London critics quarreled painting by Damien Hirst

[Тютчев]

Сообщение от gans

A serious scientific approach, say ..

Thank you for being noticed. Of course this is a misprint. Already corrected ...

[color="# 666686"]Added after 14 minutes[/color]

Сообщение от Jasmin

I think we should be careful in expressions and in the conclusions ... or add at least that is - "personal opinion ".

What, if anything to add, and so it is clear that this is my personal opinion. And then I also wrote:

Definition damp and does not reflect all the signs of the phenomenon, and therefore can and should be adjusted and its complement.

Do you have any objections, comments, additions? I ask them to quickly lay out the forum! What you do not agree Jasmine? Ask ... I'll try to explain, and if necessary, correct your definition. I invite all to the discussion.

[Vladimir]

Сообщение от Tjutchev

Ask ... I'll try to explain, and if necessary, correct your definition. I invite all to the discussion.

I think that the discussion of sexism in relation to a specific audience of the term - it is not constructive. As any attempt to hang a "shortcut" and legitimize it through the public hearing. There is a certain phenomenon. That's what the phenomenon that not everyone took it for granted. In short, I urge you to be healthy agnosticism in relation to Hirst. How to Alien.

[Тютчев]

Сообщение от Vladimir

If you refuse to accept the language of contemporary art (which makes many of the older generation), then all the discussion is reduced to the abuse directed.

For me there is no concept of "the language of contemporary art." There is the notion of "language arts", as it is modern or not - armistice. Any art was once "modern" the time in which it was created. The main thing that we are interested in the subject was art.
      Talk about misunderstanding between people of different generations - this is another dubious argument for giving significance to the fact that claims to be high quality, while not possessing one. I am surprised only that you are using this method, discussing the art. You seriously think that art can be not only modern, but also youth and the old man's? The fact that the art we call that affects the rights, meet their aesthetic needs.
      Following your logic, it turns out that the aesthetic needs of the young and old people are different? I doubt that this is so. Rather, speaking of the differences we have in mind the degree of involvement of an individual's culture and characteristics of his personal experience, which naturally differ, including age. In other words, a person is able to perceive art, does not lose this ability with age, but on the contrary, it develops and multiplies. This, of course, is precisely to those people who are in a certain cognitive tone. So, on the contrary, a man who all his life interested in art, and learns something new for themselves, but rather accept innovation, rather than his young colleague. This, rather, is not about age differences, but about the individual.
      Experienced person is much more difficult vparit some chippie, giving it for innovation! That's from here and all this rhetoric is built on the alleged differences between the generations. As they say, "divide and conquer!" or, to paraphrase our conversation, "divide and vparivay!". You see, art - art is always, regardless of historical era. A man capable of comprehending art, does not lose this ability with age.

Summary:
The ability to perceive the art does not depend on age. High art has always been valued in human beings, able to perceive it.
    
P.S. And the age difference we have with you is low. You are only 3 years younger than me.

[Vladimir]

Сообщение от Tjutchev

P.S. And the age difference we have with you is low. You are only 3 years younger than me.

If the profile does not lie, then at seven But I'm in my thoughts did not keep pedaling the subject of age, rather it was an artificial world vision conflict.

Сообщение от Tjutchev

Following your logic, it turns out that the aesthetic needs of young and old people are different?!

Yes, but is not this natural? As for food, clothing and social behavior.

Сообщение от Tjutchev

In other words, a person is able to perceive art, does not lose this ability with age, but on the contrary, it develops and multiplies.

Here is a logical flaw. This would be true if people could not live under the iron curtain. Development of natural, is when Pollock after the war saw, and not in the seventies or the nineties. And we were surrounded by the aesthetics of realism, a letter from the front, and bears on the virtual money and then bang - and immediately Hurst with biomaterials, Kulik, yes Abramovich with performances. Clearly, this is a protest, distrust and suspicion of charlatanism. We must make an effort. Saying "chippie" - is protection. In general it is strange - "Dora Maar" somehow understand, and the "impossibility of death" type do not understand.

[gans]

Сообщение от Tjutchev

Of course this is a misprint. Already corrected ...

I do not know about any typos you say, but I was trying to say that this labeling, and the invention of new terms is absolutely a waste of time.
As for Hearst, I can say that after a recent exhibition in Kiev, I was amazed when almost everything dear to me people from different spheres of culture, in one voice said that his installation filled with great meaning. And really no interest in what they have just not there. So it makes sense to talk about how a person is ready to perceive and understand.

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от Tjutchev

Just as fast - food can not be high cuisine in principle, just and Hearst can not be considered an artist. His "art" - this is blasphemy! And those who consider it an art or a layman, respectively, fuckers! Who else like more ...

Hearst-not "fast food". Hurst, if we accept such gastronomic association, rather much a restaurant with a kitchen "fusion". What is also at the amateur. And about this kitchen supporter "soup yes porridge, our food" might say, "yes this is for suckers. That's vodka-herring, Pelmeshki a thing" ...
How can you not remember Nikolai Vasilyevich:
   I am a frog though
sugar stuck, do not take it into his mouth, and oysters, too, will not take: I know what
like an oyster. Take the ram - he continued, turning to Chichikov - is
ram side with porridge! This is not the same stew, which are made to the master's kitchen from
mutton, which for four days on the market lies! This is all invented by Dr.
Germans let the French, I would hang them for it! Invented the diet, to treat hunger!
What do they have a German liquid nature, because they imagine that with the Russian
stomach cope! No, it's not what this is all nonsense, it's all ... - Here
Sobakevich even angrily shook his head. - They say: education, education,
and that education - huff! I would tell him and another word, but that's just for
Table indecent. I do not. I when pork - let the whole pig on
table, lamb - just drag a sheep, a goose - just a goose! I would rather eat two
meals, but eat in moderation, as the soul requires. - Sobakevich confirmed this matter: it
overturned half lamb ribs to his plate and ate it all, gnawing,
sucked up to the last stone. (c)

: D: D: D

[Jasmin]

Сообщение от gans

As for Hearst, I can say that after a recent exhibition in Kiev, I was amazed when almost everything dear to me people from different spheres of culture, in one voice said that his installation filled with great meaning. And really no interest in what they have just not there. So it makes sense to talk about how a person is ready to perceive and understand.

In my opinion, the most ardent admirers Hurst found in Kiev, and nowhere is it with such enthusiasm did not discuss how our forum ... The rest of the world to him ... I can relate. Idols have remained the same as 10, 20, 50 years ago - Munch, Picasso, Modigliani, Warhol, Bacon, Hockney.

[ВЯЧЕСЛАВ]

Сообщение от Tjutchev

Following your logic, it turns out that the aesthetic needs of the young and old people are different? I doubt that this is so

Let you not soglasitsya.Estestvenno razlichny.Ved different knowledge base, life experiences. requirements arise from the knowledge.

The point here is nature ... human nature to devote himself among the other fellow. The desire consistent, regular and perceived as self-razumeyuscheesya.Odnako, there is a certain category of people who have a desire to painful hypertrophied. It is this "nartsisss, thrusting his finger in his nose and smiles enigmatically. They say I know, I see what you sirym and squalid dano.Na not really - can not see, does not know and even disgusting, but ... here it feels, that all the nasty, so it should be - opposite. composing and theory leads. if only to prove its peculiarity, superiority over NEZNAYKAMI.Kuchkuyas, they create their own idols. tutzhe be named and their masterminds. In contrast to these artist-creators, whose genius is known by society over time, this fame seychas.No Give the money without all this - pathetic sueta.I here there is a need to "orphans", but can bury their coins by "spreading cranberries with called "modern" art. Uncles and aunts with an important air write bryzzhut saliva and all sorts of abstruse (invented by them) with a single purpose - to sell! Money in your pocket is not you finger in his nose.
As for the art - but it will be the case that the poor fellow with stanetsya.Rech is not about him ...

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от Tjutchev

In fact, a major world art criticism never belonged to Hearst as to what is worthy of attention.

And who is this interesting?
"World art criticism", French, American, German? Critics of these in any publications written, where this "world of art criticism" you know and see where this criticism?

[Yaya]

Jasmin, what do you! still fresh memories of his double solo auction. His work is in Slutsker, Friedman and other Russian oligarchs