Glamor in the art

[Veronic]

Сообщение от Chernomashentsev Vladimir

The most famous example for me of glamor - mature works of Klimt.
And photos of interiors of the palace - also was once the glamor, and now it is considered art. as Klimt. Deservedly.

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]

Сообщение от Chernomashentsev Vladimir

I as always, very good individual determination of 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.

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.

[Черномашенцев Владимир]

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.

[NATA NOVA]

Сообщение от Chernomashentsev Vladimir

A very inexpensive (only at the price of gold, but good job, especially in their "Animal"). This - and glamor lawsuit

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!)

[Yaya]

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

[Veronic]

Сообщение от Chernomashentsev Vladimir

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

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

[color="# 666686"]Added after 1 minute[/color]

Сообщение от Yaya

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

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

[Yaya]

Veronic,

Yaya, you are important in a faint cheer

later warned!
fell
My idea of kitsch in the expansion is not needed. AX, indeed, sometimes it tends

[NATA NOVA]

Urinals in the toilet is a plumbing;
Urinal at the exhibition is an art
Urinal at auction is money
Urinal in a vase in the gallery is ArtDesign,
Urinal in a vase in a shop that kitsch
Urinal gold (in the toilet) is a glamor ...

                                                  Nova Nath

[Veronic]

Сообщение от Yaya

glamor do not think 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 glamorous

Still to come

[Черномашенцев Владимир]

Of course, better to be famous and rich. Dead artist - do not care. But we do not care.
Argue here is useless. Some people and elephants - a rarity. And for me - was kitsch, kitsch, and so remained.
His jewelry - art and rarity, I do not call and do not hang on the wall. A Klimt * - hanged. He looks good in modern interiors, if made in China with gilt foil. Better than in reproduction. If it is still in the golden frame to frame - then it ceases to be glamorous and transformed into kitsch.

* I am not in the form of the Klimt, that in a museum nowadays.


Perhaps not venture more embed their ideas about glamor. I hope my departure from the theme does not force you to spend on my place.

  I'm going to enjoy Ionova and Khachatrian peer.

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Glamor? Kitsch?