"All of modernism is a pit, into which beauty must be eradicated."

Re his comment that the truly creative "artists" were Greenberg and the others who came up with the theories that Pollock et al then strove to illustrate.

Read Tom Wolfe's Painted Word, an absolute classic little book.

I can muster no respect for a community that considers a crucifix in a jar of urine a work of art, heartily defending the "artist", but then cowers to muslims' demands that Allah's likeness is off limits.

The real crime is municipal politicians agreeing 1% of all construction project budgets should be dedicated to ‘art.'

That's how you get a pile of ball bearings along the road in Edmonton, while the ‘artist' is laughing all the way to the bank after fleecing taxpayers for $1 million plus.

Us 99% refuse to take it any more!

At its root, Socialism is the religion of self-loathing; and therefore, all forms of human beauty must by necessity be destroyed, as it's a contradiction to the base belief of socialism that: humanity is ugly.

This is why "art" that depicts grotesque visions of humanity is the preferred taste of Progressives; as it best depicts their view of humanity. This is also why those that support socialism make it priority 1 to destroy the art and history of the cultures it absorbs; as culture itself is evil and must be eliminated until we are all the same: ugly.

I recommend the book "Faith of the Fallen", as it delves specifically into this discussion of the destruction of art and culture by socialists; and the raising of all that is ugly about humanity to the forefront of people’s minds to reinforce the mental shackles imposed on the folks.

In a nutshell, for a true Utopia, all that is good must be eliminated to make things fair.

At its root, Socialism is the religion of self-loathing; and therefore, all forms of human beauty must by necessity be destroyed, as it's a contradiction to the base belief of socialism that: humanity is ugly.

This is why "art" that depicts grotesque visions of humanity is the preferred taste of Progressives; as it best depicts their view of humanity. This is also why those that support socialism make it priority 1 to destroy the art and history of the cultures it absorbs; as culture itself is evil and must be eliminated until we are all the same: ugly.

I recommend the book "Faith of the Fallen", as it delves specifically into this discussion of the destruction of art and culture by socialists; and the raising of all that is ugly about humanity to the forefront of people’s minds to reinforce the mental shackles imposed on the folks.

In a nutshell, for a true Utopia, all that is good must be eliminated to make things fair.

Well, that certainly explains the lack of beauty in progressive/liberal women. Movie stars don't count because they are too vapid to matter.

You eradicate from something, not into it. Ugh.

I wish I had kept the brochure that the Art Gallery of Canada handed out way back when to explain Voice of Fire: you'd be amazed - or perhaps not - at the myriad of meanings of those three crummy stripes.

My only quibble is that modern art is not the problem but post-modern art. Modern architecture has made for amazing skyscrapers. Post-modern art reflects a subjectivist view of reality.

Vienna, home of modernism.

On the other hand, there is this.

I have seen the article few days ago. The author makes a few valid points, however he is going overboard with swiping naive conclusion that the whole modern and abstract art is lacking craftsmanship and beauty. Expressionism itself requires skills to capture emotional states of human condition. Of course there is a flip coin that many talentless so called artist see expressing any feelings as an art, or worse they create "art with a hidden message", so no one can see anything. Cubism by definition is the pure craftsmanship. Most people intuitively can appreciate abstract lines, for example in the shapes of automobiles, furniture, fashion. Often decorative art can be noxiously kitschy.
I agree that all fine artists should have a training in classicism to appreciate the beauty of form, yet it takes aggressive marketing campaign to create a brand as an artist:

http://www.banksyny.com/

I say let artists find a patron, or sell the general public. I would outlaw any public funds spent by any level of government on grants or purchase of "art". I would allow private citizens the right to purchase said "art" and gift it to the government, without a tax deduction! We'll see a flood of artist return to the starving stage, or actually get out there and fill up the service industry with more useless degreed workers :)

Modern art will make fine burning fuel in the coming winters before civilization can renew itself.
Prosperity will not be saving this garbage.
Just as the Soviet era "art" with structures are disappearing.
Besides this discussion is mote unless Islam is stopped from implementing sharia law where any art is considered evil, to be destroyed as Idol worship.
Socialism considers any form of art as only good propaganda.
Not a collectivist alive who like creativity, beauty, or depicting humanity, unless fained for ego's sake..

There are quite a few anti-Semitic posts on this link, as if the Jews were to blame for modern art. Some one even referred to the Jews as sort of modern sex slave traders in the Middle East.

Bah! Rather than writing about tripe, Ms. McMillan, why not write a little about
the Quattrocento? Or David Milne? You did put up one picture by Alex Colville, and
good enough for that; but one is hardly enough to compensate for all the mean, carping,
sneering stuff that you have published over the years.

BTW, true art is often not pretty; think of Rembrandt's "Flayed Ox", or Goya's
"Caprichos", or Donatello's "Mary Magdalene"; but they are different from modern
dreck.

Brilliant, I see a polar bear in a blizzard - caused by climate change.

From Camille Paglia's Sexual Personae (1991) - "Renaissance hierarchies are dramamtized in the noisy climax of Benvenuto Cellini's Autobiography (1562)... Perseus is placed in Florence's public square. Dozens of sonnets are nailed up, panegyrics by university scholars. The Duke sits for hours hidden in a palace window, listening to citizens acclaim the statue... The Renaissance made art public, uniting the social classes in a common emotion. A figure on a platform; the mingling of nobles, intellectuals, plebians: one thinks of the broad audience of Shakespeare's Globe Theatre. It is impossible to imagine a modern art work providing a shout from a socially mixed crowd. Our sole equivalent is cinema...." (Emphasis mine.)

The art scene doesn't matter anymore. As the article notes, the same ugly and cheap impulses that characterize much of modern art have done terrible damage to architecture. But it's much harder to escape architecture than it is to not go to a Damien Hirst exhibit.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3266/3093087666_84e1fae101.jpg

The comments at Alternative Right are a steaming pile of blaming this all on the Jews. Nothing more need be said.

There are some great surreal and cubist art out there along with garbage like anything else. If you truly appreciate art you can appreciate all forms and styles of it. How many people knew a pin head music fan in high school that only listened to ‘Punk” or “Rap”?

The disgusting art is simply a window into the mental illness of the “artist”, it only appeals to the mentally ill aficionado’s that find comfort in that they’re not alone in the world, or that their somehow special for having something in life the mass majority does not.

I look at this sort of “art” and am sickened, but not by the art itself, I’m sickened by the reminder that someone who produces this sort of sh*t lives, walks, and breaths amongst the rest of us. Usually quietly and under the public radar.

Anyway that for me is what is disturbing about disturbing art.

Public art more often that not resembles a very lame joke - if it needs explaining or interpretation it's a lost cause.