Defend this

Defend this.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=49KvZrioFB0
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

deepstatecore

it looks like a red fish

A E S T H E T I C

Why? You have your taste, I have mine. I'm probably not going to convince you, you probably just want to validate your opinion and have a good whinge anyway.

This. Some people enjoy art, others like staring at rectangles.

>Proponents of De Stijl advocated pure abstraction and universality by a reduction to the essentials of form and colour; they simplified visual compositions to vertical and horizontal, using only black, white and primary colors.

Sweetykins, just tell the class why you like this piece of art. It's that simple. Forget any of OP's hidden intentions if there are any, just defend it.

Not him but defending it doesn't necessarily mean you like it

Not him, but I am you. Stop replying to yourself faggot.

Well at least you can tell the paint has layers to it. It doesn't look like something out of mspaint.

That's all I got.

I think the project of De Stijl, and abstract art more generally is quite interesting as an exploration into what the
the boundaries, perhaps bare minimum, or aesthetics are.
Also, I find artwork like this conducive to thinking in general if you are willing to accept it, or open yourself to it in an
intuitive manner.

I would actually prefer this sort of work on occasion, taste isn't a constant after all.

...

Seems like a "seen one, you've seen them all" type thing

Some are more sensitive to the patterns behind the underlying frameworks of the universe than others.

Frankly I don't much like De Stijl, but no amount of sweetieposting will change the fact that the OP is just intended to be a vehicle for moaning about post-modernism (read: modernism). Queue a dozen posts of >money laundering by the 100th reply with appeals for evidence ignored, if not links to articles or outlandish scenarios that don't relate to the claim.

Fuck you. I don't have to explain shit.

It looks neat.

It looks good.

anyone got it one of goatse or pregnant anne frank? asking for a cousin of mine

Depends I think. Abstract art I would argue is more about what the viewer brings than what the artist presents.
I know that is a sort of a cop-out excuse, but I think it brings into focus how much beauty actually surrounds us in the
world if we only focus on it. Since I opened up more to less formal art, I have come to appreciate natural and ordinary
things to a far greater extent.

Not to say you ought to appreciate it more than other schools of art, but I think it is worth appreciating.

Notice how this immediately looks like shit compared to OP.

Ok design obviously it's not high art.Any meaning supposed to be pulled from it is just wankery

It looks neat.

>Inexact edges to lines
>no attention to composition, just thrown down haphazardly

>digital colour application fails to capture he exacting colour and tonality of the style


One of these things is not like the other. One of these things is not the same.

I would dig out a trench in front of the premise in which the painting is located and I will gather some troops to defend it a la trench warfare.

>pure aesthetic conception isn't high art.
>art must be pedagogical to be high art
Lel

>a bunch of humanities majors can't understand formal beauty
youtube.com/watch?v=49KvZrioFB0

>defend this
Displays of creativity and originality are the only elements that make art valuable.

kek

I prefer Composition IV.