Four Year Old Calgary Girl's Scribbles Praised By Some Critics As High Art

TKretts3

New member
Jul 20, 2010
432
0
0
http://news.nationalpost.com/2015/02/11/art-critics-cant-decide-whether-calgary-four-year-old-cosette-swart-is-a-prodigy-or-a-dabbler/

Okay, so, I know piling on 'modern art' is the cool thing to do and all, and I'm pretty sure that you're all well versed in that kind if thing and have seen it a million times... But this is just ridiculous. Seriously, this entire situation is like something you'd read on The Onion. This is the situation that people bring up as a joke response to modern art, "That looks like something I scribbled together when I was a four-year-old."

My mom is a painter. The 'paintings' show to be made by this girl look like the the mess that my mom makes on the board she wipes excess paint off on to.





I think I'm losing my mind...
 

Story

Note to self: Prooof reed posts
Sep 4, 2013
905
0
0
Huh...reminds me of the action paintings, you know like Pollick and De Kooning...Expect with less structure and being naturally less avant guarde (yeah that is possible).

Art is in the eye of the beholder. I honestly don't see any harm in this. In fact, I think it is kinda cute.

Captcha: give or take.
 

Marter

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
14,276
15
43
Go, Calgary!

OT: Her paintings are being sold to raise money for charity. Not a bad thing. No, I don't like them, but if some people do, then who cares?
 

Barbas

ExQQxv1D1ns
Oct 28, 2013
33,804
0
0
Some of that's rather aesthetically pleasing. I suppose I just like the variety of colours. The one in the frame behind her is something I wouldn't mind hanging on a wall of my home. I'd like to hear the reasons why she decided to paint them the way she did, because the story behind an artwork is usually the most interesting aspect to me, but it's not really necessary. We could argue all day over whether or not this is art, but we'd get nowhere because nobody really decides what is and isn't. One person's trash is another's treasure.

I guess the lesson here is to never underestimate the power of social media. Good on them for managing to raise that amount of money and I hope it goes to good use.
 

Queen Michael

has read 4,010 manga books
Jun 9, 2009
10,400
0
0
I say what I always say. It's only art if you recognize it as art without framing it or putting it in a gallery.
 

TKretts3

New member
Jul 20, 2010
432
0
0
Marter said:
Go, Calgary!

OT: Her paintings are being sold to raise money for charity. Not a bad thing. No, I don't like them, but if some people do, then who cares?
Oh I get that - it's great that they're raising money for charities, and I mean no disrespect to the girl in question. My frustration is towards the 'professional' 'art' 'critics' who praise and hold these up as the epitome of artistic achievement. My frustration is towards the publicly funded art galleries that buy these kinds of paintings (And even more simplistic ones (Yes, that is possible)) inordinate amounts of money - paid for by the taxpayers. My frustration is towards the people who encourage professional grown-up adult painters to create this kind of stuff instead of, well, painting actual things.
 

White Lightning

New member
Feb 9, 2012
797
0
0
See, this right here is why I think art is stupid. Don't bother trying to tell me "oh but that's how art works, it evokes emotions and makes you think" or any of that garbage. I've heard it all before, and it's BS no matter how you try and spin it.

It's cool that they're raising money for charity though.
 

Orbot_Vectorman

Cleaning trash since 1990
May 11, 2009
344
0
0
OH, COME THE FUCK ON! you can't be serious. It looks like something made by a four year old, taking no effort! no freaking talent! no anything! If you want some actual art to look at I would like to lead you to my DeviantArt, though I'm not sure if I can post my username on here, I will if proven I can (Don't want to get into too much trouble on the Escapist)

But still, this is terrible, just terrible.

If any one needs me, I'll be working on something that takes more than half my brain.
 

Euryalus

New member
Jun 30, 2012
4,429
0
0
White Lightning said:
See, this right here is why I think art is stupid. Don't bother trying to tell me "oh but that's how art works, it evokes emotions and makes you think" or any of that garbage. I've heard it all before, and it's BS no matter how you try and spin it.

It's cool that they're raising money for charity though.
The death of the idea of art being representational (or a presentation), of some sort of Truth-ey thing did tend to lead to some pretty awful stuff.

The arguments behind "art is in the eye of the beholder" aren't bad, but holy shit does that make for shit inspiration. I could take a dump according to those theories and call it art and wouldn't be wrong per say, but is it any good? Can good be objective?

No idea, but I'm not gonna waste my time critically appraising a turd you know?
 

Queen Michael

has read 4,010 manga books
Jun 9, 2009
10,400
0
0
It's pretty funny, though -- logically you ought to have created this thread ages ago. She's not exactly the first person to sell this kind of thing as high art. Plus, at least in this case it looks as if it's made by a kindergartener because it actually is. You should be more outraged when adults sell this kind of stuff.
 

Eclipse Dragon

Lusty Argonian Maid
Legacy
Jul 7, 2020
4,259
12
43
Country
United States
I wouldn't want to be this girl as she gets older.
So many things could go wrong with giving a kid attention like this at that age.

She may not want to do art at all and people may pressure her because she was "so talented".
She might try to do more abstract art, but the paintings will not sell because she's not four anymore and it's no longer cute.
She might try to do realistic stuff and think she's gone downhill (when in fact she hasn't even started) because she's not receiving the same praise she got when she was younger.
She may become a cocky little shit and not actually want to learn the basics because her paintings sold more than her teacher's.
 

Scarim Coral

Jumped the ship
Legacy
Apr 30, 2020
18,157
1
3
Country
UK
It look like Iris got a contender

http://www.boredpanda.com/thula-therapy-cat-autistic-artist-iris-grace/

I bet those two would get along fine if they were able to open out to each other.

OT- I consider that to be art seeing how anything can be art these days like that piece of garbage that the cleaning woman accidently got rid of.
 

Jamieson 90

New member
Mar 29, 2010
1,052
0
0
Hey if you can convince people that's art and even better get paid for it then who am I to argue? Some people have way too much money and time to burn.
 

HardkorSB

New member
Mar 18, 2010
1,477
0
0
Here's something you need to know about art and art critics.

This thing is praised as art of the highest caliber and was sold for $87 million:



$87 MILLION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

People are idiots.
 

Zontar

Mad Max 2019
Feb 18, 2013
4,931
0
0
Critiquing art in general seems to be something you can half ass with a lot of pretty words anyway. I write in my free time, and in my Short Fiction class everyone always wants to work with me because I can use big words to flesh out an idea I pulled out of my ass. Got 94% in that class, and I didn't even read half the material I was critiquing. I just looked over the first paragraph, last paragraph and a random paragraph half the time.

This XKCD comic is disturbingly accurate.

 

Story

Note to self: Prooof reed posts
Sep 4, 2013
905
0
0
HardkorSB said:
Here's something you need to know about art and art critics.

This thing is praised as art of the highest caliber and was sold for $87 million:



$87 MILLION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

People are idiots.
It's a Mark Rothko field color painting. It's not that surprising in hindsight that it sold for so much considering he is one of the most popular post-world war artists along with De Kooning and Pollock, who I mentioned above.

Eh, I'm an Art History minor in college and honestly it is difficult to explain modern art to people. Heck, I didn't appreciate it until I started taking classes about it. All I'll say is we are in a period (and have been for a long time) where artwork is measured less by classical talent and more about uniqueness and historical significance. In this way, what is considered art is difficult to describe in this day and age and I think for many modern artists, that's kinda the point.
 

HardkorSB

New member
Mar 18, 2010
1,477
0
0
Story said:
It's a Mark Rothko field color painting. It's not that surprising in hindsight that it sold for so much considering he is one of the most popular post-world war artists along with De Kooning and Pollock, who I mentioned above.

Eh, I'm an Art History minor in college and honestly it is difficult to explain modern art to people. Heck, I didn't appreciate it until I started taking classes about it. All I'll say is we are in a period (and have been for a long time) where artwork is measured less by classical talent and more about uniqueness and historical significance. In this way, what is considered art is difficult to describe in this day and age and I think for many modern artists, that's kinda the point.
I remember seeing this clip from the 70's where an "artist" is standing in front of his piece, which was a white canvas with a small red square in one of the corners, and talking for over 40 minutes about the meaning and significance of it.

If you need to take extensive classes to understand that a particular thing you're viewing is art then it probably isn't all that special.
If you're having trouble explaining why something is this great art piece then maybe it's not.

Call me ignorant but to me, a lot (not all) of modern art is about fooling people into thinking that it's art.
 

Story

Note to self: Prooof reed posts
Sep 4, 2013
905
0
0
HardkorSB said:
Story said:
It's a Mark Rothko field color painting. It's not that surprising in hindsight that it sold for so much considering he is one of the most popular post-world war artists along with De Kooning and Pollock, who I mentioned above.

Eh, I'm an Art History minor in college and honestly it is difficult to explain modern art to people. Heck, I didn't appreciate it until I started taking classes about it. All I'll say is we are in a period (and have been for a long time) where artwork is measured less by classical talent and more about uniqueness and historical significance. In this way, what is considered art is difficult to describe in this day and age and I think for many modern artists, that's kinda the point.
I remember seeing this clip from the 70's where an "artist" is standing in front of his piece, which was a white canvas with a small red square in one of the corners, and talking for over 40 minutes about the meaning and significance of it.

If you need to take extensive classes to understand that a particular thing you're viewing is art then it probably isn't all that special.
If you're having trouble explaining why something is this great art piece then maybe it's not.

Call me ignorant but to me, a lot (not all) of modern art is about fooling people into thinking that it's art.
Yeah, I think remember that clip too, it was a parody and an example of what you and many others on this thread feel about modern artwork. Yeah you know what? I'm not going to argue with that stance either becuase it is true that the art world can be masterbatory like that. Hell, when modern art first became a thing, it was highly criticized by art academics and the community, so many woukd say it was always misunderstood. I'd even go so far and argue that high western art was always in its own weird little club were the adverage person didn't see much value in it, even when it did have more practical purposes. So in that reguard it is no wonder that modern art is so challenging for people to appreciate.

I will ask you this though, if you don't mind, and anyone else who'd like to answer:
In your opinion kind of artwork, if any, belongs in a museum? Should we even have a professional art market in the first place?