Many of the chinese artists are sponsored by westerners.So most of the works try to cater to the taste of western spectators,for example those with political or sexual theme . I don't think it attracts chinese=.=
To work openly about the political world is an achievement from the western world through blood and steel. Very western ..
I dont think that this proofs anything. The whole concept of modern art is a western idea, some imported ideas. But this does not mean that the work of Ai Wei Wei and others is not important for the developement of China.
.the problem is their works don't reflect China today.
Thats not a problem at all. Its not the duty of art to "reflect" the society. Thats propably the work of journalists and TV-documentary makers (though china is kind of failing in this field anyway). Artists have to start debates about the society and help the culture move on. That this does not represent the ideas of 90 % or redneck chinese does not matter - in Germany its not different. Most people have no idea on modern art or know onl,y little (including myself). But the good news is: They dont have to.
Polloks was a truly gifted artist, he was a living tragedy, that was art, pure art.
This could only be said by someone who has never been in a great art museum or if he has, has never bothered to walk into the Renaissance room 'cause dude, like, that's shit's so old man.
You dumbfuck spoon-fed sycophants with your copypasta and your second-hand journalese Top 100 list fandumb watch Pollock (what the above comment is based on, no doubt) and miss the whole fucking point, which is that Pollock had no clue what the fuck he was doing and that if it weren't for the inventive doublespeak of certain influential art critics and the inherent usableness of Pollock's generic style, he would have never been known outside of his barnyard.
Pure art? Art has never been pure, and any truly pure art would suck. But there has been great art, grand works which demonstrate astounding creativity and skill, but you are not going to find them in the "Abstract Expressionist" room. In the case of Pollock, all the creativity comes from outside of the painting, from the critics and academics who created a context within which Pollock could be sold as a significant innovator. The product must be separated from the marketing.
it seems a bit on the pricey side...
So to be an artist has something to do with outstanding technique and creativity?
Obviously YES. And no, I don't want to get into any moronic bickering over the definition of art, but if in associating me with Andy Warhol you are holding him up as an example of a skilled creator you are only further demonstrating your TARDery. Warhol (with his silk-screen machine) was a self-avowed troll of the art world and so gets a 100% coolness pass.
Its like diving in madness.
No, it's more like diving into paint. And that's just, like, a bad idea.
I hope that head is shaking in agreement, @Fay, because my comments were just extensions of those you made above, which I agreed with at the heart level. And then I took a look at your gallery and realized you were speaking personally as an artist, and I say to you I would defend your work just as I have the Renaissance masters against those who, lacking heart, bow to their malaise and escape into abstractions and empty politics, in other words those who have lost touch with what art is.
Your work reasserts the central importance of the expressive figure, telling the story of a girl standing alone, steadfast, proud, self-satisfied, and defiantly smiling into the souls of the heartless bastards. I, the critic, stand behind you, bold, ever-curious, self-assured, and lovingly snickering into the skull caverns of the brainless toads. And respectfully checking out your ass.
i agree with u, go check the ugly paintings in my profile, my boss(the artist) is just so proud of them, and we can discuss more if u r interested in knowing how money-oriented he is. btw the sculptures belong to another artist tho, he is kinda cool, me and a lot guests like his works
art is not there for gain a public promotion , but art is there always there , sth tiny & touched any fragile soul by the violence itself
chinese artistes are underground ... ...
Modern Chinese art is a lot more risque than I had imagined before coming to China. The idea that Chinese art is produced to satisfy Western tastes rather than to respond to the sexual repression in the Middle Kingdom is completely ridiculous and stinks of the weakest sort of racial prejudice.
Chinese people are just as interested in fucking as anyone else. If not, how the fuck do you think there came to be so fucking many of them?
Where did this belief that art shouldn't be commercial, or at least detached from monetary gain, come from? Do you think Da Vinci wasn't commissioned to paint for those that could afford him? Is there some reality in which Shakespeare didn't write to entertain a paying audience?
And to the topic: I'm generally distrustful of modern art, Chinese or otherwise. I'm pretty ignorant when it comes to art and my ignorant view of most modern artists is: a group of people trying too hard to be artistic.
@FMB It was the same for literature in the medieval period and beyond. In fact, writers used to pretend to be someone else (a well-respected court writer or poet) so that they could sell their works. This emphasis on originality and 'the artist' really took hold in Western thought in the Romantic period (18th to late 19th Century).
Anyway, I just read a few posts by the OP and not really impressed with the level of bigotry to continue in this thread. I've made it a rule to immediately stop discussing any topic with anyone who brings out the 'real China' card, as it gets tiring when people dress up their prejudices in nationalistic lingo.
One quick bonus part:
Any artist if they aren’t worth than Van gogh yet, IT’S ALL FUCKING SHAMEFUL to got these two words in their work…
THE TOP ARTISTS in the market are still belong to Van gogh…!!~~~ no really good contemporary artisit nowadays…..(but I have to say I didn’t pay enough attention to art for some time now…I DO SEE “DIFFERENCE” between Chinese artisit and western artists!....and I don’t wanna talk about western artist here…)
ARTIST, enjoy my world.
From out of a red hot background blood-broil, she appears in crisp focus, un-singed and unhinged, an armed androgyne intent on solemn revenge. She waits, so that you might appreciate this horrific pose - deliberate, premeditated, extra-conscious. She is modern death, but she is not coming for you. Eventually you will find yourself caught in the fixed gaze of her wide eyes, askew and penetrating, and you will feel what she felt, and you know you will pay for some unknown past offense as you helplessly await the trigger finger's twitch, and the sharp, momentary end-pain. Behind her, the spray of blood appears on the black wall. She does not see it, does not react, only waits, like a spider, for the next tick.
Reply from Peter S 李贝勒 is flagged as not relevant.
Ask Urself questions
Seriously? That is exactly what you didn't do before you put a fucking blindfold on and put your brain on goddamn sleep mode and (mis)typed that incoherent mess of fish-milk sprinkled with stale fail-juice. Get the FUCK off of my internet!
Reply from Peter S 李贝勒 is flagged as not relevant.
If you are looking for some renowned names in the game of contemporary Chinese art, sorry, there is none. Art here is a chaste whore, the frequenters decide whether to love it or to despise it. Contemporary Chinese art can't really survive the highly-cultivated artistic eyes of most art-lovers nowerdays. It's not fair just asking what's wrong with the artists, but we should also ask what's wrong with the buyers/critics/enthusiasts of art here.
I could find some nice stuff, still. It just takes more time.
love art. any where in the world.