This past weekend I was passing next to the Moma (Museum of modern art) in New York. I saw some design books in the museum store adjacent to the actual huge museum, and walked in to check out the latest books on design. I found this book on the shelf, and giggled when I saw the title,
“Modern Art explained, why your 5-year old could not have done that”
There were other similar books whose existence is to ‘explain’ art to you, the casual art observer.
I dislike ‘modern’ art because of things like this. If something is art, it does not have to be ‘explained’, it explains itself. It will inspire feelings inside of you just by looking at it. Botticelli does not have to be explained. Monet does not have to be explained.. You get the point.
The reason why this type of modern art is bullshit is because its not art. Its also something made by an extremely lazy person.
Now don’t get me wrong, not all ‘modern’ art is the same. For example this piece of artwork is considered modern art, but this fantastic illustration of movie characters from Point Break isn’t lazy nor does it have to be ‘explained’. This is art in full sense of the word.
But back to the book. The book attempts to show different examples of modern art and then explains why a child count not have created something similar. The premise is ludicrous and comical enough, but where it gets bizarre is the way the book sets a serious and authoritative tone on commenting the supposed genius of the artist.
Some examples from the book, read the ridiculous commentary below each ‘art’ work.
Yeah, none would do so because unlike adults, children don’t try to blatantly bullshit each other. The only inspiration I feel from this work is the inspiration to replace it with something better and more meaningful.
“Artworks cannot last forever.. where man ends, infinity begins”
This kind of pretentious non-sense reminds me of Mike Meyers sketches on Saturday night live, where he played Deiter, the German TV critic on a TV show Sprockets, where Dieter often said similar meaningless non-sense in order to inflate his sense of self-importance.
Some of Dieter’s quotes that are remarkably similar to the bullshit written in this book:
“Genius! By seemingly embracing the cliches of the vest, he is underscoring its excruciating banality.”
“Yes, Ve are doomed and I am filled with remorse, and it is most delicious.”
The guys cleaning windows in my apartment building draw better looking and more meaningful swirls with Windex than this ‘artist’. I’ll tell you one thing, I certainly get feelings of loss and hopelessness looking at this thing and imagining people paying large sums of money to hang this atrocity in their living rooms and galleries.
The only way someone can get a spiritual feeling by looking at a yellow box with a white line across is if they are a starving chimp with hallucinations of bananas.
I dont know if a 5 year old child could design this modern classic thermal carafe (below), but it seems a bit pricey for a piece of shiny plastic. Modern art is expensive!
Blinchiki 
I think you hit some modern art nails on the head. I agree that art is today and maybe should be about more than technique (almost to respect how tough it is to “outdo” the masters of the past), and some of this stuff is lazy and bad. But then, if it is evoking a strong reaction, even if a negative one, then maybe there is value in that in itself?
This blog is so true! Thank you!!!
Fantastic! I was at MOMA last week and had the same sentiment. As a matter of fact i have been saying that for years – IF I CAN DO IT, IT IS NOT ART!!!
and btw – they have a Melita coffee maker at the store for $130.00 that can be had at Peet’s Coffee for $29.95…
Thanks again,
Isaac
I think the person has literally no idea what s/he’s talking about and only view art in term of skills and technique when it’s so much more than that.
S/he doesn’t reallize that we still do need explanation for Botticelli and Monet, because like modern artist, their paintings contain influences, theories, and iconography that we, and even their contemporaries don’t understand.
S/he seems to think that one can’t get a emotions from just block of colors, when that’s the most basic of color theories, and classical painting masters did the same (see- Baroque)
S/he doesn’t understand that modern art (eventhough that’s a term only meant for a specific period of art, but s/hes using it interchangeably with contemporary art) is about breaking away from the classical academic style art and elitist system that was in place, so that everyone can do art and express creativity in their own way
“Creativity”? Are you for real? None of this pretentious bullshit is creative in the least. Let’s go over it: We’ve got a bunch of colors slapped onto the canvas, an orange line on a red background, a canvas that has been sliced with a knife, a bunch of fucking gray swirls, and a light yellow rectangle on a darker yellow background. This is the least creative shit I’ve ever seen. Art is not for everybody. Art is for people with talent, and these assholes don’t have a single lick of talent in art. I think YOU have no idea what you’re talking about because you’ve been bullshitted into accepting this sentimental drivel. The book even says that a five year old could do this shit, despite claiming to have reasons why they could not. Don’t give me any crap about self-expression either. Gray swirls are anything but expressive. They only gain some semblance of “meaning” when some pretentious prick claims that it has meaning, and that degrades the value of meaning.
AMEN!
You make a cut on a canvas and then Creatively make up sanctimonious interpretations for it…
Funny, because contemporany artist have stablished an even more elitist system that the one that existed that bashes anybody that doesn’t agree with them as “non sophisticated” or “uneducated”.
And no, Im not a “modern art” artist, infact, Im currently studying the traditional academic drawing method
but art should ALWAYS be a way of expressing one’s self; a way of communication through creative images/actions. It matter not the skill level or the ideal of the artist, as long as s/he can communicate his/her message through the work, it should be called art. A baby’s scribble is as much art as a Leonardo study, and in the right eyes, just as beautiful.
Art is also ALWAYS subjective, like beauty, and how great an art piece is depends on how it resonate with the viewer through context of history, personal experiences, taste etc etc (like beauty). To call one form of art “bullshit” and another great is stupid and oxymoronic for anyone who love art.
You respect artist like Botticelli and Monet, but by your arguement on requirement of skills, these two aren’t nearly as great as Leonardo or Sargent (Botticelli studied during the mid quatrocento so his art lacks realism and perspective while Monet was an impressionist and his copy from nature isn’t skillful), but does that make them worse artist? ofcourse not.
“so that everyone can do art”
That’s kind of the point. Anyone could do any of that stuff, so there’s no reason to pay thousands of dollars for something anyone could have done. If you like the yellow thing, buy a canvas and paint it yellow and put a white stripe across it and save yourself a few grand.
Shut up you hippy… A strip of different color paint going down canvas is not ‘Art’, I don’t care what gay ass way you want to go about explaining yourself… That red pot right there can be found at Target or Kmart any day of the week
wow, calling me a hippie and using “gay” with a negative connotation, then saying something I’ve already argued to. Do 13 years olds with no understanding of art theories browse this blog or something?
Modern Art………..simply a way for people who want to be an artist but have no talent!!!
Barnett Newman’s “art” has always made me so angry. How is this guy famous??
There are several exemples of pretend “modern art” like stones pretending to be a beautiful sculpture or maybe some sketches or a Pollock mess pretending to be a nice pattern…
Art for me is hardwork, if its easy to be achiaveable is just crap.
By the way there SEVERAL Pollock pretending art to be autenticated but none can say its autentique or not because its totally random.
I wanted to know more about ” Today´s Art & Artists “. So l got to this Page & Comments.
FOA i thank U ALL. It was very interesting & at the same time very educational.
I got what i was looking for & I´d like to say this:
No mater if U like or hate it just at the bigining. The real Art- Lover, which i think he/she is IN each one of US, stays cool & patience in order to understand what are our dedications of Art /s to the Humanit & Mankind.
If we don´ t have any modern Artists NOW, then we don´t have any things to say
or to leave for our Childern.HTH
Mehrdad Mohajer
Hamburg – Germany
Shame if you had the modern art sketchbook it would make you understand its not something a 3 year old could do.
Because we did Jackson Pollock in College. It takes work.
I did an interesting artwork in my toilet pan this morning. You may think any 5 year old could do that, but I did it with the intention of showing that art needs to be freed from its expected media, in order to create feelings of both apprehension and excitment in the observer. I would invite you to come and see it but I pressed the flush button. Now it is an example of the transience of art as a representation of the fragility of joy. You can come and look at that if you want. The entrance fee is £10.