to art is very very hard to grasp. It’s even in contrast to general attitude of western society where we are encouraged to live by our heads and we all know that brain is useless when modern art is in question.
    Or at least this is what I think 🙂


    April 6, 2011 at 1:22 am

    • thats so true lol, the thing is I find art as an escape from the serious, I think thats why I like messing around with “untraditional” methods, its freeing. its “modern fairytale” lols 😉

      April 6, 2011 at 7:09 pm

  5. Modern art is a love hate thing usually because the pre-20th century art (‘traditional’ art) has completely different meaning. Art isn’t what it use to be because of our society, our culture. We could wish for our modern society to have successful celebrity artists that creates paintings like Michelangelo and Caravaggio but artists have to work in the conditions of today. It is a shame, although I am a modern art fan, the definition of the word ‘Art’ is completely different to what it use to be, it has definitely been diluted, and skill and talent aren’t as important anymore.

    Check out my recent blog post about all of this:

    April 6, 2011 at 5:24 pm

    • I like what u say about the evolution of art in society but I have to disagree about the dilution and the fading of talent and skill. I think that in today’s society with the far reach that we all have to different cultures and art forms, that there has been a merger of ridiculous talent. There are so many great talents out there with realism, people just don’t get famous for it anymore. and I think thats why modern art has emerged as a way not necessarily to depart from traditional styles, but to compliment it. . . with expression.

      BUT! I’m not anexpert lols, I’m just some random guy with a theory

      April 6, 2011 at 7:19 pm

      • Word.

        April 6, 2011 at 8:01 pm

      • Thanks, I am not saying modern artists don’t have skill or talent, but what I’m saying is it right for us to collectively talk about it, saying both Tracey Emin and Michelangelo have talent – because I think saying this is wrong. Talent is something you are born with, skill is something that you learn and develop. In comparison to Michelangelo I do not think Emin has talent. Her work is “cool” and interesting, and bizarre, but that is that talent? The Meaning? It’s great to know about it I know, but to compare with classical art where you had to have a powerful meaning as well as be GIFTED, and SKILLED, and disciplined. This example represent the general relation ship between traditional art and the contemporary.

        April 7, 2011 at 12:45 am

  6. All art was modern art at one time or another, and I think it’s important to remember that. I’m sure that da Vinci didn’t consider his work “Renaissance Art,” and the same goes for Romanticism, Medieval, Neoclassic, all of them.

    Furthermore, from an historical standpoint, modern art comprises art from the late 1800s until the 1970s. After that, it becomes “Contemporary” and “Postmodern.” But how the heck do you call something in the present “Postmodern?” Isn’t that what we should call art from the future or something?

    For me, art is art. I like some of it; I don’t like some of it. Some of it excites me; the rest of it doesn’t.

    The painting in question, I like. I’ve got five of yours hanging up for goodness sake. But if someone else doesn’t like it…okay. I’d like to know why, for sure, see what makes that person tick, what their preferences and tastes are. But I see no need to label something as diverse and open to interpretation as art.

    April 6, 2011 at 8:20 pm

    • “art is art” I think thats the wisest thing anyone here has said ha ha , well done shawn
      would anyone like to second that motion?

      April 6, 2011 at 8:54 pm

      • I do. As I’d like to say, “Genre?” hehe;)

        April 6, 2011 at 8:59 pm

    • The difference being, in many other art movements in the past, they recognised it as that movement, it was not contemporary art for them. For example, Enlightenment – people knew they were in an enlightenment stage even if they didn’t actually know what it meant. Neo-classicism wasn’t modern at all as they returned to the style of the greek and the romans.

      April 7, 2011 at 12:40 am

    • But your theories imply that talent exists. I am not so sure about that. Maybe am lacking all “magical thinking” needed for a happy life but I think what we call talent is all conditioning and some genes. And what would “cool” and “intereseting” be exactly if not some form of “talent”? What would Michelangelo’s work be without his mastery of anatomy and perspective? “Cool” and “ineteresting”?

      April 7, 2011 at 1:03 am

  7. Talent does exist, but differently to the past. Paintings took years to create, and now a splash of paint on a canvas is worth millions. They are very different meanings of talent, so we shouldn’t put them in the same league.

    April 7, 2011 at 1:30 am

  8. Splash of paint can say and express as much as any painting that took years to create. If modern art has thought us anything it’s that.

    And something being worth millions has not much to do with it’s real value (you know those stories about painters that were super famous and in demand in their own time and now they are considered mearly average).

    April 7, 2011 at 1:42 am

    • I think you are misunderstanding me here. I am not saying a splash of paint can’t express something, cause it can, and it’s the reason I like it, but they’re not creating anything to the same quality as past art did in terms of talent. Talent takes time, skill takes even longer – and past art proved that.

      April 7, 2011 at 2:36 am

  9. I see what ur saying rob, I do. But I think we’re all misunderstanding eachother here. I agree with you that past art took more time and skill that someone today throwing blue paint off a roof and making something. But I think we”re comparing apples to oranges. For example. Its like comparing mozart to the beatles. when teh beatles came out there were still “mozarts” who rocked the classical scene and kept that going while the beatles came out with something new. But! can we really say that mozart and the beatles are not equally as genius? It took jumping out of the ordinary to make what they made and they both did it equally well but in different ways. Thats how i see traditional art and “modern art.” Now I agree with you in that there is some art out there that is just crapola and they claim they have composed something that brings balance to the universe lols but! there are alot of crappy traditional artists too.
    in the end all that matters is that we paint or draw what we need to, because thats what arts all about right? 🙂 at least in my book

    April 7, 2011 at 6:26 am

    • I agree. We don’t create for others — even though we like to tell ourselves that we do. We create for ourselves. We write for ourselves, paint for ourselves. Therefore, it doesn’t matter whether or not someone else thinks we have talent or whether something we created has any value.

      da Vinci didn’t paint the Mona Lisa for everyone else. He painted it because HE saw the beauty in the woman, and he wanted to capture that. I for one don’t even think the Mona Lisa is all that great, to be honest, but when I look at it, I can see that it meant everything to the artist who created it.

      And that’s all that matters.

      April 7, 2011 at 6:53 am

    • I think you have just said my point, haha! My point is that we can’t compare both, because both have completely different understanding of the word ‘Art’.

      April 7, 2011 at 8:17 am

      • True, and that’s how it is with most things. But I want to clarify that talent, skill — these things don’t matter. Only passion does.

        April 7, 2011 at 9:05 am

  10. And that is where we disagree Shawn haha. I think Art needs more than passion. I am so passionate about my welsh culture and welsh literature – so passionate, but I couldn’t write a poem about it, or express my passion through theatre or a novel (which are also arts), luckily I can paint, but I can imagine many people that believe they can’t, so they can’t express their passion. You need skill and talent to do these things.

    But I am glad we agree on one thing!

    April 7, 2011 at 10:14 am

    • Shawn, I agree that passion drives. But I get Rob’s point about skill and I agree with it. But I don’t think its something that you just have like “talent” in teh way that most understand it. Skill and talent to me are things that are learned, which if that is the case is something that anybody can eventually do. Rob, u and I are painters eh, and like u said we prolly couldn’t express ourselves through theatre or a novel. . . at this point in our lives. But What made us choose painting? was it that we excelled in it or just that we enjoyed it, which goes back to shawns point of passion. I look at bob dylan and how he is a musician who has dabbled in painting and even acting. . . I dunno, I think that true “talent” is a mix of drive and skill which can both be acquired. making all of us potential artists, not to be corny but “anyone can paint”
      i love u bob ross

      awesome discussion!!!! I love it!!!!!
      hey rob, what part of wales are you from? I have friends in south wales near cardiff. I love the one art museum there

      April 7, 2011 at 11:28 am

  11. Haha yes, a good debate! I am from North Wales (Rhuthun), Vale of Clwyd, however I know many people from Cardiff and I do love it there. Yeah the National Museum there is great!

    April 7, 2011 at 11:34 am

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s