Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Newarkguy1836 t1_jbpnpjz wrote

Reply to comment by Echos_myron123 in Harriet Tubman 1 by Ironboundian

For thousands of years, every civilization 's visual Arts has improved upon the civilization before it. The trend has always been towards more realism. It was the given from the time man left the caves, to the sumerians, Egypt, India and Far East, culminating with the Greek, Roman & peaking with the US/English Victorian era. Then something happened in the early 20th century, everything stalled and became not so realistic. Art deco sculptures began, then cubism, abstractism the degradation continues to the point where a a crucifix in a toilet bowl full of rotting urine is considered "a monument". The trend now is towards not just unrealistic, but sheer lunacy with random pipes and metals, Justified by the excuse you're supposed to see the "spiritual aspect of it".

Either you refuse to acknowledge what I'm talking about, or you're like one of the four Blind Men. Each one clutching a leg and refusing to acknowledge the opinion of other three and realize the big elephant above them.

I'm not against abstract art. I believe abstract art should be about Concepts, not about individuals. Harriet Tubman was not a bunch of wires with a hollow interior. She deserved a lot better then what looks like a used Christmas lights wire prop up with wires curving (a dress?) down the side. Not a bunch of politicians and social activists and a photo op with the mayor pretending the thing behind them is the most beautiful thing they've ever seen. But hey, you have your tastes I have mine.

1

RationalMellow t1_jbs0a5z wrote

But that’s kinda the reason for it being called abstract art. Pretending? But where did they say it was beautiful?

1