Glamor in the art
 

I want to talk about glamor.
as an example of several works of Arthur Braginsky.
My avatar and skull Hirst also come down, I think


(glamour) translates the word "veil" in English, and also can be translated "sorcery". In short, in England for glamor in the Middle Ages could well be at stake - if time does not run away to France with her veil.

http://culture.trend.az/topic_open.s...&article=1

For this I can forgive all Englishmen!
Even invented them, supposedly sport, boxing!
: D: D: D

Ok, another question, and you think that completely without glamor life would be much more interesting, maybe even correct? Without design, advertising, beautiful clothes, bright colors?
Всмысле if everything worked just naive and depressive forms?

Veronic, for God's sake, do not be offended (although perhaps this is impossible), but what you show, it's not glamor. Is the most obknovenny kitsch.

A glamor then what?

The most famous example for me of glamor - mature works of Klimt. I have seen in Vienna in the museum Belverer his work in the original. In this museum, according to a guide, the best collection of Klimt in Vienna. He began as an average impressionist, and then began to paint portraits to order wealthy audience. Portraits of themselves (ie person) - done poorly, but everything leads to admire, marvel and admire! Nakako printing and Chinese do not give up this great Glamor! The ideas of Klimt's Vienna is now half continues to earn and deserve. Example - jewelry-jewelry company Frey Ville (Math., can make a mistake in spelling). By the way, for girls, a trip to Vienna and purchase FreyVille there will be cheaper than in Moscow, even given a ticket and a hotel. The massive use of Klimt in contemporary jewelry and objects of interior proves that it glamor.

Tastes Veronique, destvitelno, women. This can be seen in this example and the works of Chinese artists that I have seen from Veronique earlier. In my "proletarian, the Russo-homespun taste, perhaps it is kitsch, but not worthy of glamor. But Veronique nobody makes their bad taste. If you like it - good. We can not live in a house where there are clear masterpieces - tired. It can not always read only one Dostoevsky. Katya needed for interior - personally, I bought enough of these, I confess. Some of them are now perceive itself as kitsch.

Veronique accept my apologies, because obviously he could hurt. But not out of malice. I have such a taste.


Here are photos of the museum-Belvedere Palace. Photograph Klimt made no sense.

And photos of interiors of the palace - also was once the glamor, and now it is considered art. as Klimt. Deservedly.

And I think that kitsch (in the Soviet sense) simply does not (this term refers to the era of the Iron Curtain and the public deficit) and in the consumer society, virtually all solid-kitsch (which mutates as influenzal virus and mimic, depending on the Fashion and preferences)
Anything can be called "kitsch" in zvasimosti of place, time and circumstances.
But with the glamor of the problem (his description)
Briefly (mental definition) "glamor" is the (material) world, where there are no problems ..

The problem is that many do not share the notion of kitsch (which also recently emerged as a style, and some of its deliberate use), and glamor.
So I ask this question. Perhaps we can understand?
Preferably without needing to insult:)

And once again I repeat the question ..... Can we live without the beautiful stuff?
Try women get rid of them!

Or kitsch? (maybe kitsch and glamor-biznetsy-brothers or 2storony of the same coin?)

Between us, girls.
 

I as always, very personal definition of good glamor and kitsch. If you look, and it was like - it glamor. If you look, and feel ashamed to wear - is kitsch.
I love to buy my beloved wife jewelry - Swarovski FreyVille and others less known. Wonderful silver from the Moscow firm "Metaplastika. Very inexpensive (all at the price of gold, but good job, especially in their "Animal"). This - glamor and art, even art design.
And you can see from the Turkish gold with diamonds at the price of jewelry. This is kitsch.

Probably the courtiers and artists who portrayed coquettes at one time suffered greatly from their peers ....
Nata, I also think that the definition of kitsch is more applicable to the Soviet period. By the way, those who criticize him most often are surprised to find him in his apartment, such as elephants or a memorable grandmother's carpet on the walls.

[color="# 666686"]Added after 2 minutes[/color]
But some seem that the opposite is true.

[color="# 666686"]Added after 4 minutes[/color]
It will be very interesting if someone could examples (photos) to show their vision.

Stiff, stiff from the less fortunate and poorer counterparts. True, a hundred years that some glamor has become an art, and another - gone forever. Talent and glamor of a Great show.
In the catalog of the Pushkin Museum has paintings (they are in the reserves and never will not go there), which, according to the information under "Proishozhenie" cost in the early 20 century, several times higher than the Unsuccessful at that time the artists - Monet, Manet and others. Impressionists. Call those expensive predecessors N. Safronov no sense. They also no longer stand.

So it is better for the artist? Currency life or impoverished immortality?

For Veronique:

I wrote that the individual determination. And even the love of the masses is not always right. You like - Wear! Suits you - wonderful!
Place a photo of Klimt, or jewelry from FreyVille not see the point. Klimt all know and so, as best seen in the jewelry store on Tverskaya. Or at home - in Vienna. Who is closer.

You cheated! This "elephants 21 century!" (Kitsch)
though I no longer elephants Kitsch (rarity kitsch can not be) ..
(like elephants!), all right. 'll draw! (voti story was born!)

consider a Klimt to the glamor ............???????????? b ........!!!!!!!!
I have no words

glamor is inconceivable without objects, defiantly showing the richness /psevdobogatstvo. personification of glamor in our days - fashion labels. the word "glamor" is appellative shade, because the wealth that with the help of exhibiting at the show, as a rule, does not take place. Strictly speaking, if these naked girls were holding a series of phones Vertu Cobra, formally (ie formally), they could be called glamor

My guess ....
money life is kitsch,
and impoverished immortality - glamor?

[color="# 666686"]Added after 1 minute[/color]
Yaya, you are important in a faint cheer: p

[color="# 666686"]Added after 7 minutes[/color]
Yaya, there is still a bit to enhance your understanding of kitsch

"Damien Hirst is one of the principal representatives of so-called generation of" Young British Artists "who have gained prominence in the 1980's. Thanks to its performance, installation and sculptures frankly postmodern orientation. For the first time they learned about in 1988 when Hirst organized an exhibition under the called Freeze. They were seen as a new direction, fresh blood in the arts, but although with Hearst and other representatives of contemporary art has often and justifiably accused of superficiality and simplicity of images, as well as in the love of kitsch. "
http://www.antiq.info/news/news_and_...nts/10263.html